WASHINGTON AND HIS COMRADES IN ARMS, A CHRONICLE OF THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE

Volume 12 in the Chronicles of America Series. Abraham Lincoln Edition. 

By George M. Wrong

PREFATORY NOTE

The author is aware of a certain audacity in undertaking, himself aBriton, to appear in a company of American writers on American historyand above all to write on the subject of Washington. If excuse is neededit is to be found in the special interest of the career of Washington toa citizen of the British Commonwealth of Nations at the present time andin the urgency with which the editor and publishers declared that suchan interpretation would not be unwelcome to Americans and pressed uponthe author a task for which he doubted his own qualifications. To theeditor he owes thanks for wise criticism. He is also indebted to Mr. Worthington Chauncey Ford, of the Massachusetts Historical Society, agreat authority on Washington, who has kindly read the proofs and givenhelpful comments. Needless to say the author alone is responsible foropinions in the book. 

University of Toronto, June 16, 1920. 

CONTENTS

I. THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

II. BOSTON AND QUEBEC

III. INDEPENDENCE

IV. THE LOSS OF NEW YORK

V. THE LOSS OF PHILADELPHIA

VI. THE FIRST GREAT BRITISH DISASTER

VII. WASHINGTON AND HIS COMRADES AT VALLEY FORGE

VIII. THE ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE AND ITS RESULTS

IX. THE WAR IN THE SOUTH

X. FRANCE TO THE RESCUE

XI. YORKTOWN

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

WASHINGTON AND HIS COMRADES IN ARMS

CHAPTER I. THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

Moving among the members of the second Continental Congress, which metat Philadelphia in May, 1775, was one, and but one, military figure. George Washington alone attended the sittings in uniform. This colonelfrom Virginia, now in his forty-fourth year, was a great landholder, anowner of slaves, an Anglican churchman, an aristocrat, everything thatstands in contrast with the type of a revolutionary radical. Yet fromthe first he had been an outspoken and uncompromising champion of thecolonial cause. When the tax was imposed on tea he had abolished the useof tea in his own household and when war was imminent he had talked ofrecruiting a thousand men at his own expense and marching to Boston. Hissteady wearing of the uniform seemed, indeed, to show that he regardedthe issue as hardly less military than political. 

The clash at Lexington, on the 19th of April, had made vivid the realityof war. Passions ran high. For years there had been tension, longdisputes about buying British stamps to put on American legal papers, about duties on glass and paint and paper and, above all, tea. Bostonhad shown turbulent defiance, and to hold Boston down British soldiershad been quartered on the inhabitants in the proportion of one soldierfor five of the populace, a great and annoying burden. And now Britishsoldiers had killed Americans who stood barring their way on LexingtonGreen. Even calm Benjamin Franklin spoke later of the hands of Britishministers as "red, wet, and dropping with blood. " Americans never forgotthe fresh graves made on that day. There were, it is true, more Britishthan American graves, but the British were regarded as the aggressors. If the rest of the colonies were to join in the struggle, they must havea common leader. Who should he be?

In June, while the Continental Congress faced this question atPhiladelphia, events at Boston made the need of a leader more urgent. Boston was besieged by American volunteers under the command of GeneralArtemas Ward. The siege had lasted for two months, each side watchingthe other at long range. General Gage, the British Commander, had thesea open to him and a finely tempered army upon which he could rely. Theopposite was true of his opponents. They were a motley host rather thanan army. They had few guns and almost no powder. Idle waiting sincethe fight at Lexington made untrained troops restless and anxious to gohome. Nothing holds an army together like real war, and shrewd officersknew that they must give the men some hard task to keep up theirfighting spirit. It was rumored that Gage was preparing an aggressivemovement from Boston, which might mean pillage and massacre in thesurrounding country, and it was decided to draw in closer to Boston togive Gage a diversion and prove the mettle of the patriot army. So, onthe evening of June 16, 1775, there was a stir of preparation in theAmerican camp at Cambridge, and late at night the men fell in nearHarvard College. 

Across the Charles River north from Boston, on a peninsula, lay thevillage of Charlestown, and rising behind it was Breed's Hill, aboutseventy-four feet high, extending northeastward to the higher elevationof Bunker Hill. The peninsula could be reached from Cambridge only by anarrow neck of land easily swept by British floating batteries lying offthe shore. In the dark the American force of twelve hundred men underColonel Prescott marched to this neck of land and then advanced half amile southward to Breed's Hill. Prescott was an old campaigner of theSeven Years' War; he had six cannon, and his troops were commanded byexperienced officers. Israel Putnam was skillful in irregular frontierfighting, and Nathanael Greene, destined to prove himself the best manin the American army next to Washington himself, could furnish sagemilitary counsel derived from much thought and reading. 

Thus it happened that on the morning of the 17th of June General Gage inBoston awoke to a surprise. He had refused to believe that he was shutup in Boston. It suited his convenience to stay there until a planof campaign should be evolved by his superiors in London, but he wascertain that when he liked he could, with his disciplined battalions, brush away the besieging army. Now he saw the American force on Breed'sHill throwing up a defiant and menacing redoubt and entrenchments. Gagedid not hesitate. The bold aggressors must be driven away at once. Hedetailed for the enterprise William Howe, the officer destined soonto be his successor in the command at Boston. Howe was a brave andexperienced soldier. He had been a friend of Wolfe and had led the partyof twenty-four men who had first climbed the cliff at Quebec on thegreat day when Wolfe fell victorious. He was the younger brother ofthat beloved Lord Howe who had fallen at Ticonderoga and to whose memoryMassachusetts had reared a monument in Westminster Abbey. Gage gave himin all some twenty-five hundred men, and, at about two in the afternoon, this force was landed at Charlestown. 

The little town was soon aflame and the smoke helped to conceal Howe'smovements. The day was boiling hot and the soldiers carried heavy packswith food for three days, for they intended to camp on Bunker Hill. Straight up Breed's Hill they marched wading through long grasssometimes to their knees and throwing down the fences on the hillside. The British knew that raw troops were likely to scatter their fire ona foe still out of range and they counted on a rapid bayonetcharge against men helpless with empty rifles. This expectation wasdisappointed. The Americans had in front of them a barricade and IsraelPutnam was there, threatening dire things to any one who should firebefore he could see the whites of the eyes of the advancing soldiery. Asthe British came on there was a terrific discharge of musketry at twentyyards, repeated again and again as they either halted or drew back. 

The slaughter was terrible. British officers hardened in war declaredlong afterward that they had never seen carnage like that of this fight. The American riflemen had been told to aim especially at the Britishofficers, easily known by their uniforms, and one rifleman is said tohave shot twenty officers before he was himself killed. Lord Rawdon, who played a considerable part in the war and was later, as Marquis ofHastings, Viceroy of India, used to tell of his terror as he fought inthe British line. Suddenly a soldier was shot dead by his side, and, when he saw the man quiet at his feet, he said, "Is Death nothing butthis?" and henceforth had no fear. When the first attack by the Britishwas checked they retired; but, with dogged resolve, they re-formed andagain charged up the hill, only a second time to be repulsed. The thirdtime they were more cautious. They began to work round to the weakerdefenses of the American left, where were no redoubts and entrenchmentslike those on the right. By this time British ships were throwing shellsamong the Americans. Charlestown was burning. The great column of blacksmoke, the incessant roar of cannon, and the dreadful scenes of carnagehad affected the defenders. They wavered; and on the third Britishcharge, having exhausted their ammunition, they fled from the hill inconfusion back to the narrow neck of land half a mile away, swept nowby a British floating battery. General Burgoyne wrote that, in the thirdattack, the discipline and courage of the British private soldiers alsobroke down and that when the redoubt was carried the officers of somecorps were almost alone. The British stood victorious at Bunker Hill. Itwas, however, a costly victory. More than a thousand men, nearly half ofthe attacking force, had fallen, with an undue proportion of officers. 

Philadelphia, far away, did not know what was happening when, two daysbefore the battle of Bunker Hill, the Continental Congress settled thequestion of a leader for a national army. On the 15th of June John Adamsof Massachusetts rose and moved that the Congress should adopt asits own the army before Boston and that it should name Washingtonas Commander-in-Chief. Adams had deeply pondered the problem. Hewas certain that New England would remain united and decided in thestruggle, but he was not so sure of the other colonies. To have a leaderfrom beyond New England would make for continental unity. Virginia, next to Massachusetts, had stood in the forefront of the movement, andVirginia was fortunate in having in the Congress one whose fame as asoldier ran through all the colonies. There was something to be said forchoosing a commander from the colony which began the struggle and Adamsknew that his colleague from Massachusetts, John Hancock, a man ofwealth and importance, desired the post. He was conspicuous enough tobe President of the Congress. Adams says that when he made his motion, naming a Virginian, he saw in Hancock's face "mortification andresentment. " He saw, too, that Washington hurriedly left the room whenhis name was mentioned. 

There could be no doubt as to what the Congress would do. UnquestionablyWashington was the fittest man for the post. Twenty years earlier hehad seen important service in the war with France. His position andcharacter commanded universal aspect. The Congress adopted unanimouslythe motion of Adams and it only remained to be seen Whether Washingtonwould accept. On the next day he came to the sitting with his mind madeup. The members, he said, would bear witness to his declaration that hethought himself unfit for the task. Since, however, they called him, hewould try to do his duty. He would take the command but he would acceptno pay beyond his expenses. Thus it was that Washington became a greatnational figure. The man who had long worn the King's uniform wasnow his deadliest enemy; and it is probably true that after this stepnothing could have restored the old relations and reunited the BritishEmpire. The broken vessel could not be made whole. 

Washington spent only a few days in getting ready to take over his newcommand. On the 21st of June, four days after Bunker Hill, he set outfrom Philadelphia. The colonies were in truth very remote from eachother. The journey to Boston was tedious. In the previous yearJohn Adams had traveled in the other direction to the Congress atPhiladelphia and, in his journal, he notes, as if he were traveling inforeign lands, the strange manners and customs of the other colonies. The journey, so momentous to Adams, was not new to Washington. Sometwenty years earlier the young Virginian officer had traveled as far asBoston in the service of King George II. Now he was leader in the waragainst King George III. In New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut he wasreceived impressively. In the warm summer weather the roads were goodenough but many of the rivers were not bridged and could be crossed onlyby ferries or at fords. It took nearly a fortnight to reach Boston. 

Washington had ridden only twenty miles on his long journey when thenews reached him of the fight at Bunker Hill. The question which heasked anxiously shows what was in his mind: "Did the militia fight?"When the answer was "Yes, " he said with relief, "The liberties of thecountry are safe. " He reached Cambridge on the 2d of July and on thefollowing day was the chief figure in a striking ceremony. In thepresence of a vast crowd and of the motley army of volunteers, which wasnow to be called the American army, Washington assumed the command. He sat on horseback under an elm tree and an observer noted that hisappearance was "truly noble and majestic. " This was milder praise thanthat given a little later by a London paper which said: "There is not aking in Europe but would look like a valet de chambre by his side. "New England having seen him was henceforth wholly on his side. Histraditions were not those of the Puritans, of the Ephraims and theAbijahs of the volunteer army, men whose Old Testament names tellsomething of the rigor of the Puritan view of life. Washington, a sharerin the free and often careless hospitality of his native Virginia, had adifferent outlook. In his personal discipline, however, he was not lessPuritan than the strictest of New Englanders. The coming years were toshow that a great leader had taken his fitting place. 

Washington, born in 1732, had been trained in self-reliance, for he hadbeen fatherless from childhood. At the age of sixteen he was working atthe profession, largely self-taught, of a surveyor of land. At the ageof twenty-seven he married Martha Custis, a rich widow with children, though her marriage with Washington was childless. His estate on thePotomac River, three hundred miles from the open sea, recently namedMount Vernon, had been in the family for nearly a hundred years. There were twenty-five hundred acres at Mount Vernon with ten miles offrontage on the tidal river. The Virginia planters were a landowninggentry; when Washington died he had more than sixty thousand acres. Thegrowing of tobacco, the one vital industry of the Virginia of the time, with its half million people, was connected with the ownership of land. On their great estates the planters lived remote, with a mail perhapsevery fortnight. There were no large towns, no great factories. Nearlyhalf of the population consisted of negro slaves. It is one of theironies of history that the chief leader in a war marked by a passionfor liberty was a member of a society in which, as another of itsmembers, Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, said, there was on the one hand the most insulting despotism and on theother the most degrading submission. The Virginian landowners were moreabsolute masters than the proudest lords of medieval England. Thesefeudal lords had serfs on their land. The serfs were attached tothe soil and were sold to a new master with the soil. They were not, however, property, without human rights. On the other hand, the slavesof the Virginian master were property like his horses. They could noteven call wife and children their own, for these might be sold at will. It arouses a strange emotion now when we find Washington offering toexchange a negro for hogsheads of molasses and rum and writing that theman would bring a good price, "if kept clean and trim'd up a little whenoffered for sale. "

In early life Washington had had very little of formal education. Heknew no language but English. When he became world famous and his friendLa Fayette urged him to visit France he refused because he wouldseem uncouth if unable to speak the French tongue. Like another greatsoldier, the Duke of Wellington, he was always careful about his dress. There was in him a silent pride which would brook nothing derogatoryto his dignity. No one could be more methodical. He kept his accountsrigorously, entering even the cost of repairing a hairpin for a ward. He was a keen farmer, and it is amusing to find him recording in hiscareful journal that there are 844, 800 seeds of "New River Grass" to thepound Troy and so determining how many should be sown to the acre. Notmany youths would write out as did Washington, apparently from Frenchsources, and read and reread elaborate "Rules of Civility and DecentBehaviour in Company and Conversation. " In the fashion of the ageof Chesterfield they portray the perfect gentleman. He is always toremember the presence of others and not to move, read, or speak withoutconsidering what may be due to them. In the true spirit of the time heis to learn to defer to persons of superior quality. Tactless laughterat his own wit, jests that have a sting of idle gossip, are to beavoided. Reproof is to be given not in anger but in a sweet and mildtemper. The rules descend even to manners at table and are a revelationof care in self-discipline. We might imagine Oliver Cromwell drawing upsuch rules, but not Napoleon or Wellington. 

The class to which Washington belonged prided itself on good birth andgood breeding. We picture him as austere, but, like Oliver Cromwell, whom in some respects he resembles, he was very human in his personalrelations. He liked a glass of wine. He was fond of dancing and he wentto the theater, even on Sunday. He was, too, something of a lady's man;"He can be downright impudent sometimes, " wrote a Southern lady, "suchimpudence, Fanny, as you and I like. " In old age he loved to have theyoung and gay about him. He could break into furious oaths and no onewas a better master of what we may call honorable guile in dealing withwily savages, in circulating falsehoods that would deceive the enemy intime of war, or in pursuing a business advantage. He played cards formoney and carefully entered loss and gain in his accounts. He lovedhorseracing and horses, and nothing pleased him more than to talk ofthat noble animal. He kept hounds and until his burden of cares becametoo great was an eager devotee of hunting. His shooting was of a typemore heroic than that of an English squire spending a day on a moorwith guests and gamekeepers and returning to comfort in the evening. Washington went off on expeditions into the forest lasting many days andshared the life in the woods of rough men, sleeping often in the openair. "Happy, " he wrote, "is he who gets the berth nearest the fire. " Hecould spend a happy day in admiring the trees and the richness of theland on a neighbor's estate. Always his thoughts were turning to thesoil. There was poetry in him. It was said of Napoleon that the oneapproach to poetry in all his writings is the phrase: "The spring is atlast appearing and the leaves are beginning to sprout. " Washington, on the other hand, brooded over the mysteries of life. He pictured tohimself the serenity of a calm old age and always dared to look deathsquarely in the face. He was sensitive to human passion and he felt thewonder of nature in all her ways, her bounteous response in growth tothe skill of man, the delight of improving the earth in contrastwith the vain glory gained by ravaging it in war. His most strikingcharacteristics were energy and decision united often with strong likesand dislikes. His clever secretary, Alexander Hamilton, found, as hesaid, that his chief was not remarkable for good temper and resignedhis post because of an impatient rebuke. When a young man serving inthe army of Virginia, Washington had many a tussle with the obstinateScottish Governor, Dinwiddie, who thought his vehemence unmannerly andungrateful. Gilbert Stuart, who painted several of his portraits, saidthat his features showed strong passions and that, had he not learnedself-restraint, his temper would have been savage. This discipline heacquired. The task was not easy, but in time he was able to say withtruth, "I have no resentments, " and his self-control became so perfectas to be almost uncanny. 

The assumption that Washington fought against an England grown decadentis not justified. To admit this would be to make his task seem lighterthan it really was. No doubt many of the rich aristocracy spent idledays of pleasure-seeking with the comfortable conviction that they coulddischarge their duties to society by merely existing, since their luxurymade work and the more they indulged themselves the more happy andprofitable employment would their many dependents enjoy. The eighteenthcentury was, however, a wonderful epoch in England. Agriculture becamea new thing under the leadership of great landowners like Lord Townshendand Coke of Norfolk. Already was abroad in society a divine discontentat existing abuses. It brought Warren Hastings to trial on the charge ofplundering India. It attacked slavery, the cruelty of the criminal law, which sent children to execution for the theft of a few pennies, thebrutality of the prisons, the torpid indifference of the church to theneeds of the masses. New inventions were beginning the age of machinery. The reform of Parliament, votes for the toiling masses, and a thousandother improvements were being urged. It was a vigorous, rich, andarrogant England which Washington confronted. 

It is sometimes said of Washington that he was an English countrygentleman. A gentleman he was, but with an experience and training quiteunlike that of a gentleman in England. The young heir to an Englishestate might or might not go to a university. He could, like the youngCharles James Fox, become a scholar, but like Fox, who knew some of thevirtues and all the supposed gentlemanly vices, he might dissipatehis energies in hunting, gambling, and cockfighting. He would almostcertainly make the grand tour of Europe, and, if he had little Latin andless Greek, he was pretty certain to have some familiarity with Parisand a smattering of French. The eighteenth century was a period ofmagnificent living in England. The great landowner, then, as now, themagnate of his neighborhood, was likely to rear, if he did not inherit, one of those vast palaces which are today burdens so costly to the heirsof their builders. At the beginning of the century the nation to honorMarlborough for his victories could think of nothing better than togive him half a million pounds to build a palace. Even with the colossalwealth produced by modern industry we should be staggered at a residencecosting millions of dollars. Yet the Duke of Devonshire rivaled atChatsworth, and Lord Leicester at Holkham, Marlborough's buildingat Blenheim, and many other costly palaces were erected during thefollowing half century. Their owners sometimes built in order to surpassa neighbor in grandeur, and to this day great estates are encumbered bythe debts thus incurred in vain show. The heir to such a property wasreared in a pomp and luxury undreamed of by the frugal young planter ofVirginia. Of working for a livelihood, in the sense in which Washingtonknew it, the young Englishman of great estate would never dream. 

The Atlantic is a broad sea and even in our own day, when instantmessages flash across it and man himself can fly from shore to shore inless than a score of hours, it is not easy for those on one strand tounderstand the thought of those on the other. Every community evolvesits own spirit not easily to be apprehended by the onlooker. The stateof society in America was vitally different from that in England. Theplain living of Virginia was in sharp contrast with the magnificenceand ease of England. It is true that we hear of plate and elaboratefurniture, of servants in livery, and much drinking of Port and Madeira, among the Virginians: They had good horses. Driving, as often they did, with six in a carriage, they seemed to keep up regal style. Spaces werewide in a country where one great landowner, Lord Fairfax, held no lessthan five million acres. Houses lay isolated and remote and a gentlemandining out would sometimes drive his elaborate equipage from twenty tofifty miles. There was a tradition of lavish hospitality, of gallant menand fair women, and sometimes of hard and riotous living. Many of thehouses were, however, in a state of decay, with leaking roofs, battereddoors and windows and shabby furniture. To own land in Virginia didnot mean to live in luxurious ease. Land brought in truth no very largeincome. It was easier to break new land than to fertilize that long inuse. An acre yielded only eight or ten bushels of wheat. In England theland was more fruitful. One who was only a tenant on the estate of Cokeof Norfolk died worth 150, 000 pounds, and Coke himself had the income ofa prince. When Washington died he was reputed one of the richest men inAmerica and yet his estate was hardly equal to that of Coke's tenant. 

Washington was a good farmer, inventive and enterprising, but he haddifficulties which ruined many of his neighbors. Today much of hisinfertile estate of Mount Vernon would hardly grow enough to paythe taxes. When Washington desired a gardener, or a bricklayer, or acarpenter, he usually had to buy him in the form of a convict, or ofa negro slave, or of a white man indentured for a term of years. Suchlabor required eternal vigilance. The negro, himself property, had norespect for it in others. He stole when he could and worked only whenthe eyes of a master were upon him. If left in charge of plants or ofstock he was likely to let them perish for lack of water. Washington'slosses of cattle, horses, and sheep from this cause were enormous. Theneglected cattle gave so little milk that at one time Washington, with ahundred cows, had to buy his butter. Negroes feigned sickness for weeksat a time. A visitor noted that Washington spoke to his slaves witha stern harshness. No doubt it was necessary. The management of thisintractable material brought training in command. If Washington couldmake negroes efficient and farming pay in Virginia, he need hardly beafraid to meet any other type of difficulty. 

From the first he was satisfied that the colonies had before them adifficult struggle. Many still refused to believe that there wasreally a state of war. Lexington and Bunker Hill might be regarded asunfortunate accidents to be explained away in an era of good feelingwhen each side should acknowledge the merits of the other and apologizefor its own faults. Washington had few illusions of this kind. He tookthe issue in a serious and even bitter spirit. He knew nothing of theEnglishman at home for he had never set foot outside of the coloniesexcept to visit Barbados with an invalid half-brother. Even then henoted that the "gentleman inhabitants" whose "hospitality and genteelbehaviour" he admired were discontented with the tone of the officialssent out from England. From early life Washington had seen much ofBritish officers in America. Some of them had been men of high birth andstation who treated the young colonial officer with due courtesy. When, however, he had served on the staff of the unfortunate General Braddockin the calamitous campaign of 1755, he had been offended by the tone ofthat leader. Probably it was in these days that Washington first broodedover the contrasts between the Englishman and the Virginian. Withobstinate complacency Braddock had disregarded Washington's counselsof prudence. He showed arrogant confidence in his veteran troops andcontempt for the amateur soldiers of whom Washington was one. In a wildcountry where rapid movement was the condition of success Braddock wouldhalt, as Washington said, "to level every mole hill and to erect bridgesover every brook. " His transport was poor and Washington, a lover ofhorses, chafed at what he called "vile management" of the horses bythe British soldier. When anything went wrong Braddock blamed, not theineffective work of his own men, but the supineness of Virginia. "Helooks upon the country, " Washington wrote in wrath, "I believe, as voidof honour and honesty. " The hour of trial came in the fight of July, 1755, when Braddock was defeated and killed on the march to the Ohio. Washington told his mother that in the fight the Virginian troops stoodtheir ground and were nearly all killed but the boasted regulars "werestruck with such a panic that they behaved with more cowardice than itis possible to conceive. " In the anger and resentment of this comment isfound the spirit which made Washington a champion of the colonial causefrom the first hour of disagreement. 

That was a fatal day in March, 1765, when the British Parliament votedthat it was just and necessary that a revenue be raised in America. Washington was uncompromising. After the tax on tea he derided "ourlordly masters in Great Britain. " No man, he said, should scruple fora moment to take up arms against the threatened tyranny. He and hisneighbors of Fairfax County, Virginia, took the trouble to tell theworld by formal resolution on July 18, 1774, that they were descendednot from a conquered but from a conquering people, that they claimedfull equality with the people of Great Britain, and like them would maketheir own laws and impose their own taxes. They were not democrats; theyhad no theories of equality; but as "gentlemen and men of fortune" theywould show to others the right path in the crisis which had arisen. Inthis resolution spoke the proud spirit of Washington; and, as he broodedover what was happening, anger fortified his pride. Of the Tories inBoston, some of them highly educated men, who with sorrow were walkingin what was to them the hard path of duty, Washington could say laterthat "there never existed a more miserable set of beings than thesewretched creatures. "

The age of Washington was one of bitter vehemence in political thought. In England the good Whig was taught that to deny Whig doctrine wasblasphemy, that there was no truth or honesty on the other side, andthat no one should trust a Tory; and usually the good Whig was trueto the teaching he had received. In America there had hitherto beenno national politics. Issues had been local and passions thus confinedexploded all the more fiercely. Franklin spoke of George III as drinkinglong draughts of American blood and of the British people as so depravedand barbarous as to be the wickedest nation upon earth, inspired bybloody and insatiable malice and wickedness. To Washington George IIIwas a tyrant, his ministers were scoundrels, and the British people werelost to every sense of virtue. The evil of it is that, for a posteritywhich listened to no other comment on the issues of the Revolution, suchutterances, instead of being understood as passing expressions of partybitterness, were taken as the calm judgments of men held in reverenceand awe. Posterity has agreed that there is nothing to be said for thecoercing of the colonies so resolutely pressed by George III and hisministers. Posterity can also, however, understand that the struggle wasnot between undiluted virtue on the one side and undiluted vice on theother. Some eighty years after the American Revolution the Republiccreated by the Revolution endured the horrors of civil war rather thanaccept its own disruption. In 1776 even the most liberal Englishmen felta similar passion for the continued unity of the British Empire. Timehas reconciled all schools of thought to the unity lost in the case ofthe Empire and to the unity preserved in the case of the Republic, buton the losing side in each case good men fought with deep conviction. 

CHAPTER II. BOSTON AND QUEBEC

Washington was not a professional soldier, though he had seen therealities of war and had moved in military society. Perhaps it was anadvantage that he had not received the rigid training of a regular, forhe faced conditions which required an elastic mind. The force besiegingBoston consisted at first chiefly of New England militia, with companiesof minute-men, so called because of their supposed readiness to fight ata minute's notice. Washington had been told that he should find 20, 000men under his command; he found, in fact, a nominal army of 17, 000, with probably not more than 14, 000 effective, and the number tendedto decline as the men went away to their homes after the first vividinterest gave way to the humdrum of military life. 

The extensive camp before Boston, as Washington now saw it, expressedthe varied character of his strange command. Cambridge, the seat ofHarvard College, was still only a village with a few large houses andpark-like grounds set among fields of grain, now trodden down by thesoldiers. Here was placed in haphazard style the motley housing of amilitary camp. The occupants had followed their own taste in building. One could see structures covered with turf, looking like lumps of motherearth, tents made of sail cloth, huts of bare boards, huts of brick andstone, some having doors and windows of wattled basketwork. There werenot enough huts to house the army nor camp-kettles for cooking. Blanketswere so few that many of the men were without covering at night. In thewarm summer weather this did not much matter but bleak autumn and harshwinter would bring bitter privation. The sick in particular sufferedseverely, for the hospitals were badly equipped. 

A deep conviction inspired many of the volunteers. They regarded asbrutal tyranny the tax on tea, considered in England as a mild expedientfor raising needed revenue for defense in the colonies. The men ofSuffolk County, Massachusetts, meeting in September, 1774, had declaredin high-flown terms that the proposed tax came from a parricide whoheld a dagger at their bosoms and that those who resisted him would earnpraises to eternity. From nearly every colony came similar utterances, and flaming resentment at injustice filled the volunteer army. Many asoldier would not touch a cup of tea because tea had been the ruin ofhis country. Some wore pinned to their hats or coats the words "Libertyor Death" and talked of resisting tyranny until "time shall be no more. "It was a dark day for the motherland when so many of her sons believedthat she was the enemy of liberty. The iron of this conviction enteredinto the soul of the American nation; at Gettysburg, nearly a centurylater, Abraham Lincoln, in a noble utterance which touched the heart ofhumanity, could appeal to the days of the Revolution, when "our fathersbrought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty. " Thecolonists believed that they were fighting for something of import toall mankind, and the nation which they created believes it still. 

An age of war furnishes, however, occasion for the exercise of baserimpulses. The New Englander was a trader by instinct. An army had comesuddenly together and there was golden promise of contracts for suppliesat fat profits. The leader from Virginia, untutored in such things, wasastounded at the greedy scramble. Before the year 1775 ended Washingtonwrote to his friend Lee that he prayed God he might never again have towitness such lack of public spirit, such jobbing and self-seeking, such "fertility in all the low arts, " as now he found at Cambridge. He declared that if he could have foreseen all this nothing would haveinduced him to take the command. Later, the young La Fayette, who hadleft behind him in France wealth and luxury in order to fight a hardfight in America, was shocked at the slackness and indifference amongthe supposed patriots for whose cause he was making sacrifices soheavy. In the backward parts of the colonies the population was denselyignorant and had little grasp of the deeper meaning of the patriotcause. 

The army was, as Washington himself said, "a mixed multitude. " Therewas every variety of dress. Old uniforms, treasured from the days of thelast French wars, had been dug out. A military coat or a cocked hat wasthe only semblance of uniform possessed by some of the officers. Rankwas often indicated by ribbons of different colors tied on the arm. Ladsfrom the farms had come in their usual dress; a good many of these werehunters from the frontier wearing the buckskin of the deer they hadslain. Sometimes there was clothing of grimmer material. Later in thewar in American officer recorded that his men had skinned two deadIndians "from their hips down, for bootlegs, one pair for the Major, the other for myself. " The volunteers varied greatly in age. Therewere bearded veterans of sixty and a sprinkling of lads of sixteen. An observer laughed at the boys and the "great great grandfathers" whomarched side by side in the army before Boston. Occasionally a blackface was seen in the ranks. One of Washington's tasks was to reduce thedisparity of years and especially to secure men who could shoot. Inthe first enthusiasm of 1775 so many men volunteered in Virginia that aselection was made on the basis of accuracy in shooting. The men firedat a range of one hundred and fifty yards at an outline of a man's nosein chalk on a board. Each man had a single shot and the first men shotthe nose entirely away. 

Undoubtedly there was the finest material among the men lounging abouttheir quarters at Cambridge in fashion so unmilitary. In physique theywere larger than the British soldier, a result due to abundant food andfree life in the open air from childhood. Most of the men supplied theirown uniform and rifles and much barter went on in the hours afterdrill. The men made and sold shoes, clothes, and even arms. Theywere accustomed to farm life and good at digging and throwing upentrenchments. The colonial mode of waging war was, however, not thatof Europe. To the regular soldier of the time even earth entrenchmentsseemed a sign of cowardice. The brave man would come out on the open toface his foe. Earl Percy, who rescued the harassed British on the day ofLexington, had the poorest possible opinion of those on what he calledthe rebel side. To him they were intriguing rascals, hypocrites, cowards, with sinister designs to ruin the Empire. But he was forced toadmit that they fought well and faced death willingly. 

In time Washington gathered about him a fine body of officers, brave, steady, and efficient. On the great issue they, like himself, hadunchanging conviction, and they and he saved the revolution. But a goodmany of his difficulties were due to bad officers. He had himself thereverence for gentility, the belief in an ordered grading of society, characteristic of his class in that age. In Virginia the relation ofmaster and servant was well understood and the tone of authority wasreadily accepted. In New England conceptions of equality were moreadvanced. The extent to which the people would brook the despotism ofmilitary command was uncertain. From the first some of the volunteershad elected their officers. The result was that intriguing demagogueswere sometimes chosen. The Massachusetts troops, wrote a Connecticutcaptain, not free, perhaps, from local jealousy, were "commanded by amost despicable set of officers. " At Bunker Hill officers of this typeshirked the fight and their men, left without leaders, joined in thepanicky retreat of that day. Other officers sent away soldiers to workon their farms while at the same time they drew for them public pay. Ata later time Washington wrote to a friend wise counsel about the choiceof officers. "Take none but gentlemen; let no local attachment influenceyou; do not suffer your good nature to say Yes when you ought to say No. Remember that it is a public, not a private cause. " What he desiredwas the gentleman's chivalry of refinement, sense of honor, dignity ofcharacter, and freedom from mere self-seeking. The prime qualities ofa good officer, as he often said, were authority and decision. It isprobably true of democracies that they prefer and will follow the manwho will take with them a strong tone. Little men, however, cannot seethis and think to gain support by shifty changes of opinion to pleasethe multitude. What authority and decision could be expected froman officer of the peasant type, elected by his own men? How could hedominate men whose short term of service was expiring and who had to becoaxed to renew it? Some elected officers had to promise to pool theirpay with that of their men. In one company an officer fulfilled thedouble position of captain and barber. In time, however, the authorityof military rank came to be respected throughout the whole army. Anamusing contrast with earlier conditions is found in 1779 when a captainwas tried by a brigade court-martial and dismissed from the service forintimate association with the wagon-maker of the brigade. 

The first thing to do at Cambridge was to get rid of the inefficient andthe corrupt. Washington had never any belief in a militia army. Fromhis earliest days as a soldier he had favored conscription, even in freeVirginia. He had then found quite ineffective the "whooping, holloinggentlemen soldiers" of the volunteer force of the colony among whom"every individual has his own crude notion of things and must undertaketo direct. If his advice is neglected he thinks himself slighted, abused, and injured and, to redress his wrongs, will depart for hishome. " Washington found at Cambridge too many officers. Then as laterin the American army there were swarms of colonels. The officers fromMassachusetts, conscious that they had seen the first fighting in thegreat cause, expected special consideration from a stranger servingon their own soil. Soon they had a rude awakening. Washington broke aMassachusetts colonel and two captains because they had provedcowards at Bunker Hill, two more captains for fraud in drawing pay andprovisions for men who did not exist, and still another for absencefrom his post when he was needed. He put in jail a colonel, a major, andthree or four other officers. "New lords, new laws, " wrote in his diaryMr. Emerson, the chaplain: "the Generals Washington and Lee are uponthe lines every day... Great distinction is made between officers andsoldiers. "

The term of all the volunteers in Washington's any expired by the end of1775, so that he had to create a new army during the siege of Boston. Hespoke scornfully of an enemy so little enterprising as to remain supineduring the process. But probably the British were wise to avoid aventure inland and to remain in touch with their fleet. Washington madethem uneasy when he drove away the cattle from the neighborhood. Soonbeef was selling in Boston for as much as eighteen pence a pound. Foodmight reach Boston in ships but supplies even by sea were insecure, forthe Americans soon had privateers manned by seamen familiar with NewEngland waters and happy in expected gains from prize money. The Britishwere anxious about the elementary problem of food. They might have madeWashington more uncomfortable by forays and alarms. Only reluctantly, however, did Howe, who took over the command on October 10, 1775, admitto himself that this was a real war. He still hoped for settlementwithout further bloodshed. Washington was glad to learn that the Britishwere laying in supplies of coal for the winter. It meant that theyintended to stay in Boston, where, more than in any other place, hecould make trouble for them. 

Washington had more on his mind than the creation of an army and thesiege of Boston. He had also to decide the strategy of the war. On thelong American sea front Boston alone remained in British hands. NewYork, Philadelphia, Charleston and other ports farther south were all, for the time, on the side of the Revolution. Boston was not a goodnaval base for the British, since it commanded no great waterway leadinginland. The sprawling colonies, from the rock-bound coast of New Englandto the swamps and forests of Georgia, were strong in their incoherentvastness. There were a thousand miles of seacoast. Only rarely wereconsiderable settlements to be found more than a hundred miles distantfrom salt water. An army marching to the interior would have increasingdifficulties from transport and supplies. Wherever water routes couldbe used the naval power of the British gave them an advantage. One suchroute was the Hudson, less a river than a navigable arm of the sea, leading to the heart of the colony of New York, its upper waters almosttouching Lake George and Lake Champlain, which in turn led to theSt. Lawrence in Canada and thence to the sea. Canada was held by theBritish; and it was clear that, if they should take the city of NewYork, they might command the whole line from the mouth of the Hudson tothe St. Lawrence, and so cut off New England from the other colonies andovercome a divided enemy. To foil this policy Washington planned to holdNew York and to capture Canada. With Canada in line the union of thecolonies would be indeed continental, and, if the British were drivenfrom Boston, they would have no secure foothold in North America. 

The danger from Canada had always been a source of anxiety to theEnglish colonies. The French had made Canada a base for attempts todrive the English from North America. During many decades war had ragedalong the Canadian frontier. With the cession of Canada to Britain in1763 this danger had vanished. The old habit endured, however, of fearof Canada. When, in 1774, the British Parliament passed the bill for thegovernment of Canada known as the Quebec Act, there was violent clamor. The measure was assumed to be a calculated threat against colonialliberty. The Quebec Act continued in Canada the French civil law and theancient privileges of the Roman Catholic Church. It guaranteed order inthe wild western region north of the Ohio, taken recently from France, by placing it under the authority long exercised there of the Governorof Quebec. Only a vivid imagination would conceive that to allow tothe French in Canada their old loved customs and laws involved designsagainst the freedom under English law in the other colonies, or thatto let the Canadians retain in respect to religion what they had alwayspossessed meant a sinister plot against the Protestantism of the Englishcolonies. Yet Alexander Hamilton, perhaps the greatest mind in theAmerican Revolution, had frantic suspicions. French laws in Canadainvolved, he said, the extension of French despotism in the Englishcolonies. The privileges continued to the Roman Catholic Church inCanada would be followed in due course by the Inquisition, the burningof heretics at the stake in Boston and New York, and the bringingfrom Europe of Roman Catholic settlers who would prove tools for thedestruction of religious liberty. Military rule at Quebec meant, sooneror later, despotism everywhere in America. We may smile now at theyouthful Hamilton's picture of "dark designs" and "deceitful wiles"on the part of that fierce Protestant George III to establish RomanCatholic despotism, but the colonies regarded the danger as serious. Thequick remedy would be simply to take Canada, as Washington now planned. 

To this end something had been done before Washington assumed thecommand. The British Fort Ticonderoga, on the neck of land separatingLake Champlain from Lake George, commanded the route from New York toCanada. The fight at Lexington in April had been quickly followed byaggressive action against this British stronghold. No news of Lexingtonhad reached the fort when early in May Colonel Ethan Allen, withBenedict Arnold serving as a volunteer in his force of eighty-threemen, arrived in friendly guise. The fort was held by only forty-eightBritish; with the menace from France at last ended they felt secure;discipline was slack, for there was nothing to do. The incompetentcommander testified that he lent Allen twenty men for some rough workon the lake. By evening Allen had them all drunk and then it was easy, without firing a shot, to capture the fort with a rush. The door toCanada was open. Great stores of ammunition and a hundred and twentyguns, which in due course were used against the British at Boston, fellinto American hands. 

About Canada Washington was ill-informed. He thought of the Canadians asif they were Virginians or New Yorkers. They had been recently conqueredby Britain; their new king was a tyrant; they would desire liberty andwould welcome an American army. So reasoned Washington, but withoutknowledge. The Canadians were a conquered people, but they had foundthe British king no tyrant and they had experienced the paradox of beingfreer under the conqueror than they had been under their own sovereign. The last days of French rule in Canada were disgraced by corruptionand tyranny almost unbelievable. The Canadian peasant had been cruellyrobbed and he had conceived for his French rulers a dislike whichappears still in his attitude towards the motherland of France. Forhis new British master he had assuredly no love, but he was no longerdragged off to war and his property was not plundered. He was free, too, to speak his mind. During the first twenty years after the Britishconquest of Canada the Canadian French matured indeed an assertiveliberty not even dreamed of during the previous century and a half ofFrench rule. 

The British tyranny which Washington pictured in Canada was thus notvery real. He underestimated, too, the antagonism between the RomanCatholics of Canada and the Protestants of the English colonies. TheCongress at Philadelphia in denouncing the Quebec Act had accused theCatholic Church of bigotry, persecution, murder, and rebellion. This wasno very tactful appeal for sympathy to the sons of that France which wasstill the eldest daughter of the Church and it was hardly helped bya maladroit turn suggesting that "low-minded infirmities" should notpermit such differences to block union in the sacred cause of liberty. Washington believed that two battalions of Canadians might be recruitedto fight the British, and that the French Acadians of Nova Scotia, apeople so remote that most of them hardly knew what the war was about, were tingling with sympathy for the American cause. In truth theCanadian was not prepared to fight on either side. What the priest andthe landowner could do to make him fight for Britain was done, but, forall that, Sir Guy Carleton, the Governor of Canada, found recruitingimpossible. 

Washington believed that the war would be won by the side which heldCanada. He saw that from Canada would be determined the attitude of thesavages dwelling in the wild spaces of the interior; he saw, too, thatQuebec as a military base in British hands would be a source of gravedanger. The easy capture of Fort Ticonderoga led him to underratedifficulties. If Ticonderoga why not Quebec? Nova Scotia might beoccupied later, the Acadians helping. Thus it happened that, soonafter taking over the command, Washington was busy with a plan for theconquest of Canada. Two forces were to advance into that country; one byway of Lake Champlain under General Schuyler and the other through theforests of Maine under Benedict Arnold. 

Schuyler was obliged through illness to give up his command, and it wasan odd fortune of war that put General Richard Montgomery at the headof the expedition going by way of Lake Champlain. Montgomery had servedwith Wolfe at the taking of Louisbourg and had been an officer in theproud British army which had received the surrender of Canada in 1760. Not without searching of heart had Montgomery turned against his formersovereign. He was living in America when war broke out; he had marriedinto an American family of position; and he had come to the view thatvital liberty was challenged by the King. Now he did his work well, in spite of very bad material in his army. His New Englanders were, hesaid, "every man a general and not one of them a soldier. " They feignedsickness, though, as far as he had learned, there was "not a man dead ofany distemper. " No better were the men from New York, "the sweepings ofthe streets" with morals "infamous. " Of the officers, too, Montgomeryhad a poor opinion. Like Washington he declared that it was necessary toget gentlemen, men of education and integrity, as officers, or disasterwould follow. Nevertheless St. Johns, a British post on the Richelieu, about thirty miles across country from Montreal, fell to Montgomery onthe 3d of November, after a siege of six weeks; and British regularsunder Major Preston, a brave and competent officer, yielded to a crudevolunteer army with whole regiments lacking uniforms. Montreal couldmake no defense. On the 12th of November Montgomery entered Montrealand was in control of the St. Lawrence almost to the cliffs of Quebec. Canada seemed indeed an easy conquest. 

The adventurous Benedict Arnold went on an expedition more hazardous. He had persuaded Washington of the impossible, that he could advancethrough the wilderness from the seacoast of Maine and take Quebec bysurprise. News travels even by forest pathways. Arnold made a wonderfuleffort. Chill autumn was upon him when, on the 25th of September, withabout a thousand picked men, he began to advance up the Kennebec Riverand over the height of land to the upper waters of the Chaudiere, whichdischarges into the St. Lawrence opposite Quebec. There were heavyrains. Sometimes the men had to wade breast high in dragging heavyand leaking boats over the difficult places. A good many men died ofstarvation. Others deserted and turned back. The indomitable Arnoldpressed on, however, and on the 9th of November, a few days beforeMontgomery occupied Montreal, he stood with some six hundred worn andshivering men on the strand of the St. Lawrence opposite Quebec. Hehad not surprised the city and it looked grim and inaccessible as hesurveyed it across the great river. In the autumn gales it was not easyto carry over his little army in small boats. But this he accomplishedand then waited for Montgomery to join him. 

By the 3d of December Montgomery was with Arnold before Quebec. Theyhad hardly more than a thousand effective troops, together with a fewhundred Canadians, upon whom no reliance could be placed. Carleton, commanding at Quebec, sat tight and would hold no communicationwith despised "rebels. " "They all pretend to be gentlemen, " said anastonished British officer in Quebec, when he heard that among theAmerican officers now captured by the British there were a formerblacksmith, a butcher, a shoemaker, and an innkeeper. Montgomery wasstung to violent threats by Carleton's contempt, but never could he drawfrom Carleton a reply. At last Montgomery tried, in the dark of earlymorning of New Year's Day, 1776, to carry Quebec by storm. He was tolead an attack on the Lower Town from the west side, while Arnold was toenter from the opposite side. When they met in the center they were tostorm the citadel on the heights above. They counted on the help of theFrench inhabitants, from whom Carleton said bitterly enough that hehad nothing to fear in prosperity and nothing to hope for in adversity. Arnold pressed his part of the attack with vigor and penetrated to thestreets of the Lower Town where he fell wounded. Captain Daniel Morgan, who took over the command, was made prisoner. 

Montgomery's fate was more tragic. In spite of protests from hisofficers, he led in person the attack from the west side of thefortress. The advance was along a narrow road under the towering cliffsof a great precipice. The attack was expected by the British and theguard at the barrier was ordered to hold its fire until the enemy wasnear. Suddenly there was a roar of cannon and the assailants not sweptdown fled in panic. With the morning light the dead head of Montgomerywas found protruding from the snow. He was mourned by Washington andwith reason. He had talents and character which might have made him oneof the chief leaders of the revolutionary army. Elsewhere, too, washe mourned. His father, an Irish landowner, had been a member of theBritish Parliament, and he himself was a Whig, known to Fox and Burke. When news of his death reached England eulogies upon him came from theWhig benches in Parliament which could not have been stronger had hedied fighting for the King. 

While the outlook in Canada grew steadily darker, the American causeprospered before Boston. There Howe was not at ease. If it was reallyto be war, which he still doubted, it would be well to seek someother base. Washington helped Howe to take action. Dorchester Heightscommanded Boston as critically from the south as did Bunker Hill fromthe north. By the end of February Washington had British cannon, broughtwith heavy labor from Ticonderoga, and then he lost no time. On themorning of March 5, 1776, Howe awoke to find that, under cover of aheavy bombardment, American troops had occupied Dorchester Heights andthat if he would dislodge them he must make another attack similarto that at Bunker Hill. The alternative of stiff fighting was theevacuation of Boston. Howe, though dilatory, was a good fightingsoldier. His defects as a general in America sprang in part from hisbelief that the war was unjust and that delay might bring counselsmaking for peace and save bloodshed. His first decision was to attack, but a furious gale thwarted his purpose, and he then prepared for theinevitable step. 

Washington divined Howe's purpose and there was a tacit agreement thatthe retiring army should not be molested. Howe destroyed munitionsof war which he could not take away but he left intact the powerfuldefenses of Boston, defenses reared at the cost of Britain. Many of thebetter class of the inhabitants, British in their sympathies, were nowface to face with bitter sorrow and sacrifice. Passions were so arousedthat a hard fate awaited them should they remain in Boston and theydecided to leave with the British army. Travel by land was blocked; theycould go only by sea. When the time came to depart, laden carriages, trucks, and wheelbarrows crowded to the quays through the narrow streetsand a sad procession of exiles went out from their homes. A profanecritic said that they moved "as if the very devil was after them. " Nodoubt many of them would have been arrogant and merciless to "rebels"had theirs been the triumph. But the day was above all a day of sorrow. Edward Winslow, a strong leader among them, tells of his tears "atleaving our once happy town of Boston. " The ships, a forest of masts, set sail and, crowded with soldiers and refugees, headed straight outto sea for Halifax. Abigail, wife of John Adams, a clever woman, watchedthe departure of the fleet with gladness in her heart. She thought thatnever before had been seen in America so many ships bearing so manypeople. Washington's army marched joyously into Boston. Joyous it mightwell be since, for the moment, powerful Britain was not secure in asingle foot of territory in the former colonies. If Quebec should fallthe continent would be almost conquered. 

Quebec did not fall. All through the winter the Americans held on beforethe place. They shivered from cold. They suffered from the dread diseasesmallpox. They had difficulty in getting food. The Canadians wereinsistent on having good money for what they offered and since goodmoney was not always in the treasury the invading army sometimes usedviolence. Then the Canadians became more reserved and chilling thanever. In hope of mending matters Congress sent a commission to Montrealin the spring of 1776. Its chairman was Benjamin Franklin and, with him, were two leading Roman Catholics, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, agreat landowner of Maryland, and his brother John, a priest, afterwardsArchbishop of Baltimore. It was not easy to represent as the liberatorof the Catholic Canadians the Congress which had denounced in scathingterms the concessions in the Quebec Act to the Catholic Church. Franklinwas a master of conciliation, but before he achieved anything a dramaticevent happened. On the 6th of May, British ships arrived at Quebec. Theinhabitants rushed to the ramparts. Cries of joy passed from streetto street and they reached the little American army, now under GeneralThomas, encamped on the Plains of Abraham. Panic seized the small forcewhich had held on so long. On the ships were ten thousand fresh Britishtroops. The one thing for the Americans to do was to get away; and theyfled, leaving behind guns, supplies, even clothing and private papers. Five days later Franklin, at Montreal, was dismayed by the distressingnews of disaster. 

Congress sent six regiments to reinforce the army which had fled fromQuebec. It was a desperate venture. Washington's orders were that theAmericans should fight the new British army as near Quebec as possible. The decisive struggle took place on the 8th of June. An American forceunder the command of General Thompson attacked Three Rivers, a townon the St. Lawrence, half way between Quebec and Montreal. They wererepulsed and the general was taken prisoner. The wonder is indeed thatthe army was not annihilated. Then followed a disastrous retreat. Shortof supplies, ravaged by smallpox, and in bad weather, the invaders triedto make their way back to Lake Champlain. They evacuated Montreal. It ishard enough in the day of success to hold together an untrained army. Inthe day of defeat such a force is apt to become a mere rabble. Some ofthe American regiments preserved discipline. Others fell into completedisorder as, weak and discouraged, they retired to Lake Champlain. Manysoldiers perished of disease. "I did not look into a hut or a tent, "says an observer, "in which I did not find a dead or dying man. " Thosewho had huts were fortunate. The fate of some was to die without medicalcare and without cover. By the end of June what was left of the forcehad reached Crown Point on Lake Champlain. 

Benedict Arnold, who had been wounded at Quebec, was now at Crown Point. Competent critics of the war have held that what Arnold now did savedthe Revolution. In another scene, before the summer ended, the Britishhad taken New York and made themselves masters of the lower Hudson. Had they reached in the same season the upper Hudson by way of LakeChamplain they would have struck blows doubly staggering. This Arnoldsaw, and his object was to delay, if he could not defeat, the Britishadvance. There was no road through the dense forest by the shores ofLake Champlain and Lake George to the upper Hudson. The British must godown the lake in boats. This General Carleton had foreseen and he hadurged that with the fleet sent to Quebec should be sent from England, in sections, boats which could be quickly carried past the rapids of theRichelieu River and launched on Lake Champlain. They had not come andthe only thing for Carleton to do was to build a flotilla which couldcarry an army up the lake and attack Crown Point. The thing was donebut skilled workmen were few and not until the 6th of October were thelittle ships afloat on Lake Champlain. Arnold, too, spent the summer inbuilding boats to meet the attack and it was a strange turn in warfarewhich now made him commander in a naval fight. There was a briskstruggle on Lake Champlain. Carleton had a score or so of vessels;Arnold not so many. But he delayed Carleton. When he was beaten on thewater he burned the ships not captured and took to the land. When hecould no longer hold Crown Point he burned that place and retreated toTiconderoga. 

By this time it was late autumn. The British were far from their baseand the Americans were retreating into a friendly country. There islittle doubt that Carleton could have taken Fort Ticonderoga. It fellquite easily less than a year later. Some of his officers urged him topress on and do it. But the leaves had already fallen, the bleak winterwas near, and Carleton pictured to himself an army buried deeply in anenemy country and separated from its base by many scores of miles oflake and forest. He withdrew to Canada and left Lake Champlain to theAmericans. 

CHAPTER III. INDEPENDENCE

Well-meaning people in England found it difficult to understand theintensity of feeling in America. Britain had piled up a huge debt indriving France from America. Landowners were paying in taxes no lessthan twenty per cent of their incomes from land. The people who hadchiefly benefited by the humiliation of France were the colonists, now freed from hostile menace and secure for extension over a wholecontinent. Why should not they pay some share of the cost of their ownsecurity? Certain facts tended to make Englishmen indignant with theAmericans. Every effort had failed to get them to pay willingly fortheir defense. Before the Stamp Act had become law in 1765 the colonieswere given a whole year to devise the raising of money in any way whichthey liked better. The burden of what was asked would be light. Whyshould not they agree to bear it? Why this talk, repeated by the Whigsin the British Parliament, of brutal tyranny, oppression, hired minionsimposing slavery, and so on. Where were the oppressed? Could any onepoint to a single person who before war broke out had known Britishtyranny? What suffering could any one point to as the result of the taxon tea? The people of England paid a tax on tea four times heavier thanthat paid in America. Was not the British Parliament supreme over thewhole Empire? Did not the colonies themselves admit that it had theright to control their trade overseas? And if men shirk their dutyshould they not come under some law of compulsion?

It was thus that many a plain man reasoned in England. The plain man inAmerica had his own opposing point of view. Debts and taxes in Englandwere not his concern. He remembered the recent war as vividly as did theEnglishman, and, if the English paid its cost in gold, he had paid hisshare in blood and tears. Who made up the armies led by the Britishgenerals in America? More than half the total number who served inAmerica came from the colonies, the colonies which had barely a thirdof the population of Great Britain. True, Britain paid the bill in moneybut 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. Lookat the magnificence, the pomp of servants, plate and pictures, the parksand gardens, of hundreds of English country houses, and compare thisopulence with the simple mode of life, simplicity imposed by necessity, of a country gentleman like George Washington of Virginia, reputed to bethe richest man in America. Thousands of tenants in England, owning noacre of land, were making a larger income than was possible in Americato any owner of broad acres. It was true that America had gained fromthe late war. The foreign enemy had been struck down. But had he notbeen struck down too for England? Had there not been far more dread inEngland of invasion by France and had not the colonies by helping toruin France freed England as much as England had freed them? If now thecolonies were asked to pay a share of the bill for the British army thatwas a matter for discussion. They had never before done it and theymust not be told that they had to meet the demand within a year or becompelled to pay. Was it not to impose tyranny and slavery to tella people that their property would be taken by force if they did notchoose to give it? What free man would not rather die than yield on sucha point?

The familiar workings of modern democracy have taught us that a greatpolitical issue must be discussed in broad terms of high praise orsevere blame. The contestants will exaggerate both the virtue ofthe side they espouse and the malignity of the opposing side; nicediscrimination is not possible. It was inevitable that the dispute withthe colonies should arouse angry vehemence on both sides. The passionatespeech of Patrick Henry in Virginia, in 1763, which made him famous, and was the forerunner of his later appeal, "Give me Liberty or give meDeath, " related to so prosaic a question as the right of disallowanceby England of an act passed by a colonial legislature, a rightexercised long and often before that time and to this day a part of theconstitutional machinery of the British Empire. Few men have lived moreserenely poised than Washington, yet, as we have seen, he hated theBritish with an implacable hatred. He was a humane man. In earlieryears, Indian raids on the farmers of Virginia had stirred him to"deadly sorrow, " and later, during his retreat from New York, he wasmoved by the cries of the weak and infirm. Yet the same man felt notouch of pity for the Loyalists of the Revolution. To him they weredetestable parricides, vile traitors, with no right to live. When wefind this note in Washington, in America, we hardly wonder that thehigh Tory, Samuel Johnson, in England, should write that the proposedtaxation 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, " andthat the Americans were "a race of convicts, and ought to be thankfulfor anything which we allow them short of hanging. " Tyranny and treasonare both ugly things. Washington believed that he was fighting the one, Johnson that he was fighting the other, and neither side would admit thecharge against itself. 

Such are the passions aroused by civil strife. We need not now, whenthey are, or ought to be, dead, spend any time in deploring them. Itsuffices to explain them and the events to which they led. There wasone and really only one final issue. Were the American colonies free togovern themselves as they liked or might their government in the lastanalysis be regulated by Great Britain? The truth is that the colonieshad reached a condition in which they regarded themselves as Britishstates with their own parliaments, exercising complete jurisdiction intheir own affairs. They intended to use their own judgment and they wereas restless under attempted control from England as England would havebeen under control from America. We can indeed always understand thepoint of view of Washington if we reverse the position and imagine whatan Englishman would have thought of a claim by America to tax him. 

An ancient and proud society is reluctant to change. After a long andsuccessful war England was prosperous. To her now came riches from Indiaand the ends of the earth. In society there was such lavish expenditurethat Horace Walpole declared an income of twenty thousand pounds a yearwas barely enough. England had an aristocracy the proudest in the world, for it had not only rank but wealth. The English people were certain ofthe invincible superiority of their nation. Every Englishman was taught, as Disraeli said of a later period, to believe that he occupied aposition better than any one else of his own degree in any other countryin the world. The merchant in England was believed to surpass all othersin wealth and integrity, the manufacturer to have no rivals in skill, the British sailor to stand in a class by himself, the British officerto express the last word in chivalry. It followed, of course, that themotherland was superior to her children overseas. The colonies had noaristocracy, no great landowners living in stately palaces. They hadalmost no manufactures. They had no imposing state system with placesand pensions from which the fortunate might reap a harvest of ten oreven twenty thousand pounds a year. They had no ancient universitiesthronged by gilded youth who, if noble, might secure degrees without thetrying ceremony of an examination. They had no Established Church withthe ancient glories of its cathedrals. In all America there was not evena bishop. In spite of these contrasts the English Whigs insisted uponthe political equality with themselves of the American colonists. TheTory squire, however, shared Samuel Johnson's view that colonists wereeither traders or farmers and that colonial shopkeeping society wasvulgar and contemptible. 

George III was ill-fitted by nature to deal with the crisis. The Kingwas not wholly without natural parts, for his own firm will hadachieved what earlier kings had tried and failed to do; he had masteredParliament, made it his obedient tool and himself for a time a despot. He had some admirable virtues. He was a family man, the father offifteen children. He liked quiet amusements and had wholesome tastes. Ifindustry and belief in his own aims could of themselves make a mangreat we might reverence George. He wrote once to Lord North: "I have noobject but to be of use: if that is ensured I am completely happy. "The King was always busy. Ceaseless industry does not, however, includeevery 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 wasill-educated. He had never traveled. He had no power to see the point ofview of others. 

As if nature had not sufficiently handicapped George for a high part, fate placed him on the throne at the immature age of twenty-two. Henceforth the boy was master, not pupil. Great nobles and obsequiousprelates did him reverence. Ignorant and obstinate, the young King wasdetermined not only to reign but to rule, in spite of the new doctrinethat Parliament, not the King, carried on the affairs of governmentthrough the leader of the majority in the House of Commons, alreadyknown as the Prime Minister. George could not really change what was thelast expression of political forces in England. The rule of Parliamenthad come to stay. Through it and it alone could the realm be governed. This power, however, though it could not be destroyed, might becontrolled. Parliament, while retaining all its privileges, might yetcarry out the wishes of the sovereign. The King might be his own PrimeMinister. The thing could be done if the King's friends held a majorityof the seats and would do what their master directed. It was a dark dayfor England when a king found that he could play off one faction againstanother, buy a majority in Parliament, and retain it either by payingwith guineas or with posts and dignities which the bought Parliamentleft in his gift. This corruption it was which ruined the first BritishEmpire. 

We need not doubt that George thought it his right and also his duty tocoerce America, or rather, as he said, the clamorous minority which wastrying to force rebellion. He showed no lack of sincerity. On October26, 1775, while Washington was besieging Boston, he opened Parliamentwith a speech which at any rate made the issue clear enough. Britainwould not give up colonies which she had founded with severe toil andnursed with great kindness. Her army and her navy, both now increasedin size, would make her power respected. She would not, however, dealharshly with her erring children. Royal mercy would be shown to thosewho admitted their error and they need not come to England to secure it. Persons in America would be authorized to grant pardons and furnish theguarantees which would proceed from the royal clemency. 

Such was the magnanimity of George III. Washington's rage at the tone ofthe speech is almost amusing in its vehemence. He, with a mind consciousof rectitude and sacrifice in a great cause, to ask pardon for hiscourse! He to bend the knee to this tyrant overseas! Washington himselfwas not highly gifted with imagination. He never realized the strengthof the forces in England arrayed on his own side and attributed to theEnglish, as a whole, sinister and malignant designs always condemned bythe great mass of the English people. They, no less than the Americans, were the victims of a turn in politics which, for a brief period, andfor only a brief period, left power in the hands of a corrupt Parliamentand a corrupting king. 

Ministers were not all corrupt or place-hunters. One of them, theEarl of Dartmouth, was a saint in spirit. Lord North, the king's chiefminister, was not corrupt. He disliked his office and wished to leaveit. In truth no sweeping simplicity of condemnation will include all theministers of George III except on this one point that they allowed todictate their policy a narrow-minded and ignorant king. It was theirright to furnish a policy and to exercise the powers of government, appoint to office, spend the public revenues. Instead they let the Kingsay that the opinions of his ministers had no avail with him. If we askwhy, the answer is that there was a mixture of motives. North stayed inoffice because the King appealed to his loyalty, a plea hard to resistunder an ancient monarchy. Others stayed from love of power or for whatthey could get. In that golden age of patronage it was possible for aman to hold a plurality of offices which would bring to himself manythousands of pounds a year, and also to secure the reversion of officesand pensions to his children. Horace Walpole spent a long life inluxurious ease because of offices with high pay and few duties securedin the distant days of his father's political power. Contracts to supplythe army and the navy went to friends of the government, sometimeswith disastrous results, since the contractor often knew nothing ofthe business he undertook. When, in 1777, the Admiralty boasted thatthirty-five ships of war were ready to put to sea it was found thatthere were in fact only six. The system nearly ruined the navy. Itactually happened that planks of a man-of-war fell out through rot andthat she sank. Often ropes and spars could not be had when most needed. When a public loan was floated the King's friends and they alone weregiven the shares at a price which enabled them to make large profits onthe stock market. 

The system could endure only as long as the King's friends had amajority in the House of Commons. Elections must be looked after. TheKing must have those on whom he could always depend. He controlledoffices and pensions. With these things he bought members and he had tokeep them bought by repeating the benefits. If the holder of a publicoffice was thought to be dying the King was already naming to his PrimeMinister the person to whom the office must go when death should occur. He insisted that many posts previously granted for life should now begiven during his pleasure so that he might dismiss the holders at will. He watched the words and the votes in Parliament of public men and woeto those in his power if they displeased him. When he knew that Fox, his great antagonist, would be absent from Parliament he pressed throughmeasures which Fox would have opposed. It was not until George III wasKing that the buying and selling of boroughs became common. The Kingbought votes in the boroughs by paying high prices for trifles. Heeven went over the lists of voters and had names of servants of thegovernment inserted if this seemed needed to make a majority secure. One of the most unedifying scenes in English history is that of Georgemaking a purchase in a shop at Windsor and because of this patronageasking for the shopkeeper's support in a local election. The King wassaving and penurious in his habits that he might have the more money tobuy votes. When he had no money left he would go to Parliament andask for a special grant for his needs and the bought members could notrefuse the money for their buying. 

The people of England knew that Parliament was corrupt. But how to endthe system? The press was not free. Some of it the government boughtand the rest it tried to intimidate though often happily in vain. Onlyfragments of the debates in Parliament were published. Not until 1779did the House of Commons admit the public to its galleries. No greatpolitical meetings were allowed until just before the American war andin any case the masses had no votes. The great landowners had in theircontrol a majority of the constituencies. There were scores of pocketboroughs in which their nominees were as certain of election as peerswere of their seats in the House of Lords. The disease of Englandwas deep-seated. A wise king could do much, but while George IIIsurvived--and his reign lasted sixty years--there was no hope of a wiseking. A strong minister could impose his will on the King. But only timeand circumstance could evolve a strong minister. Time and circumstanceat length produced the younger Pitt. But it needed the tragedy of twolong wars--those against the colonies and revolutionary France--beforethe nation finally threw off the system which permitted the personalrule of George III and caused the disruption of the Empire. It may thusbe said with some truth that George Washington was instrumental in thesalvation of England. 

The ministers of George III loved the sports, the rivalries, the ease, the remoteness of their rural magnificence. Perverse fashion kept themin London even in April and May for "the season, " just when in thecountry nature was most alluring. Otherwise they were off to theirestates whenever they could get away from town. The American Revolutionwas not remotely affected by this habit. With ministers long absent inthe country important questions were postponed or forgotten. The crisiswhich in the end brought France into the war was partly due to thecarelessness of a minister hurrying away to the country. Lord GeorgeGermain, who directed military operations in America, dictated a letterwhich would have caused General Howe to move northward from New Yorkto meet General Burgoyne advancing from Canada. Germain went off to thecountry without waiting to sign the letter; it was mislaid among otherpapers; Howe was without needed instructions; and the disaster followedof Burgoyne's surrender. Fox pointed out, that, at a time when therewas a danger that a foreign army might land in England, not one of theKing's ministers was less than fifty miles from London. They were intheir parks and gardens, or hunting or fishing. Nor did they stay awayfor a few days only. The absence was for weeks or even months. 

It is to the credit of Whig leaders in England, landowners andaristocrats as they were, that they supported with passion the Americancause. In America, where the forces of the Revolution were in control, the Loyalist who dared to be bold for his opinions was likely to betarred and feathered and to lose his property. There was an embitteredintolerance. In England, however, it was an open question in societywhether to be for or against the American cause. The Duke of Richmond, a great grandson of Charles II, said in the House of Lords that under nocode should the fighting Americans be considered traitors. What they didwas "perfectly justifiable in every possible political and moralsense. " All the world knows that Chatham and Burke and Fox urged theconciliation of America and hundreds took the same stand. Burke said ofGeneral Conway, a man of position, that when he secured a majority inthe House of Commons against the Stamp Act his face shone as the face ofan angel. Since the bishops almost to a man voted with the King, Conwayattacked them as in this untrue to their high office. Sir George Savile, whose benevolence, supported by great wealth, made him widely respectedand loved, said that the Americans were right in appealing to arms. Cokeof Norfolk was a landed magnate who lived in regal style. His seat ofHolkham was one of those great new palaces which the age reared atsuch elaborate cost. It was full of beautiful things--the art ofMichelangelo, Raphael, Titian, and Van Dyke, rare manuscripts, books, and tapestries. So magnificent was Coke that a legend long ran that hishorses were shod with gold and that the wheels of his chariots were ofsolid silver. In the country he drove six horses. In town only the Kingdid this. Coke despised George III, chiefly on account of his Americanpolicy, and to avoid the reproach of rivaling the King's estate, hetook joy in driving past the palace in London with a donkey as hissixth animal and in flicking his whip at the King. When he was offereda peerage by the King he denounced with fiery wrath the minister throughwhom it was offered as attempting to bribe him. Coke declared that ifone of the King's ministers held up a hat in the House of Commons andsaid that it was a green bag the majority of the members would solemnlyvote that it was a green bag. The bribery which brought this blindobedience of Toryism filled Coke with fury. In youth he had been taughtnever to trust a Tory and he could say "I never have and, by God, Inever will. " One of his children asked their mother whether Tories wereborn wicked or after birth became wicked. The uncompromising answer was:"They are born wicked and they grow up worse. "

There is, of course, in much of this something of the malignance ofparty. In an age when one reverend theologian, Toplady, called anothertheologian, John Wesley, "a low and puny tadpole in Divinity" we mustexpect harsh epithets. But behind this bitterness lay a deep convictionof the righteousness of the American cause. At a great banquet atHolkham, Coke omitted the toast of the King; but every night during theAmerican war he drank the health of Washington as the greatest man onearth. The war, he said, was the King's war, ministers were his tools, the press was bought. He denounced later the King's reception of thetraitor Arnold. When the King's degenerate son, who became George IV, after some special misconduct, wrote to propose his annual visit toHolkham, Coke replied, "Holkham is open to strangers on Tuesdays. " Itwas an independent and irate England which spoke in Coke. Those whopaid taxes, he said, should control those who governed. America was notgetting fair play. Both Coke and Fox, and no doubt many others, worewaistcoats of blue and buff because these were the colors of theuniforms of Washington's army. 

Washington and Coke exchanged messages and they would have beencongenial companions; for Coke, like Washington, was above all a farmerand tried to improve agriculture. Never for a moment, he said, hadtime hung heavy on his hands in the country. He began on his estate theculture of the potato, and for some time the best he could hear of itfrom his stolid tenantry was that it would not poison the pigs. Coke would have fought the levy of a penny of unjust taxation and heunderstood Washington. The American gentleman and the English gentlemanhad a common outlook. 

Now had come, however, the hour for political separation. Byreluctant but inevitable steps America made up its mind to declare forindependence. At first continued loyalty to the King was urged on theplea that he was in the hands of evil-minded ministers, inspired bydiabolical rage, or in those of an "infernal villain" such as thesoldier, General Gage, a second Pharaoh; though it must be admitted thateven then the King was "the tyrant of Great Britain. " After Bunker Hillspasmodic declarations of independence were made here and there by localbodies. When Congress organized an army, invaded Canada, and besiegedBoston, it was hard to protest loyalty to a King whose forces werethose of an enemy. Moreover independence would, in the eyes at least offoreign governments, give the colonies the rights of belligerents andenable them to claim for their fighting forces the treatment due to aregular army and the exchange of prisoners with the British. They could, too, make alliances with other nations. Some clamored for independencefor a reason more sinister--that they might punish those who held to theKing and seize their property. There were thirteen colonies in armsand each of them had to form some kind of government which would workwithout a king as part of its mechanism. One by one such governmentswere formed. King George, as we have seen, helped the colonies to makeup their minds. They were in no mood to be called erring children whomust implore undeserved mercy and not force a loving parent to takeunwilling vengeance. "Our plantations" and "our subjects in thecolonies" would simply not learn obedience. If George III would notreply to their petitions until they laid down their arms, they couldmanage to get on without a king. If England, as Horace Walpole admitted, would not take them seriously and speakers in Parliament called themobscure ruffians and cowards, so much the worse for England. 

It was an Englishman, Thomas Paine, who fanned the fire intounquenchable flames. He had recently been dismissed from a post inthe excise in England and was at this time earning in Philadelphia aprecarious living by his pen. Paine said it was the interest of Americato break the tie with Europe. Was a whole continent in America to begoverned by an island a thousand leagues away? Of what advantage wasit to remain connected with Great Britain? It was said that a unitedBritish Empire could defy the world, but why should America defy theworld? "Everything that is right or natural pleads for separation. "Interested men, weak men, prejudiced men, moderate men who do not reallyknow Europe, may urge reconciliation, but nature is against it. Painebroke loose in that denunciation of kings with which ever since theworld has been familiar. The wretched Briton, said Paine, is under aking and where there was a king there was no security for liberty. Kings were crowned ruffians and George III in particular was a scepteredsavage, a royal brute, and other evil things. He had inflicted onAmerica injuries not to be forgiven. The blood of the slain, not lessthan the true interests of posterity, demanded separation. Paine calledhis pamphlet "Common Sense". It was published on January 9, 1776. Morethan a hundred thousand copies were quickly sold and it brought decisionto many wavering minds. 

In the first days of 1776 independence had become a burning question. New England had made up its mind. Virginia was keen for separation, keener even than New England. New York and Pennsylvania long hesitatedand Maryland and North Carolina were very lukewarm. Early in 1776Washington was advocating independence and Greene and other army leaderswere of the same mind. Conservative forces delayed the settlement, andat last Virginia, in this as in so many other things taking thelead, instructed its delegates to urge a declaration by Congress ofindependence. Richard Henry Lee, a member of that honored family whichlater produced the ablest soldier of the Civil War, moved in Congress onJune 7, 1776, that "these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, Free and Independent States. " The preparation of a formal declarationwas referred to a committee of which John Adams and Thomas Jeffersonwere members. It is interesting to note that each of them becamePresident of the United States and that both died on July 4, 1826, thefiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Adams relatedlong after that he and Jefferson formed the sub-committee to draft theDeclaration and that he urged Jefferson to undertake the task since "youcan write ten times better than I can. " Jefferson accordingly wrotethe paper. Adams was delighted "with its high tone and the flights ofOratory" but he did not approve of the flaming attack on the King, asa tyrant. "I never believed, " he said, "George to be a tyrant indisposition and in nature. " There was, he thought, too much passion fora grave and solemn document. He was, however, the principal speaker inits support. 

There is passion in the Declaration from beginning to end, and not therestrained and chastened passion which we find in the great utterancesof an American statesman of a later day, Abraham Lincoln. Compared withLincoln, Jefferson is indeed a mere amateur in the use of words. Lincolnwould not have scattered in his utterances overwrought phrases about"death, desolation and tyranny" or talked about pledging "our lives, ourfortunes and our sacred honour. " He indulged in no "Flights of Oratory. "The passion in the Declaration is concentrated against the King. We donot know what were the emotions of George when he read it. We know thatmany Englishmen thought that it spoke truth. Exaggerations there arewhich make the Declaration less than a completely candid document. TheKing is accused of abolishing English laws in Canada with the intentionof "introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies. " What hadbeen done in Canada was to let the conquered French retain their ownlaws--which was not tyranny but magnanimity. Another clause of theDeclaration, as Jefferson first wrote it, made George responsible forthe slave trade in America with all its horrors and crimes. We may doubtwhether that not too enlightened monarch had even more than vaguelyheard of the slave trade. This phase of the attack upon him was too muchfor the slave owners of the South and the slave traders of New England, and the clause was struck out. 

Nearly fourscore and ten years later, Abraham Lincoln, at a supremecrisis in the nation's life, told in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, what the Declaration of Independence meant to him. "I have never, "he said, "had a feeling politically which did not spring from thesentiments in the Declaration of Independence"; and then he spoke ofthe sacrifices which the founders of the Republic had made for theseprinciples. He asked, too, what was the idea which had held together thenation thus founded. It was not the breaking away from Great Britain. Itwas the assertion of human right. We should speak in terms of reverenceof a document which became a classic utterance of political right andwhich inspired Lincoln in his fight to end slavery and to make "Libertyand the pursuit of Happiness" realities for all men. In England thecolonists were often taunted with being "rebels. " The answer was notwanting that ancestors of those who now cried "rebel" had themselvesbeen rebels a hundred years earlier when their own liberty was at stake. 

There were in Congress men who ventured to say that the Declarationwas a libel on the government of England; men like John Dickinson ofPennsylvania and John Jay of New York, who feared that the radicalelements were moving too fast. Radicalism, however, was in the saddle, and on the 2d of July the "resolution respecting independency" wasadopted. On July 4, 1776, Congress debated and finally adoptedthe formal Declaration of Independence. The members did not voteindividually. The delegates from each colony cast the vote of thecolony. Twelve colonies voted for the Declaration. New York alone wassilent because its delegates had not been instructed as to their vote, but New York, too, soon fell into line. It was a momentous occasion andwas understood to be such. The vote seems to have been reached in thelate afternoon. Anxious citizens were waiting in the streets. Therewas a bell in the State House, and an old ringer waited there for thesignal. When there was long delay he is said to have muttered: "Theywill never do it! they will never do it!" Then came the word, "Ring!Ring!" It is an odd fact that the inscription on the bell, placed therelong before the days of the trouble, was from Leviticus: "Proclaimliberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof. " Thebells of Philadelphia rang and cannon boomed. As the news spread therewere bonfires and illuminations in all the colonies. On the day afterthe Declaration the Virginia Convention struck out "O Lord, save theKing" from the church service. On the 10th of July Washington, whoby this time had moved to New York, paraded the army and had theDeclaration read at the head of each brigade. That evening the statueof King George in New York was laid in the dust. It is a comment on thechanges in human fortune that within little more than a year the Britishhad taken Philadelphia, that the clamorous bell had been hid away forsafety, and that colonial wiseacres were urging the rescinding of theill-timed Declaration and the reunion of the British Empire. 

CHAPTER IV. THE LOSS OF NEW YORK

Washington's success at Boston had one good effect. It destroyed Toryinfluence in that Puritan stronghold. New England was henceforth of atemper wholly revolutionary; and New England tradition holds that whatits people think today other Americans think tomorrow. But, in thesummer of this year 1776, though no serious foe was visible at anypoint in the revolted colonies, a menace haunted every one of them. TheBritish had gone away by sea; by sea they would return. On land armiesmove slowly and visibly; but on the sea a great force may pass out ofsight and then suddenly reappear at an unexpected point. This isthe haunting terror of sea power. Already the British had destroyedFalmouth, now Portland, Maine, and Norfolk, the principal town inVirginia. Washington had no illusions of security. He was anxious aboveall for the safety of New York, commanding the vital artery of theHudson, which must at all costs be defended. Accordingly, in April, hetook his army to New York and established there his own headquarters. 

Even before Washington moved to New York, three great Britishexpeditions were nearing America. One of these we have already seen atQuebec. Another was bound for Charleston, to land there an army and tomake the place a rallying center for the numerous but harassed Loyalistsof the South. The third and largest of these expeditions was to strikeat New York and, by a show of strength, bring the colonists to reasonand reconciliation. If mildness failed the British intended to captureNew York, sail up the Hudson and cut off New England from the othercolonies. 

The squadron destined for Charleston carried an army in command of afine soldier, Lord Cornwallis, destined later to be the defeatedleader in the last dramatic scene of the war. In May this fleet reachedWilmington, North Carolina, and took on board two thousand men underGeneral Sir Henry Clinton, who had been sent by Howe from Boston invain to win the Carolinas and who now assumed military command of thecombined forces. Admiral Sir Peter Parker commanded the fleet, and onthe 4th of June he was off Charleston Harbor. Parker found that in orderto cross the bar he would have to lighten his larger ships. This wasdone by the laborious process of removing the guns, which, of course, he had to replace when the bar was crossed. On the 28th of June, Parkerdrew up his ships before Fort Moultrie in the harbor. He had expectedsimultaneous aid by land from three thousand soldiers put ashore fromthe fleet on a sandbar, but these troops could give him no help againstthe fort from which they were cut off by a channel of deep water. Abattle soon proved the British ships unable to withstand the Americanfire from Fort Moultrie. Late in the evening Parker drew off, withtwo hundred and twenty-five casualties against an American loss ofthirty-seven. The check was greater than that of Bunker Hill, for therethe British took the ground which they attacked. The British sailorsbore witness to the gallantry of the defense: "We never had such adrubbing in our lives, " one of them testified. Only one of Parker's tenships was seaworthy after the fight. It took him three weeks to refit, and not until the 4th of August did his defeated ships reach New York. 

A mighty armada of seven hundred ships had meanwhile sailed into theBay of New York. This fleet was commanded by Admiral Lord Howe and itcarried an army of thirty thousand men led by his younger brother, SirWilliam Howe, who had commanded at Bunker Hill. The General was an ableand well-informed soldier. He had a brilliant record of service in theSeven Years' War, with Wolfe in Canada, then in France itself, and inthe West Indies. In appearance he was tall, dark, and coarse. His faceshowed him to be a free user of wine. This may explain some of hisfaults as a general. He trusted too much to subordinates; he wasleisurely and rather indolent, yet capable of brilliant and rapidaction. In America his heart was never in his task. He was member ofParliament for Nottingham and had publicly condemned the quarrel withAmerica and told his electors that in it he would take no command. Hehad not kept his word, but his convictions remained. It would be toaccuse Howe of treason to say that he did not do his best in America. Lack of conviction, however, affects action. Howe had no belief that hiscountry was in the right in the war and this handicapped him as againstthe passionate conviction of Washington that all was at stake which madelife worth living. 

The General's elder brother, Lord Howe, was another Whig who had nobelief that the war was just. He sat in the House of Lords while hisbrother sat in the House of Commons. We rather wonder that the Kingshould have been content to leave in Whig hands his fortunes in Americaboth by land and sea. At any rate, here were the Howes more eagerto make peace than to make war and commanded to offer terms ofreconciliation. Lord Howe had an unpleasant face, so dark that he wascalled "Black Dick"; he was a silent, awkward man, shy and harsh inmanner. In reality, however, he was kind, liberal in opinion, sober, andbeloved by those who knew him best. His pacific temper towards Americawas not due to a dislike of war. He was a fighting sailor. Nearly twentyyears later, on June 1, 1794, when he was in command of a fleet in touchwith the French enemy, the sailors watched him to find any indicationthat the expected action would take place. Then the word went round: "Weshall have the fight today; Black Dick has been smiling. " They had it, and Howe won a victory which makes his name famous in the annals of thesea. 

By the middle of July the two brothers were at New York. The soldier, having waited at Halifax since the evacuation of Boston, had arrived, and landed his army on Staten Island, on the day before Congress madethe Declaration of Independence, which, as now we can see, ended finallyany chance of reconciliation. The sailor arrived nine days later. LordHowe was wont to regret that he had not arrived a little earlier, sincethe concessions which he had to offer might have averted the Declarationof Independence. In truth, however, he had little to offer. Humor andimagination are useful gifts in carrying on human affairs, but GeorgeIII had neither. He saw no lack of humor in now once more offering fulland free pardon to a repentant Washington and his comrades, though JohnAdams was excepted by name * in repudiating the right to exist of theCongress at Philadelphia, and in refusing to recognize the militaryrank of the rebel general whom it had named: he was to be addressed incivilian style as "George Washington Esq. " The King and his ministershad no imagination to call up the picture of high-hearted men fightingfor rights which they held dear. 

 * Trevelyan, "American Revolution", Part II, vol. I (New Ed. , vol. II), 261. 

Lord Howe went so far as to address a letter to "George Washington Esq. &c. &c. , " and Washington agreed to an interview with the officer whobore it. In imposing uniform and with the stateliest manner, Washington, who had an instinct for effect, received the envoy. The awed messengerexplained that the symbols " &c. &c. " meant everything, including, ofcourse, military titles; but Washington only said smilingly that theymight mean anything, including, of course, an insult, and refused totake the letter. He referred to Congress, a body which Howe could notrecognize, the grave question of the address on an envelope and Congressagreed that the recognition of his rank was necessary. There was nothingto do but to go on with the fight. 

Washington's army held the city of New York, at the southerly pointof Manhattan Island. The Hudson River, separating the island from themainland of New Jersey on the west, is at its mouth two miles wide. Thenorthern and eastern sides of the island are washed by the Harlem River, flowing out of the Hudson about a dozen miles north of the city, andbroadening into the East River, about a mile wide where it separates NewYork from Brooklyn Heights, on Long Island. Encamped on Staten Island, on the south, General Howe could, with the aid of the fleet, land at anyof half a dozen vulnerable points. Howe had the further advantage ofa much larger force. Washington had in all some twenty thousand men, numbers of them serving for short terms and therefore for the most partbadly drilled. Howe had twenty-five thousand well-trained soldiers, andhe could, in addition, draw men from the fleet, which would give him inall double the force of Washington. 

In such a situation even the best skill of Washington was likely onlyto qualify defeat. He was advised to destroy New York and retire topositions more tenable. But even if he had so desired, Congress, hismaster, would not permit him to burn the city, and he had to make plansto defend it. Brooklyn Heights so commanded New York that enemy cannonplanted there would make the city untenable. Accordingly Washingtonplaced half his force on Long Island to defend Brooklyn Heights andin doing so made the fundamental error of cutting his army in two anddividing it by an arm of the sea in presence of overwhelming hostilenaval power. 

On the 22d of August Howe ferried fifteen thousand men across theNarrows to Long Island, in order to attack the position on BrooklynHeights from the rear. Before him lay wooded hills across which ledthree roads converging at Brooklyn Heights beyond the hills. On the easta fourth road led round the hills. In the dark of the night of the 26thof August Howe set his army in motion on all these roads, in order bydaybreak to come to close quarters with the Americans and drive themback to the Heights. The movement succeeded perfectly. The British madeterrible use of the bayonet. By the evening of the twenty-seventh theAmericans, who fought well against overwhelming odds, had lost nearlytwo thousand men in casualties and prisoners, six field pieces, andtwenty-six heavy guns. The two chief commanders, Sullivan and Stirling, were among the prisoners, and what was left of the army had been drivenback to Brooklyn Heights. Howe's critics said that had he pressed theattack further he could have made certain the capture of the wholeAmerican force on Long Island. 

Criticism of what might have been is easy and usually futile. It mightbe said of Washington, too, that he should not have kept an army so farin front of his lines behind Brooklyn Heights facing a superior enemy, and with, for a part of it, retreat possible only by a single causewayacross a marsh three miles long. When he realized, on the 28th ofAugust, what Howe had achieved, he increased the defenders of BrooklynHeights to ten thousand men, more than half his army. This was anothercardinal error. British ships were near and but for unfavorable windsmight have sailed up to Brooklyn. Washington hoped and prayed that Howewould try to carry Brooklyn Heights by assault. Then there would havebeen at least slaughter on the scale of Bunker Hill. But Howe hadlearned caution. He made no reckless attack, and soon Washington foundthat he must move away or face the danger of losing every man on LongIsland. 

On the night of the 29th of August there was clear moonlight, with fogtowards daybreak. A British army of twenty-five thousand men was onlysome six hundred yards from the American lines. A few miles from theshore lay at anchor a great British fleet with, it is to be presumed, its patrols on the alert. Yet, during that night, ten thousand Americantroops were marched down to boats on the strand at Brooklyn and, withall their stores, were carried across a mile of water to New York. Theremust have been the splash of oars and the grating of keels, orders givenin tones above a whisper, the complex sounds of moving bodies of men. It was all done under the eye of Washington. We can picture that tallfigure moving about on the strand at Brooklyn, which he was the lastto leave. Not a sound disturbed the slumbers of the British. An armyin retreat does not easily defend itself. Boats from the British fleetmight have brought panic to the Americans in the darkness and theBritish army should at least have known that they were gone. By seven inthe morning the ten thousand American soldiers were for the time safein New York, and we may suppose that the two Howes were asking eagerquestions and wondering how it had all happened. 

Washington had shown that he knew when and how to retire. Long Islandwas his first battle and he had lost. Now retreat was his first greattactical achievement. He could not stay in New York and so sent at oncethe chief part of the army, withdrawn from Brooklyn, to the line of theHarlem River at the north end of the island. He realized that his shorebatteries could not keep the British fleet from sailing up both theEast and the Hudson Rivers and from landing a force on Manhattan Islandalmost where it liked. Then the city of New York would be surrounded bya hostile fleet and a hostile army. The Howes could have performed thismaneuver as soon as they had a favorable wind. There was, we know, greatconfusion in New York, and Washington tells us how his heart was torn bythe distress of the inhabitants. The British gave him plenty of time tomake plans, and for a reason. We have seen that Lord Howe was not onlyan admiral to make war but also an envoy to make peace. The Britishvictory on Long Island might, he thought, make Congress more willing tonegotiate. So now he sent to Philadelphia the captured American GeneralSullivan, with the request that some members of Congress might conferprivately on the prospects for peace. 

Howe probably did not realize that the Americans had the British qualityof becoming more resolute by temporary reverses. By this time, too, suspicion of every movement on the part of Great Britain had becomea mania. Every one in Congress seems to have thought that Howe wasplanning treachery. John Adams, excepted by name from British offers ofpardon, called Sullivan a "decoy duck" and, as he confessed, laughed, scolded, and grieved at any negotiation. The wish to talk privately withmembers of Congress was called an insulting way of avoiding recognitionof that body. In spite of this, even the stalwart Adams and the suaveFranklin were willing to be members of a committee which went to meetLord Howe. With great sorrow Howe now realized that he had no power togrant what Congress insisted upon, the recognition of independence, as apreliminary to negotiation. There was nothing for it but war. 

On the 15th of September the British struck the blow too long delayedhad war been their only interest. New York had to sit nearly helplesswhile great men-of-war passed up both the Hudson and the East River withguns sweeping the shores of Manhattan Island. At the same time GeneralHowe sent over in boats from Long Island to the landing at Kip's Bay, near the line of the present Thirty-fourth Street, an army to cut offthe city from the northern part of the island. Washington marched inperson with two New England regiments to dispute the landing and givehim time for evacuation. To his rage panic seized his men and theyturned and fled, leaving him almost alone not a hundred yards from theenemy. A stray shot at that moment might have influenced greatly modernhistory, for, as events were soon to show, Washington was the mainstayof the American cause. He too had to get away and Howe's force landedeasily enough. Meanwhile, on the west shore of the island, there was ananimated scene. The roads were crowded with refugees fleeing northwardfrom New York. These civilians Howe had no reason to stop, but theremarched, too, out of New York four thousand men, under Israel Putnam, who got safely away northward. Only leisurely did Howe extend hisline across the island so as to cut off the city. The story, not moretrustworthy than many other legends of war, is that Mrs. Murray, livingin a country house near what now is Murray Hill, invited the Generalto luncheon, and that to enjoy this pleasure he ordered a halt for hiswhole force. Generals sometimes do foolish things but it is not easy tocall up a picture of Howe, in the midst of a busy movement of troops, receiving the lady's invitation, accepting it, and ordering the wholearmy to halt while he lingered over the luncheon table. There is nodoubt that his mind was still divided between making war and makingpeace. Probably Putnam had already got away his men, and there was nopurpose in stopping the refugees in that flight from New York which soaroused the pity of Washington. As it was Howe took sixty-seven guns. By accident, or, it is said, by design of the Americans themselves, NewYork soon took fire and one-third of the little city was burned. 

After the fall of New York there followed a complex campaign. Theresourceful Washington was now, during his first days of active warfare, pitting himself against one of the most experienced of British generals. Fleet and army were acting together. The aim of Howe was to get controlof the Hudson and to meet half way the advance from Canada by way ofLake Champlain which Carleton was leading. On the 12th of October, whenautumn winds were already making the nights cold, Howe moved. He didnot attack Washington who lay in strength at the Harlem. That wouldhave been to play Washington's game. Instead he put the part of his armystill on Long Island in ships which then sailed through the dangerouscurrents of Hell Gate and landed at Throg's Neck, a peninsula on thesound across from Long Island. Washington parried this movement by soguarding the narrow neck of the peninsula leading to the mainland thatthe cautious Howe shrank from a frontal attack across a marsh. After adelay of six days, he again embarked his army, landed a few milesabove Throg's Neck in the hope of cutting off Washington from retreatnorthward, only to find Washington still north of him at White Plains. A sharp skirmish followed in which Howe lost over two hundred men andWashington only one hundred and forty. Washington, masterly in retreat, then withdrew still farther north among hills difficult of attack. 

Howe had a plan which made a direct attack on Washington unnecessary. Heturned southward and occupied the east shore of the Hudson River. On the16th of November took place the worst disaster which had yet befallenAmerican arms. Fort Washington, lying just south of the Harlem, was theonly point still held on Manhattan Island by the Americans. In modernwar it has become clear that fortresses supposedly strong may be onlytraps for their defenders. Fort Washington stood on the east bank of theHudson opposite Fort Lee, on the west bank. These forts could not fulfilthe purpose for which they were intended, of stopping British ships. Washington saw that the two forts should be abandoned. But the civiliansin Congress, who, it must be remembered, named the generals and hadfinal authority in directing the war, were reluctant to accept theloss involved in abandoning the forts and gave orders that every effortshould be made to hold them. Greene, on the whole Washington's bestgeneral, was in command of the two positions and was left to use his ownjudgment. On the 15th of November, by a sudden and rapid march acrossthe island, Howe appeared before Fort Washington and summoned it tosurrender on pain of the rigors of war, which meant putting the garrisonto the sword should he have to take the place by storm. The answer was adefiance; and on the next day Howe attacked in overwhelming force. Therewas severe fighting. The casualties of the British were nearly fivehundred, but they took the huge fort with its three thousand defendersand a great quantity of munitions of war. Howe's threat was not carriedout. There was no massacre. 

Across the river at Fort Lee the helpless Washington watched this greatdisaster. He had need still to look out, for Fort Lee was itself doomed. On the nineteenth Lord Cornwallis with five thousand men crossed theriver five miles above Fort Lee. General Greene barely escaped withthe two thousand men in the fort, leaving behind one hundred and fortycannon, stores, tools, and even the men's blankets. On the twentieth theBritish flag was floating over Fort Lee and Washington's whole forcewas in rapid flight across New Jersey, hardly pausing until it had beenferried over the Delaware River into Pennsylvania. 

Treachery, now linked to military disaster, made Washington's positionterrible. Charles Lee, Horatio Gates, and Richard Montgomery werethree important officers of the regular British army who fought on theAmerican side. Montgomery had been killed at Quebec; the defects ofGates were not yet conspicuous; and Lee was next to Washington the mosttrusted American general. The names Washington and Lee of the twin fortson opposite sides of the Hudson show how the two generals stood in thepublic mind. While disaster was overtaking Washington, Lee had seventhousand men at North Castle on the east bank of the Hudson, a few milesabove Fort Washington, blocking Howe's advance farther up the river. Onthe day after the fall of Fort Washington, Lee received positiveorders to cross the Hudson at once. Three days later Fort Lee fell, andWashington repeated the order. Lee did not budge. He was safe wherehe was and could cross the river and get away into New Jersey when heliked. He seems deliberately to have left Washington to face completedisaster and thus prove his incompetence; then, as the undefeatedgeneral, he could take the chief command. There is no evidence that hehad intrigued with Howe, but he thought that he could be the peacemakerbetween Great Britain and America, with untold possibilities of ambitionin that role. He wrote of Washington at this time, to his friend Gates, as weak and "most damnably deficient. " Nemesis, however, overtook him. In the end he had to retreat across the Hudson to northern New Jersey. Here many of the people were Tories. Lee fell into a trap, was capturedin bed at a tavern by a hard-riding party of British cavalry, andcarried off a prisoner, obliged to bestride a horse in night gown andslippers. Not always does fate appear so just in her strokes. 

In December, though the position of Washington was very bad, all wasnot lost. The chief aim of Howe was to secure the line of the Hudson andthis he had not achieved. At Stony Point, which lies up the Hudson aboutfifty miles from New York, the river narrows and passes through what isalmost a mountain gorge, easily defended. Here Washington had erectedfortifications which made it at least difficult for a British force topass up the river. Moreover in the highlands of northern New Jersey, with headquarters at Morristown, General Sullivan, recently exchanged, and General Gates now had Lee's army and also the remnants of the forcedriven from Canada. But in retreating across New Jersey Washingtonhad been forsaken by thousands of men, beguiled in part by the Torypopulation, discouraged by defeat, and in many cases with the right togo home, since their term of service had expired. All that remainedof Washington's army after the forces of Sullivan and Gates joined himacross the Delaware in Pennsylvania, was about four thousand men. 

Howe was determined to have Philadelphia as well as New York andcould place some reliance on Tory help in Pennsylvania. He had pursuedWashington to the Delaware and would have pushed on across that riverhad not his alert foe taken care that all the boats should be on thewrong shore. As it was, Howe occupied the left bank of the Delaware withhis chief post at Trenton. If he made sure of New Jersey he could go onto Philadelphia when the river was frozen over or indeed when he liked. Even the Congress had fled to Baltimore. There were British successes inother quarters. Early in December Lord Howe took the fleet to Newport. Soon he controlled the whole of Rhode Island and checked the Americanprivateers who had made it their base. The brothers issued proclamationsoffering protection to all who should within sixty days return to theirBritish allegiance and many people of high standing in New York and NewJersey accepted the offer. Howe wrote home to England the glad news ofvictory. Philadelphia would probably fall before spring and it looked asif the war was really over. 

In this darkest hour Washington struck a blow which changed the wholesituation. We associate with him the thought of calm deliberation. Now, however, was he to show his strongest quality as a general to beaudacity. At the Battle of the Marne, in 1914, the French General Fochsent the despatch: "My center is giving way; my right is retreating; thesituation is excellent: I am attacking. " Washington's position seemedas nearly hopeless and he, too, had need of some striking action. Acampaign marked by his own blundering and by the treachery of a trustedgeneral had ended in seeming ruin. Pennsylvania at his back and NewJersey before him across the Delaware were less than half loyal to theAmerican cause and probably willing to accept peace on almost any terms. Never was a general in a position where greater risks must be taken forsalvation. As Washington pondered what was going on among the Britishacross the Delaware, a bold plan outlined itself in his mind. Howe, he knew, had gone to New York to celebrate a triumphant Christmas. Hisabsence from the front was certain to involve slackness. It was Germanswho held the line of the Delaware, some thirteen hundred of them underColonel Rahl at Trenton, two thousand under Von Donop farther down theriver at Bordentown; and with Germans perhaps more than any otherpeople Christmas is a season of elaborate festivity. On this their firstChristmas away from home many of the Germans would be likely to beoff their guard either through homesickness or dissipation. They carednothing for either side. There had been much plundering in New Jerseyand discipline was relaxed. 

Howe had been guilty of the folly of making strong the posts farthestfrom the enemy and weak those nearest to him. He had, indeed, orderedRahl to throw up redoubts for the defense of Trenton, but this, asWashington well knew, had not been done for Rahl despised his enemy andspoke of the American army as already lost. Washington's bold planwas to recross the Delaware and attack Trenton. There were to be threecrossings. One was to be against Von Donop at Bordentown below Trenton, the second at Trenton itself. These two attacks were designed to preventaid to Trenton. The third force with which Washington himself went wasto cross the river some nine miles above the town. 

Christmas Day, 1776, was dismally cold. There was a driving storm ofsleet and the broad swollen stream of the Delaware, dotted with darkmasses of floating ice, offered a chill prospect. To take an army withits guns across that threatening flood was indeed perilous. Gates andother generals declared that the scheme was too difficult to be carriedout. Only one of the three forces crossed the river. Washington, withiron will, was not to be turned from his purpose. He had skilled boatmenfrom New England. The crossing took no less than ten hours and a greatpart of it was done in wintry darkness. When the army landed on the NewJersey shore it had a march of nine miles in sleet and rain in orderto reach Trenton by daybreak. It is said that some of the men marchedbarefoot leaving tracks of blood in the snow. The arms of some were lostand those of others were wet and useless but Washington told them thatthey must depend the more on the bayonet. He attacked Trenton in broaddaylight. There was a sharp fight. Rahl, the commander, and some seventymen, were killed and a thousand men surrendered. 

Even now Washington's position was dangerous. Von Donop, with twothousand men, lay only a few miles down the river. Had he marched atonce on Trenton, as he should have done, the worn out little force ofWashington might have met with disaster. What Von Donop did when thealarm reached him was to retreat as fast as he could to Princeton, adozen miles to the rear towards New York, leaving behind his sick andall his heavy equipment. Meanwhile Washington, knowing his danger, hadturned back across the Delaware with a prisoner for every two of hismen. When, however, he saw what Von Donop had done he returned on thetwenty-ninth to Trenton, sent out scouting parties, and roused thecountry so that in every bit of forest along the road to Princeton therewere men, dead shots, to make difficult a British advance to retakeTrenton. 

The reverse had brought consternation at New York. Lord Cornwallis wasabout to embark for England, the bearer of news of overwhelming victory. Now, instead, he was sent to drive back Washington. It was no easy taskfor Cornwallis to reach Trenton, for Washington's scouting parties and aforce of six hundred men under Greene were on the road to harass him. Onthe evening of the 2d of January, however, he reoccupied Trenton. This time Washington had not recrossed the Delaware but had retreatedsouthward and was now entrenched on the southern bank of the littleriver Assanpink, which flows into the Delaware. Reinforcements werefollowing Cornwallis. That night he sharply cannonaded Washington'sposition and was as sharply answered. He intended to attack in forcein the morning. To the skill and resource of Washington he paid thecompliment of saying that at last he had run down the "Old Fox. "

Then followed a maneuver which, years after, Cornwallis, a generousfoe, told Washington was one of the most surprising and brilliant inthe history of war. There was another "old fox" in Europe, Frederick theGreat, of Prussia, who knew war if ever man knew it, and he, too, fromthis movement ranked Washington among the great generals. The maneuverwas simple enough. Instead of taking the obvious course of againretreating across the Delaware Washington decided to advance, to getin behind Cornwallis, to try to cut his communications, to threaten theBritish base of supply and then, if a superior force came up, to retreatinto the highlands of New Jersey. There he could keep an unbrokenline as far east as the Hudson, menace the British in New Jersey, andprobably force them to withdraw to the safety of New York. 

All through the night of January 2, 1777, Washington's camp fires burnedbrightly and the British outposts could hear the sound of voices and ofthe spade and pickaxe busy in throwing up entrenchments. The firesdied down towards morning and the British awoke to find the enemy campdeserted. Washington had carried his whole army by a roundabout route tothe Princeton road and now stood between Cornwallis and his base. Therewas some sharp fighting that day near Princeton. Washington had todefeat and get past the reinforcements coming to Cornwallis. He reachedPrinceton and then slipped away northward and made his headquarters atMorristown. He had achieved his purpose. The British with Washingtonentrenched on their flank were not safe in New Jersey. The only thingto do was to withdraw to New York. By his brilliant advance Washingtonrecovered the whole of New Jersey with the exception of some minorpositions near the sea. He had changed the face of the war. In Londonthere was momentary rejoicing over Howe's recent victories, but it wassoon followed by distressing news of defeat. Through all the coloniesran inspiring tidings. There had been doubts whether, after all, Washington was the heaven-sent leader. Now both America and Europelearned to recognize his skill. He had won a reputation, though not yethad he saved a cause. 

CHAPTER V. THE LOSS OF PHILADELPHIA

Though the outlook for Washington was brightened by his success in NewJersey, it was still depressing enough. The British had taken New York, they could probably take Philadelphia when they liked, and no placenear the seacoast was safe. According to the votes in Parliament, by thespring of 1777 Britain was to have an army of eighty-nine thousand men, of whom fifty-seven thousand were intended for colonial garrisons andfor the prosecution of the war in America. These numbers were in factnever reached, but the army of forty thousand in America was formidablecompared with Washington's forces. The British were not hampered by thepractice of enlisting men for only a few months, which marred so much ofWashington's effort. Above all they had money and adequate resources. In a word they had the things which Washington lacked during almost thewhole of the war. 

Washington called his success in the attack at Trenton a lucky stroke. It was luck which had far-reaching consequences. Howe had the fixed ideathat to follow the capture of New York by that of Philadelphia, the mostpopulous city in America, and the seat of Congress, would mean greatglory for himself and a crushing blow to the American cause. If to thiscould be added, as he intended, the occupation of the whole valley ofthe Hudson, the year 1777 might well see the end of the war. An acutesense of the value of time is vital in war. Promptness, the quicksurprise of the enemy, was perhaps the chief military virtue ofWashington; dilatoriness was the destructive vice of Howe. He had solittle contempt for his foe that he practised a blighting caution. OnApril 12, 1777, Washington, in view of his own depleted force, in astate of half famine, wrote: "If Howe does not take advantage of ourweak state he is very unfit for his trust. " Howe remained inactive andtime, thus despised, worked its due revenge. Later Howe did move, andwith skill, but he missed the rapid combination in action which was thefirst condition of final success. He could have captured Philadelphiain May. He took the city, but not until September, when to hold it hadbecome a liability and not an asset. To go there at all was perhapsunwise; to go in September was for him a tragic mistake. 

From New York to Philadelphia the distance by land is about a hundredmiles. The route lay across New Jersey, that "garden of America" whichEnglish travelers spoke of as resembling their own highly cultivatedland. Washington had his headquarters at Morristown, in northern NewJersey. His resources were at a low ebb. He had always the faith thata cause founded on justice could not fail; but his letters at this timeare full of depressing anxiety. Each State regarded itself as in dangerand made care of its own interests its chief concern. By this timeCongress had lost most of the able men who had given it dignity andauthority. Like Howe it had slight sense of the value of time andimagined that tomorrow was as good as today. Wellington once complainedthat, though in supreme command, he had not authority to appoint evena corporal. Washington was hampered both by Congress and by the StateGovernments in choosing leaders. He had some officers, such as Greene, Knox, and Benedict Arnold, whom he trusted. Others, like Gates andConway, were ceaseless intriguers. To General Sullivan, who fanciedhimself constantly slighted and ill-treated, Washington wrote sharply toabolish his poisonous suspicions. 

Howe had offered easy terms to those in New Jersey who should declaretheir loyalty and to meet this Washington advised the stern policy ofoutlawing every one who would not take the oath of allegiance to theUnited States. There was much fluttering of heart on the New Jerseyfarms, much anxious trimming in order, in any event, to be safe. Howe'sHessians had plundered ruthlessly causing deep resentment against theBritish. Now Washington found his own people doing the same thing. Militia officers, themselves, "generally" as he said, "of the lowestclass of the people, " not only stole but incited their men to steal. Itwas easy to plunder under the plea that the owner of the property was aTory, whether open or concealed, and Washington wrote that the wasteand theft were "beyond all conception. " There were shirkers claimingexemption from military service on the ground that they were doingnecessary service as civilians. Washington needed maps to plan hisintricate movements and could not get them. Smallpox was devastating hisarmy and causing losses heavier than those from the enemy. When pay daycame there was usually no money. It is little wonder that in this springof 1777 he feared that his army might suddenly dissolve and leave himwithout a command. In that case he would not have yielded. Rather, sostern and bitter was he against England, would he have plunged into thewestern wilderness to be lost in its vast spaces. 

Howe had his own perplexities. He knew that a great expedition underBurgoyne was to advance from Canada southward to the Hudson. Was he toremain with his whole force at New York until the time should come topush up the river to meet Burgoyne? He had a copy of the instructionsgiven in England to Burgoyne by Lord George Germain, but he was himselfwithout orders. Afterwards the reason became known. Lord George Germainhad dictated the order to cooperate with Burgoyne, but had hurried offto the country before it was ready for his signature and it had beenmislaid. Howe seemed free to make his own plans and he longed tobe master of the enemy's capital. In the end he decided to takePhiladelphia--a task easy enough, as the event proved. At Howe's elbowwas the traitorous American general, Charles Lee, whom he had recentlycaptured, and Lee, as we know, told him that Maryland and Pennsylvaniawere at heart loyal to the King and panting to be free from the tyrannyof the demagogue. Once firmly in the capital Howe believed that he wouldhave secure control of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. He couldachieve this and be back at New York in time to meet Burgoyne, perhapsat Albany. Then he would hold the colony of New York from Staten Islandto the Canadian frontier. Howe found that he could send ships up theHudson, and the American army had to stand on the banks almost helplessagainst the mobility of sea power. Washington's left wing rested onthe Hudson and he held both banks but neither at Peekskill nor, as yet, farther up at West Point, could his forts prevent the passage of ships. It was a different matter for the British to advance on land. But theships went up and down in the spring of 1777. It would be easy enough tohelp Burgoyne when the time should come. 

It was summer before Howe was ready to move, and by that time he hadreceived instructions that his first aim must be to cooperate withBurgoyne. First, however, he was resolved to have Philadelphia. Washington watched Howe in perplexity. A great fleet and a great armylay at New York. Why did they not move? Washington knew perfectly wellwhat he himself would have done in Howe's place. He would have attackedrapidly in April the weak American army and, after destroying ordispersing it, would have turned to meet Burgoyne coming southward fromCanada. Howe did send a strong force into New Jersey. But he did notknow how weak Washington really was, for that master of craft in wardisseminated with great skill false information as to his own supposedoverwhelming strength. Howe had been bitten once by advancing too farinto New Jersey and was not going to take risks. He tried to enticeWashington from the hills to attack in open country. He marched here andthere in New Jersey and kept Washington alarmed and exhausted by countermarches, and always puzzled as to what the next move should be. Howepurposely let one of his secret messengers be taken bearing a despatchsaying that the fleet was about to sail for Boston. All these thingstook time and the summer was slipping away. In the end Washingtonrealized that Howe intended to make his move not by land but by sea. Could it be possible that he was not going to make aid to Burgoyne hischief purpose? Could it be that he would attack Boston? Washingtonhoped so for he knew the reception certain at Boston. Or was his goalCharleston? On the 23d of July, when the summer was more than half gone, Washington began to see more clearly. On that day Howe had embarkedeighteen thousand men and the fleet put to sea from Staten Island. 

Howe was doing what able officers with him, such as Cornwallis, Grey, and the German Knyphausen, appear to have been unanimous in thinkinghe should not do. He was misled not only by the desire to strike atthe very center of the rebellion, but also by the assurance of thetraitorous Lee that to take Philadelphia would be the effective signalto all the American Loyalists, the overwhelming majority of the people, as was believed, that sedition had failed. A tender parent, the King, was ready to have the colonies back in their former relation and to givethem secure guarantees of future liberty. Any one who saw the fleetput out from New York Harbor must have been impressed with the might ofBritain. No less than two hundred and twenty-nine ships set their sailsand covered the sea for miles. When they had disappeared out of sightof the New Jersey shore their goal was still unknown. At sea they mightturn in any direction. Washington's uncertainty was partly relieved onthe 30th of July when the fleet appeared at the entrance of DelawareBay, with Philadelphia some hundred miles away across the bay and up theDelaware River. After hovering about the Cape for a day the fleet againput to sea, and Washington, who had marched his army so as to be nearPhiladelphia, thought the whole movement a feint and knew not where thefleet would next appear. He was preparing to march to New York to menaceGeneral Clinton, who had there seven thousand men able to help Burgoynewhen he heard good news. On the 22d of August he knew that Howehad really gone southward and was in Chesapeake Bay. Boston was nowcertainly safe. On the 25th of August, after three stormy weeks at sea, Howe arrived at Elkton, at the head of Chesapeake Bay, and there landedhis army. It was Philadelphia fifty miles away that he intended to have. Washington wrote gleefully "Now let all New England turn out and crushBurgoyne. " Before the end of September he was writing that he wascertain of complete disaster to Burgoyne. 

Howe had, in truth, made a ruinous mistake. Had the date been Mayinstead of August he might still have saved Burgoyne. But at the endof August, when the net was closing on Burgoyne, Howe was three hundredmiles away. His disregard of time and distance had been magnificent. InJuly he had sailed to the mouth of the Delaware, with Philadelphia near, but he had then sailed away again, and why? Because the passage of hisships up the river to the city was blocked by obstructions commanded bybristling forts. The naval officers said truly that the fleet could notget up the river. But Howe might have landed his army at the head ofDelaware Bay. It is a dozen miles across the narrow peninsula from thehead of Delaware Bay to that of Chesapeake Bay. Since Howe had decidedto attack from the head of Chesapeake Bay there was little to preventhim from landing his army on the Delaware side of the peninsula andmarching across it. By sea it is a voyage of three hundred miles rounda peninsula one hundred and fifty miles long to get from one of thesepoints to the other, by land only a dozen miles away. Howe made thesea voyage and spent on it three weeks when a march of a day would havesaved this time and kept his fleet three hundred miles by sea nearer toNew York and aid for Burgoyne. 

Howe's mistakes only have their place in the procession to inevitabledisaster. Once in the thick of fighting he showed himself formidable. When he had landed at Elkton he was fifty miles southwest ofPhiladelphia and between him and that place was Washington with hisarmy. Washington was determined to delay Howe in every possible way. To get to Philadelphia Howe had to cross the Brandywine River. Time wasnothing to him. He landed at Elkton on the 25th of August. Not until the10th of September was he prepared to attack Washington barring his wayat Chadd's Ford. Washington was in a strong position on a front of twomiles on the river. At his left, below Chadd's Ford, the Brandywine isa torrent flowing between high cliffs. There the British would find nopassage. On his right was a forest. Washington had chosen his positionwith his usual skill. Entrenchments protected his front and batterieswould sweep down an advancing enemy. He had probably not more thaneleven thousand men in the fight and it is doubtful whether Howe broughtup a greater number so that the armies were not unevenly matched. Atdaybreak on the eleventh the British army broke camp at the villageof Kenneth Square, four miles from Chadd's Ford, and, under GeneralKnyphausen, marched straight to make a frontal attack on Washington'sposition. 

In the battle which followed Washington was beaten by the superiortactics of his enemy. Not all of the British army was there in theattack at Chadd's Ford. A column under Cornwallis had filed off by aroad to the left and was making a long and rapid march. The plan was tocross the Brandywine some ten miles above where Washington wasposted and to attack him in the rear. By two o'clock in the afternoonCornwallis had forced the two branches of the upper Brandywine and wasmarching on Dilworth at the right rear of the American army. Only thendid Washington become aware of his danger. His first impulse was toadvance across Chadd's Ford to try to overwhelm Knyphausen and thusto get between Howe and the fleet at Elkton. This might, however, havebrought disaster and he soon decided to retire. His movement was ablycarried out. Both sides suffered in the woodland fighting but that nightthe British army encamped in Washington's position at Chadd's Ford, andHowe had fought skillfully and won an important battle. 

Washington had retired in good order and was still formidable. He nowrealized clearly enough that Philadelphia would fall. Delay, however, would be nearly as good as victory. He saw what Howe could not see, thatmenacing cloud in the north, much bigger than a man's hand, which, withHowe far away, should break in a final storm terrible for the Britishcause. Meanwhile Washington meant to keep Howe occupied. Rain aloneprevented another battle before the British reached the SchuylkillRiver. On that river Washington guarded every ford. But, in the end, by skillful maneuvering, Howe was able to cross and on the 26th ofSeptember he occupied Philadelphia without resistance. The people wereordered to remain quietly in their houses. Officers were billeted on thewealthier inhabitants. The fall resounded far of what Lord Adam Gordoncalled a "great and noble city, " "the first Town in America, " "one ofthe Wonders of the World. " Its luxury had been so conspicuous that theaustere John Adams condemned the "sinful feasts" in which he shared. About it were fine country seats surrounded by parklike grounds, withnoble trees, clipped hedges, and beautiful gardens. The British believedthat Pennsylvania was really on their side. Many of the people werefriendly and hundreds now renewed their oath of allegiance to the King. Washington complained that the people gave Howe information denied tohim. They certainly fed Howe's army willingly and received good Britishgold while Washington had only paper money with which to pay. Over theproud capital floated once more the British flag and people who did notsee very far said that, with both New York and Philadelphia taken, therebellion had at last collapsed. 

Once in possession of Philadelphia Howe made his camp at Germantown, astraggling suburban village, about seven miles northwest of the city. Washington's army lay at the foot of some hills a dozen miles fartheraway. Howe had need to be wary, for Washington was the same "old fox"who had played so cunning a game at Trenton. The efforts of the Britisharmy were now centered on clearing the river Delaware so that suppliesmight be brought up rapidly by water instead of being carried fiftymiles overland from Chesapeake Bay. Howe detached some thousands of menfor this work and there was sharp fighting before the troops and thefleet combined had cleared the river. At Germantown Howe kept about ninethousand men. Though he knew that Washington was likely to attack him hedid not entrench his army as he desired the attack to be made. It mightwell have succeeded. Washington with eleven thousand men aimed at asurprise. On the evening of the 3d of October he set out from his camp. Four roads led into Germantown and all these the Americans used. At sunrise on the fourth, just as the attack began, a fog arose toembarrass both sides. Lying a little north of the village was the solidstone house of Chief Justice Chew, and it remains famous as the centralpoint in the bitter fight of that day. What brought final failure to theAmerican attack was an accident of maneuvering. Sullivan's brigadewas in front attacking the British when Greene's came up for the samepurpose. His line overlapped Sullivan's and he mistook in the fogSullivan's men for the enemy and fired on them from the rear. A panicnaturally resulted among the men who were attacked also at the sametime by the British on their front. The disorder spread. Britishreinforcements arrived, and Washington drew off his army in surprisingorder considering the panic. He had six hundred and seventy-threecasualties and lost besides four hundred prisoners. The British losswas five hundred and thirty-seven casualties and fourteen prisoners. The attack had failed, but news soon came which made the reverseunimportant. Burgoyne and his whole army had surrendered at Saratoga. 

CHAPTER VI. THE FIRST GREAT BRITISH DISASTER

John Burgoyne, in a measure a soldier of fortune, was the younger son ofan impoverished baronet, but he had married the daughter of the powerfulEarl of Derby and was well known in London society as a man of fashionand also as a man of letters, whose plays had a certain vogue. His will, in which he describes himself as a humble Christian, who, in spite ofmany faults, had never forgotten God, shows that he was serious minded. He sat in the House of Commons for Preston and, though he used thelanguage of a courtier and spoke of himself as lying at the King's feetto await his commands, he was a Whig, the friend of Fox and otherswhom the King regarded as his enemies. One of his plays describes thedifficulties of getting the English to join the army of George III. Wehave the smartly dressed recruit as a decoy to suggest an easy life inthe army. Victory and glory are so certain that a tailor stands with hisfeet on the neck of the King of France. The decks of captured ships swimwith punch and are clotted with gold dust, and happy soldiers playwith diamonds as if they were marbles. The senators of England, saysBurgoyne, care chiefly to make sure of good game laws for their ownpleasure. The worthless son of one of them, who sets out on the longdrive to his father's seat in the country, spends an hour in "yawning, picking his teeth and damning his journey" and when once on the waydrives with such fury that the route is marked by "yelping dogs, broken-backed pigs and dismembered geese. "

It was under this playwright and satirist, who had some skill as asoldier, that the British cause now received a blow from which it neverrecovered. Burgoyne had taken part in driving the Americans fromCanada in 1776 and had spent the following winter in England using hisinfluence to secure an independent command. To his later undoing hesucceeded. It was he, and not, as had been expected, General Carleton, who was appointed to lead the expedition of 1777 from Canada to theHudson. Burgoyne was given instructions so rigid as to be an insult tohis intelligence. He was to do one thing and only one thing, to pressforward to the Hudson and meet Howe. At the same time Lord GeorgeGermain, the minister responsible, failed to instruct Howe to advance upthe Hudson to meet Burgoyne. Burgoyne had a genuine belief in thewisdom of this strategy but he had no power to vary it, to meet changingcircumstances, and this was one chief factor in his failure. 

Behold Burgoyne then, on the 17th of June, embarking on Lake Champlainthe army which, ever since his arrival in Canada on the 6th of May, he had been preparing for this advance. He had rather more than seventhousand men, of whom nearly one-half were Germans under the competentGeneral Riedesel. In the force of Burgoyne we find the ominous presenceof some hundreds of Indian allies. They had been attached to one side orthe other in every war fought in those regions during the previous onehundred and fifty years. In the war which ended in 1763 Montcalm hadused them and so had his opponent Amherst. The regiments from the NewEngland and other colonies had fought in alliance with the paintedand befeathered savages and had made no protest. Now either times hadchanged, or there was something in a civil war which made the use ofsavages seem hideous. One thing is certain. Amherst had held his savagesin stern restraint and could say proudly that they had not committed asingle outrage. Burgoyne was not so happy. 

In nearly every war the professional soldier shows distrust, if notcontempt, for civilian levies. Burgoyne had been in America before theday of Bunker Hill and knew a great deal about the country. He thoughtthe "insurgents" good enough fighters when protected by trees and stonesand swampy ground. But he thought, too, that they had no real knowledgeof the science of war and could not fight a pitched battle. He himselfhad not shown the prevision required by sound military knowledge. If theBritish were going to abandon the advantage of sea power and fight wherethey could not fall back on their fleet, they needed to pay specialattention to land transport. This Burgoyne had not done. It was only alittle more than a week before he reached Lake Champlain that he askedCarleton to provide the four hundred horses and five hundred carts whichhe still needed and which were not easily secured in a sparsely settledcountry. Burgoyne lingered for three days at Crown Point, half way downthe lake. Then, on the 2d of July, he laid siege to Fort Ticonderoga. Once past this fort, guarding the route to Lake George, he could easilyreach the Hudson. 

In command at Fort Ticonderoga was General St. Clair, with aboutthirty-five hundred men. He had long notice of the siege, for theexpedition of Burgoyne had been the open talk of Montreal and thesurrounding country during many months. He had built Fort Independence, on the east shore of Lake Champlain, and with a great expenditure oflabor had sunk twenty-two piers across the lake and stretched in frontof them a boom to protect the two forts. But he had neglected to defendSugar Hill in front of Fort Ticonderoga, and commanding the Americanworks. It took only three or four days for the British to drag cannon tothe top, erect a battery and prepare to open fire. On the 5th of July, St. Clair had to face a bitter necessity. He abandoned the untenableforts and retired southward to Fort Edward by way of the difficult GreenMountains. The British took one hundred and twenty-eight guns. 

These successes led the British to think that within a few days theywould be in Albany. We have an amusing picture of the effect on GeorgeIII of the fall of Fort Ticonderoga. The place had been much discussed. It had been the first British fort to fall to the Americans when theRevolution began, and Carleton's failure to take it in the autumn of1776 had been the cause of acute heartburning in London. Now, when thenews of its fall reached England, George III burst into the Queen'sroom with the glad cry, "I have beat them, I have beat the Americans. "Washington's depression was not as great as the King's elation; he hada better sense of values; but he had intended that the fort should holdBurgoyne, and its fall was a disastrous blow. The Americans showed skilland good soldierly quality in the retreat from Ticonderoga, and Burgoynein following and harassing them was led into hard fighting in the woods. The easier route by way of Lake George was open but Burgoyne hoped todestroy his enemy by direct pursuit through the forest. It took himtwenty days to hew his way twenty miles, to the upper waters ofthe Hudson near Fort Edward. When there on the 30th of July he hadcommunications open from the Hudson to the St. Lawrence. 

Fortune seemed to smile on Burgoyne. He had taken many guns and he hadproved the fighting quality of his men. But his cheerful elation had, intruth, no sound basis. Never during the two and a half months of bitterstruggle which followed was he able to advance more than twenty-fivemiles from Fort Edward. The moment he needed transport by land hefound himself almost helpless. Sometimes his men were without food andequipment because he had not the horses and carts to bring supplies fromthe head of water at Fort Anne or Fort George, a score of milesaway. Sometimes he had no food to transport. He was dependent on hiscommunications for every form of supplies. Even hay had to be broughtfrom Canada, since, in the forest country, there was little food for hishorses. The perennial problem for the British in all operations was thisone of food. The inland regions were too sparsely populated to make itpossible for more than a few soldiers to live on local supplies. Thewheat for the bread of the British soldier, his beef and his pork, eventhe oats for his horse, came, for the most part, from England, at vastexpense for transport, which made fortunes for contractors. It is saidthat the cost of a pound of salted meat delivered to Burgoyne on theHudson was thirty shillings. Burgoyne had been told that the inhabitantsneeded only protection to make them openly loyal and had counted on themfor supplies. He found instead the great mass of the people hostile andhe doubted the sincerity even of those who professed their loyalty. 

After Burgoyne had been a month at Fort Edward he was face to face withstarvation. If he advanced he lengthened his line to flank attack. Asit was he had difficulty in holding it against New Englanders, the mostresolute of all his foes, eager to assert by hard fighting, if need be, their right to hold the invaded territory which was claimed also by NewYork. Burgoyne's instructions forbade him to turn aside and strike thema heavy blow. He must go on to meet Howe who was not there to be met. A being who could see the movements of men as we watch a game of chess, might think that madness had seized the British leaders; Burgoyne onthe upper Hudson plunging forward resolutely to meet Howe; Howe at seasailing away, as it might well seem, to get as far from Burgoyne as hecould; Clinton in command at New York without instructions, puzzled whatto do and not hearing from his leader, Howe, for six weeks at a time;and across the sea a complacent minister, Germain, who believed that heknew what to do in a scene three thousand miles away, and had drawn upexact instructions as to the way of doing it, and who was now eagerlyawaiting news of the final triumph. 

Burgoyne did his best. Early in August he had to make a venturesomestroke to get sorely needed food. Some twenty-five miles east of theHudson at Bennington, in difficult country, New England militia hadgathered food and munitions, and horses for transport. The pressure ofneed clouded Burgoyne's judgment. To make a dash for Bennington meant along and dangerous march. He was assured, however, that a surprisewas possible and that in any case the country was full of friends onlyawaiting a little encouragement to come out openly on his side. Theywere Germans who lay on Burgoyne's left and Burgoyne sent Colonel Baum, an efficient officer, with five or six hundred men to attack the NewEnglanders and bring in the supplies. It was a stupid blunder to sendGermans among a people specially incensed against the use of thesemercenaries. There was no surprise. Many professing loyalists, seeminglyeager to take the oath of allegiance, met and delayed Baum. When nearBennington he found in front of him a force barring the way and had tomake a carefully guarded camp for the night. Then five hundred men, someof them the cheerful takers of the oath of allegiance, slipped round tohis rear and in the morning he was attacked from front and rear. 

A hot fight followed which resulted in the complete defeat of theBritish. Baum was mortally wounded. Some of his men escaped into thewoods; the rest were killed or captured. Nor was this all. Burgoyne, scenting danger, had ordered five hundred more Germans to reinforceBaum. They, too, were attacked and overwhelmed. In all Burgoyne lostsome eight hundred men and four guns. The American loss was seventy. It shows the spirit of the time that, for the sport of the soldiers, British prisoners were tied together in pairs and driven by negroesat the tail of horses. An American soldier described long after, withregret for his own cruelty, how he had taken a British prisoner who hadhad his left eye shot out and mounted him on a horse also withoutthe left eye, in derision at the captive's misfortune. The Britishcomplained that quarter was refused in the fight. For days tiredstragglers, after long wandering in the woods, drifted into Burgoyne'scamp. This was now near Saratoga, a name destined to be ominous in thehistory of the British army. 

Further misfortune now crowded upon Burgoyne. The general of that dayhad two favorite forms of attack. One was to hold the enemy's front andthrow out a column to march round the flank and attack his rear, themethod of Howe at the Brandywine; the other method was to advance on theenemy by lines converging at a common center. This form of attack hadproved most successful eighteen years earlier when the British hadfinally secured Canada by bringing together, at Montreal, three armies, one from the east, one from the west, and one from the south. Now therewas a similar plan of bringing together three British forces at or nearAlbany, on the Hudson. Of Clinton, at New York, and Burgoyne we know. The third force was under General St. Leger. With some seventeen hundredmen, fully half of whom were Indians, he had gone up the St. Lawrencefrom Montreal and was advancing from Oswego on Lake Ontario to attackFort Stanwix at the end of the road from the Great Lakes to the MohawkRiver. After taking that stronghold he intended to go down the rivervalley to meet Burgoyne near Albany. 

On the 3d of August St. Leger was before Fort Stanwix garrisoned by someseven hundred Americans. With him were two men deemed potent in thatscene. One of these was Sir John Johnson who had recently inheritedthe vast estate in the neighborhood of his father, the great IndianSuperintendent, Sir William Johnson, and was now in command of aregiment recruited from Loyalists, many of them fierce and embitteredbecause of the seizure of their property. The other leader was a famouschief of the Mohawks, Thayendanegea, or, to give him his English name, Joseph Brant, half savage still, but also half civilized and halfeducated, because he had had a careful schooling and for a brief day hadbeen courted by London fashion. He exerted a formidable influence withhis own people. The Indians were not, however, all on one side. Half ofthe six tribes of the Iroquois were either neutral or in sympathy withthe Americans. Among the savages, as among the civilized, the war was afamily quarrel, in which brother fought brother. Most of the Indians onthe American side preserved, indeed, an outward neutrality. There wasno hostile population for them to plunder and the Indian usually had nostomach for any other kind of warfare. The allies of the British, on theother hand, had plenty of openings to their taste and they brought onthe British cause an enduring discredit. 

When St. Leger was before Fort Stanwix he heard that a force of eighthundred men, led by a German settler named Herkimer, was coming upagainst him. When it was at Oriskany, about six miles away, St. Legerlaid a trap. He sent Brant with some hundreds of Indians and a fewsoldiers to be concealed in a marshy ravine which Herkimer must cross. When the American force was hemmed in by trees and marsh on the narrowcauseway of logs running across the ravine the Indians attacked withwild yells and murderous fire. Then followed a bloody hand to handfight. Tradition has been busy with its horrors. Men struggled in slimeand blood and shouted curses and defiance. Improbable stories are toldof pairs of skeletons found afterwards in the bog each with a bonyhand which had driven a knife to the heart of the other. In the end theBritish, met by resolution so fierce, drew back. Meanwhile a sortiefrom the American fort on their rear had a menacing success. Sir JohnJohnson's camp was taken and sacked. The two sides were at last glad toseparate, after the most bloody struggle in the whole war. St. Leger'sIndians had had more than enough. About a hundred had been killed andthe rest were in a state of mutiny. Soon it was known that BenedictArnold, with a considerable force, was pushing up the Mohawk Valley torelieve the American fort. Arnold knew how to deal with savages. He tookcare that his friendly Indians should come into contact with those ofBrant and tell lurid tales of utter disaster to Burgoyne and of a greatavenging army on the march to attack St. Leger. The result was that St. Leger's Indians broke out in riot and maddened themselves with stolenrum. Disorder affected even the soldiers. The only thing for St. Legerto do was to get away. He abandoned his guns and stores and, harassednow by his former Indian allies, made his way to Oswego and in the endreached Montreal with a remnant of his force. 

News of these things came to Burgoyne just after the disaster atBennington. Since Fort Stanwix was in a country counted upon as Loyalistat heart it was especially discouraging again to find that in the mainthe population was against the British. During the war almost withoutexception Loyalist opinion proved weak against the fierce determinationof the American side. It was partly a matter of organization. Thevigilance committees in each State made life well-nigh intolerable tosuspected Tories. Above all, however, the British had to bear the odiumwhich attaches always to the invader. We do not know what an Americanarmy would have done if, with Iroquois savages as allies, it had madewar in an English county. We know what loathing a parallel situationaroused against the British army in America. The Indians, it should benoted, were not soldiers under British discipline but allies; the chiefsregarded themselves as equals who must be consulted and not as enlistedto take orders from a British general. 

In war, as in politics, nice balancing of merit or defect in an enemywould destroy the main purpose which is to defeat him. Each sideexaggerates any weak point in the other in order to stimulate thefighting passions. Judgment is distorted. The Baroness Riedesel, thewife of one of Burgoyne's generals, who was in Boston in 1777, says thatthe people were all dressed alike in a peasant costume with a leatherstrap round the waist, that they were of very low and insignificantstature, and that only one in ten of them could read or write. Shepictures New Englanders as tarring and feathering cultivated Englishladies. When educated people believed every evil of the enemy theignorant had no restraint to their credulity. New England had longregarded the native savages as a pest. In 1776 New Hampshire offeredseventy pounds for each scalp of a hostile male Indian and thirty-sevenpounds and ten shillings for each scalp of a woman or of a child undertwelve years of age. Now it was reported that the British were offeringbounties for American scalps. Benjamin Franklin satirized Britishignorance when he described whales leaping Niagara Falls and he did notexpect to be taken seriously when, at a later date, he pictured GeorgeIII as gloating over the scalps of his subjects in America. The SenecaIndians alone, wrote Franklin, sent to the King many bales of scalps. Some bales were captured by the Americans and they found the scalps of43 soldiers, 297 farmers, some of them burned alive, and 67 old people, 88 women, 193 boys, 211 girls, 29 infants, and others unclassified. Exact figures bring conviction. Franklin was not wanting in exactnessnor did he fail, albeit it was unwittingly, to intensify burningresentment of which we have echoes still. Burgoyne had to bear the odiumof the outrages by Indians. It is amusing to us, though it was hardly soto this kindly man, to find these words put into his mouth by a colonialpoet:

 I will let loose the dogs of Hell, Ten thousand Indians who shall yell, And foam, and tear, and grin, and roar And drench their moccasins in gore:... I swear, by St. George and St. Paul, I will exterminate you all. 

Such seed, falling on soil prepared by the hate of war, brought forthits deadly fruit. The Americans believed that there was no brutalityfrom which British officers would shrink. Burgoyne had told his Indianallies that they must not kill except in actual fighting and that theremust be no slaughter of non-combatants and no scalping of any but thedead. The warning delivered him into the hands of his enemies for itshowed that he half expected outrage. Members of the British House ofCommons were no whit behind the Americans in attacking him. Burke amusedthe House by his satire on Burgoyne's words: "My gentle lions, my humanebears, my tenderhearted hyenas, go forth! But I exhort you, as you areChristians and members of civilized society, to take care not to hurtany man, woman, or child. " Burke's great speech lasted for three anda half hours and Sir George Savile called it "the greatest triumph ofeloquence within memory. " British officers disliked their dirty, greasy, noisy allies and Burgoyne found his use of savages, with the futileorder to be merciful, a potent factor in his defeat. 

A horrifying incident had occurred while he was fighting his way tothe Hudson. As the Americans were preparing to leave Fort Edward somemarauding Indians saw a chance of plunder and outrage. They burst into ahouse and carried off two ladies, both of them British in sympathy--Mrs. McNeil, a cousin of one of Burgoyne's chief officers, General Fraser, and Miss Jeannie McCrae, whose betrothed, a Mr. Jones, and whose brotherwere serving with Burgoyne. In a short time Mrs. McNeil was handed overunhurt to Burgoyne's advancing army. Miss McCrae was never again seenalive by her friends. Her body was found and a Wyandot chief, known asthe Panther, showed her scalp as a trophy. Burgoyne would have been apoor creature had he not shown anger at such a crime, even if committedagainst the enemy. This crime, however, was committed against his ownfriends. He pressed the charge against the chief and was prepared tohang him and only relaxed when it was urged that the execution wouldcause all his Indians to leave him and to commit further outrages. Theincident was appealing in its tragedy and stirred the deep anger of thepopulation of the surrounding country among whose descendants to thisday the tradition of the abandoned brutality of the British keeps alivethe old hatred. 

At Fort Edward Burgoyne now found that he could hardly move. He wasencumbered by an enormous baggage train. His own effects filled, it issaid, thirty wagons and this we can believe when we find that champagnewas served at his table up almost to the day of final disaster. Thepopulation was thoroughly aroused against him. His own instinct wasto remain near the water route to Canada and make sure of hiscommunications. On the other hand, honor called him to go forward andnot fail Howe, supposed to be advancing to meet him. For a long time hewaited and hesitated. Meanwhile he was having increasing difficulty infeeding his army and through sickness and desertion his numbers weredeclining. By the 13th of September he had taken a decisive step. Hemade a bridge of boats and moved his whole force across the river toSaratoga, now Schuylerville. This crossing of the river would resultinevitably in cutting off his communications with Lake George andTiconderoga. After such a step he could not go back and he was movingforward into a dark unknown. The American camp was at Stillwater, twelvemiles farther down the river. Burgoyne sent messenger after messengerto get past the American lines and bring back news of Howe. Not oneof these unfortunate spies returned. Most of them were caught andignominiously hanged. One thing, however, Burgoyne could do. He couldhazard a fight and on this he decided as the autumn was closing in. 

Burgoyne had no time to lose, once his force was on the west bank of theHudson. General Lincoln cut off his communications with Canada and wassoon laying siege to Ticonderoga. The American army facing Burgoyne wasnow commanded by General Gates. This Englishman, the godson of HoraceWalpole, had gained by successful intrigue powerful support in Congress. That body was always paying too much heed to local claims and jealousiesand on the 2d of August it removed Schuyler of New York because he wasdisliked by the soldiers from New England and gave the command to Gates. Washington was far away maneuvering to meet Howe and he was never ableto watch closely the campaign in the north. Gates, indeed, considered himself independent of Washington and reported not to theCommander-in-Chief but direct to Congress. On the 19th of SeptemberBurgoyne attacked Gates in a strong entrenched position on BemisHeights, at Stillwater. There was a long and bitter fight, but byevening Burgoyne had not carried the main position and had lost morethan five hundred men whom he could ill spare from his scanty numbers. 

Burgoyne's condition was now growing desperate. American forces barredretreat to Canada. He must go back and meet both frontal and flankattacks, or go forward, or surrender. To go forward now had mostpromise, for at last Howe had instructed Clinton, left in command at NewYork, to move, and Clinton was making rapid progress up the Hudson. Onthe 7th of October Burgoyne attacked again at Stillwater. This time hewas decisively defeated, a result due to the amazing energy in attackof Benedict Arnold, who had been stripped of his command by an intrigue. Gates would not even speak to him and his lingering in the American campwas unwelcome. Yet as a volunteer Arnold charged the British line madlyand broke it. Burgoyne's best general, Fraser, was killed in the fight. Burgoyne retired to Saratoga and there at last faced the prospects ofgetting back to Fort Edward and to Canada. It may be that he could havecut his way through, but this is doubtful. Without risk of destructionhe could not move in any direction. His enemies now outnumbered himnearly four to one. His camp was swept by the American guns and hismen were under arms night and day. American sharpshooters stationedthemselves at daybreak in trees about the British camp and any onewho appeared in the open risked his life. If a cap was held up in viewinstantly two or three balls would pass through it. His horses werekilled by rifle shots. Burgoyne had little food for his men and none forhis horses. His Indians had long since gone off in dudgeon. Many ofhis Canadian French slipped off homeward and so did the Loyalists. TheGerman troops were naturally dispirited. A British officer tells of thedeadly homesickness of these poor men. They would gather in groups oftwo dozen or so and mourn that they would never again see their nativeland. They died, a score at a time, of no other disease than sicknessfor their homes. They could have no pride in trying to save a lostcause. Burgoyne was surrounded and, on the 17th of October, he wasobliged to surrender. 

Gates proposed to Burgoyne hard terms--surrender with no honors of war. The British were to lay down their arms in their encampments and tomarch out without weapons of any kind. Burgoyne declared that, ratherthan accept such terms, he would fight still and take no quarter. Ashadow was falling on the path of Gates. The term of service of some ofhis men had expired. The New Englanders were determined to stay and seethe end of Burgoyne but a good many of the New York troops went off. Sickness, too, was increasing. Above all General Clinton was advancingup the Hudson. British ships could come up freely as far as Albany andin a few days Clinton might make a formidable advance. Gates, a timidman, was in a hurry. He therefore agreed that the British should marchfrom their camp with the honors of war, that the troops should be takento New England, and from there to England. They must not serve againin North America during the war but there was nothing in the terms toprevent their serving in Europe and relieving British regiments forservice in America. Gates had the courtesy to keep his army where itcould not see the laying down of arms by Burgoyne's force. About fivethousand men, of whom sixteen hundred were Germans and only threethousand five hundred fit for duty, surrendered to sixteen thousandAmericans. Burgoyne gave offense to German officers by saying in hisreport that he might have held out longer had all his troops beenBritish. This is probably true but the British met with only a justNemesis for using soldiers who had no call of duty to serve. 

The army set out on its long march of two hundred miles to Boston. Thelate autumn weather was cold, the army was badly clothed and fed, andthe discomfort of the weary route was increased by the bitter antagonismof the inhabitants. They respected the regular British soldier but atthe Germans they shouted insults and the Loyalists they despised astraitors. The camp at the journey's end was on the ground at Cambridgewhere two years earlier Washington had trained his first army. Every dayBurgoyne expected to embark. There was delay and, at last, he knewthe reason. Congress repudiated the terms granted by Gates. A tangleddispute followed. Washington probably had no sympathy with the quibblingof Congress. But he had no desire to see this army return to Europe andrelease there an army to serve in America. Burgoyne's force was neversent to England. For nearly a year it lay at Boston. Then it was marchedto Virginia. The men suffered great hardships and the numbers fell bydesertion and escape. When peace came in 1783 there was no army to takeback to England; Burgoyne's soldiers had been merged into the Americanpeople. It may well be, indeed, that descendants of his beaten men haveplayed an important part in building up the United States. The irony ofhistory is unconquerable. 

CHAPTER VII. WASHINGTON AND HIS COMRADES AT VALLEY FORGE

Washington had met defeat in every considerable battle at which he waspersonally present. His first appearance in military history, inthe Ohio campaign against the French, twenty-two years before theRevolution, was marked by a defeat, the surrender of Fort Necessity. Again in the next year, when he fought to relieve the disaster toBraddock's army, defeat was his portion. Defeat had pursued him inthe battles of the Revolution--before New York, at the Brandywine, atGermantown. The campaign against Canada, which he himself planned, hadfailed. He had lost New York and Philadelphia. But, like William III ofEngland, who in his long struggle with France hardly won a battleand yet forced Louis XIV to accept his terms of peace, Washington, bysuddenness in reprisal, by skill in resource when his plans seemedto have been shattered, grew on the hard rock of defeat the flower ofvictory. 

There was never a time when Washington was not trusted by men of realmilitary insight or by the masses of the people. But a general who doesnot win victories in the field is open to attack. By the winter of 1777when Washington, with his army reduced and needy, was at Valley Forgekeeping watch on Howe in Philadelphia, John Adams and others weretalking of the sin of idolatry in the worship of Washington, of itsflavor of the accursed spirit of monarchy, and of the punishment which"the God of Heaven and Earth" must inflict for such perversity. Adamswas all against a Fabian policy and wanted to settle issues forever by ashort and strenuous war. The idol, it was being whispered, proved afterall to have feet of clay. One general, and only one, had to his credita really great victory--Gates, to whom Burgoyne had surrendered atSaratoga, and there was a movement to replace Washington by thislaureled victor. 

General Conway, an Irish soldier of fortune, was one of the mosttroublesome in this plot. He had served in the campaign aboutPhiladelphia but had been blocked in his extravagant demands forpromotion; so he turned for redress to Gates, the star in the north. Amalignant campaign followed in detraction of Washington. He had, it wassaid, worn out his men by useless marches; with an army three timesas numerous as that of Howe, he had gained no victory; there was highfighting quality in the American army if properly led, but Washingtondespised the militia; a Gates or a Lee or a Conway would save the causeas Washington could not; and so on. "Heaven has determined to save yourcountry or a weak general and bad counsellors would have ruined it"; sowrote Conway to Gates and Gates allowed the letter to be seen. The wordswere reported to Washington, who at once, in high dudgeon, calledConway to account. An explosion followed. Gates both denied that he hadreceived a letter with the passage in question, and, at the same time, charged that there had been tampering with his private correspondence. He could not have it both ways. Conway was merely impudent in reply toWashington, but Gates laid the whole matter before Congress. Washingtonwrote to Gates, in reply to his denials, ironical references to "richtreasures of knowledge and experience" "guarded with penurious reserve"by Conway from his leaders but revealed to Gates. There was no irony inWashington's reference to malignant detraction and mean intrigue. Atthe same time he said to Gates: "My temper leads me to peace and harmonywith all men, " and he deplored the internal strife which injured thegreat cause. Conway soon left America. Gates lived to command anotherAmerican army and to end his career by a crowning disaster. 

Washington had now been for more than two years in the chief command andknew his problems. It was a British tradition that standing armies werea menace to liberty, and the tradition had gained strength in crossingthe sea. Washington would have wished a national army recruited byCongress alone and bound to serve for the duration of the war. Therewas much talk at the time of a "new model army" similar in type to thewonderful creation of Oliver Cromwell. The Thirteen Colonies became, however, thirteen nations. Each reserved the right to raise its ownlevies in its own way. To induce men to enlist Congress was twicehandicapped. First, it had no power of taxation and could only ask theStates to provide what it needed. The second handicap was even greater. When Congress offered bounties to those who enlisted in the Continentalarmy, some of the States offered higher bounties for their own leviesof militia, and one authority was bidding against the other. Thisencouraged short-term enlistments. If a man could re-enlist and againsecure a bounty, he would gain more than if he enlisted at once for theduration of the war. 

An army is an intricate mechanism needing the same variety of agenciesthat is required for the well-being of a community. The chief aim is, ofcourse, to defeat the enemy, and to do this an army must be prepared tomove rapidly. Means of transport, so necessary in peace, are even moreurgently needed in war. Thus Washington always needed military engineersto construct roads and bridges. Before the Revolution the greater partof such services had been provided in America by the regular Britisharmy, now the enemy. British officers declared that the American armywas without engineers who knew the science of war, and certainly theforts on which they spent their skill in the North, those on the lowerHudson, and at Ticonderoga, at the head of Lake George, fell easilybefore the assailant. Good maps were needed, and in this Washingtonwas badly served, though the defect was often corrected by his intimateknowledge of the country. Another service ill-equipped was what weshould now call the Red Cross. Epidemics, and especially smallpox, wrought havoc in the army. Then, as now, shattered nerves were sometimesthe result of the strain of military life. "The wind of a ball, " what weshould now call shellshock, sometimes killed men whose bodies appearedto be uninjured. To our more advanced knowledge the medical science ofthe time seems crude. The physicians of New England, today perhaps themost expert body of medical men in the world, were even then highlyskillful. But the surgeons and nurses were too few. This was trueof both sides in the conflict. Prisoners in hospitals often sufferedterribly and each side brought charges of ill-treatment against theother. The prison-ships in the harbor of New York, where Americanprisoners were confined, became a scandal, and much bitter invectiveagainst British brutality is found in the literature of the period. TheBritish leaders, no less than Washington himself, were humane men, andignorance and inadequate equipment will explain most of the hardships, though an occasional officer on either side was undoubtedly callous inrespect to the sufferings of the enemy. 

Food and clothing, the first vital necessities of an army, were oftendeplorably scarce. In a land of farmers there was food enough. Itslack in the army was chiefly due to bad transport. Clothing was anothermatter. One of the things insisted upon in a well-trained army is adecent regard for appearance, and in the eyes of the French and theBritish officers the American army usually seemed rather unkempt. Theformalities of dress, the uniformity of pipe-clay and powdered hair, ofpolished steel and brass, can of course be overdone. The British armyhad too much of it, but to Washington's force the danger was of havingtoo little. It was not easy to induce farmers and frontiersmen who athome began the day without the use of water, razor, or brush, to appearon parade clean, with hair powdered, faces shaved, and clothes neat. Inthe long summer days the men were told to shave before going to bed thatthey might prepare the more quickly for parade in the morning, and tofill their canteens over night if an early march was imminent. Someof the regiments had uniforms which gave them a sufficiently smartappearance. The cocked hat, the loose hunting shirt with its fringedborder, the breeches of brown leather or duck, the brown gaiters orleggings, the powdered hair, were familiar marks of the soldier of theRevolution. 

During a great part of the war, however, in spite of supplies broughtfrom both lance and the West Indies, Washington found it difficult tosecure for his men even decent clothing of any kind, whether of militarycut or not. More than a year after he took command, in the fightingabout New York, a great part of his army had no more semblance ofuniform than hunting shirts on a common pattern. In the followingDecember, he wrote of many men as either shivering in garments fit onlyfor summer wear or as entirely naked. There was a time in the latercampaign in the South when hundreds of American soldiers marched starknaked, except for breech cloths. One of the most pathetic hardshipsof the soldier's life was due to the lack of boots. More than one ofWashington's armies could be tracked by the bloody footprints of hisbarefooted men. Near the end of the war Benedict Arnold, who knewwhereof he spoke, described the American army as "illy clad, badly fed, and worse paid, " pay being then two or three years overdue. On theother hand, there is evidence that life in the army was not without itscompensations. Enforced dwelling in the open air saved men from diseasessuch as consumption and the movement from camp to camp gave a broaderoutlook to the farmer's sons. The army could usually make a braveparade. On ceremonial occasions the long hair of the men would be tiedback and made white with powder, even though their uniforms were littlemore than rags. 

The men carried weapons some of which, in, at any rate, the early daysof the war, were made by hand at the village smithy. A man might taketo the war a weapon forged by himself. The American soldier had thisadvantage over the British soldier, that he used, if not generally, atleast in some cases, not the smooth-bore musket but the grooved rifleby which the ball was made to rotate in its flight. The fire from thisrifle was extremely accurate. At first weapons were few and ammunitionwas scanty, but in time there were importations from France and alsosupplies from American gun factories. The standard length of the barrelwas three and a half feet, a portentous size compared with that of themodern weapon. The loading was from the muzzle, a process so slow thatone of the favorite tactics of the time was to await the fire of theenemy and then charge quickly and bayonet him before he could reload. The old method of firing off the musket by means of slow matcheskept alight during action was now obsolete; the latest device was theflintlock. But there was always a measure of doubt whether the weaponwould go off. Partly on this account Benjamin Franklin, the wisest manof his time, declared for the use of the pike of an earlier age ratherthan the bayonet and for bows and arrows instead of firearms. A soldier, he said, could shoot four arrows to one bullet. An arrow wound was moredisabling than a bullet wound; and arrows did not becloud thevision with smoke. The bullet remained, however, the chief means ofdestruction, and the fire of Washington's soldiers usually excelled thatof the British. These, in their turn, were superior in the use of thebayonet. 

Powder and lead were hard to get. The inventive spirit of America wasbusy with plans to procure saltpeter and other ingredients for makingpowder, but it remained scarce. Since there was no standard firearm, each soldier required bullets specially suited to his weapon. The menmelted lead and cast it in their own bullet-molds. It is an instance ofthe minor ironies of war that the great equestrian statue of George III, which had been erected in New York in days more peaceful, was meltedinto bullets for killing that monarch's soldiers. Another necessity waspaper for cartridges and wads. The cartridge of that day was a paperenvelope containing the charge of ball and powder. This served also asa wad, after being emptied of its contents, and was pushed home with aramrod. A store of German Bibles in Pennsylvania fell into the hands ofthe soldiers at a moment when paper was a crying need, and the pages ofthese Bibles were used for wads. 

The artillery of the time seems feeble compared with the monster weaponsof death which we know in our own age. Yet it was an important factor inthe war. It is probable that before the war not a single cannon had beenmade in the colonies. From the outset Washington was hampered for lackof artillery. Neutrals, especially the Dutch in the West Indies, soldguns to the Americans, and France was a chief source of supply duringlong periods when the British lost the command of the sea. There wasalways difficulty about equipping cavalry, especially in the North. TheVirginian was at home on horseback, and in the farther South bands ofcavalry did service during the later years of the war, but many ofthe fighting riders of today might tomorrow be guiding their horsespeacefully behind the plough. 

The pay of the soldiers remained to Washington a baffling problem. Whenthe war ended their pay was still heavily in arrears. The States weretimid about imposing taxation and few if any paid promptly the leviesmade upon them. Congress bridged the chasm in finance by issuing papermoney which so declined in value that, as Washington said grimly, itrequired a wagon-load of money to pay for a wagon-load of supplies. Thesoldier received his pay in this money at its face value, and thereis little wonder that the "continental dollar" is still in the UnitedStates a symbol of worthlessness. At times the lack of pay caused mutinywhich would have been dangerous but for Washington's firm and tactfulmanagement in the time of crisis. There was in him both the kindlyfeeling of the humane man and the rigor of the army leader. He sentmen to death without flinching, but he was at one with his men in theirsufferings, and no problem gave him greater anxiety than that of pay, affecting, as it did, the health and spirits of men who, while unpaid, had no means of softening the daily tale of hardship. 

Desertion was always hard to combat. With the homesickness which ledsometimes to desertion Washington must have had a secret sympathy, for his letters show that he always longed for that pleasant home inVirginia which he did not allow himself to revisit until nearly the endof the war. The land of a farmer on service often remained untilled, and there are pathetic cases of families in bitter need because thebreadwinner was in the army. In frontier settlements his absencesometimes meant the massacre of his family by the savages. There islittle wonder that desertion was common, so common that after a reversethe men went away by hundreds. As they usually carried with them theirrifles and other equipment, desertion involved a double loss. On oneoccasion some soldiers undertook for themselves the punishment ofdeserters. Men of the First Pennsylvania Regiment who had recapturedthree deserters, beheaded one of them and returned to their camp withthe head carried on a pole. More than once it happened that condemnedmen were paraded before the troops for execution with the graves dug andthe coffins lying ready. The death sentence would be read, and then, asthe firing party took aim, a reprieve would be announced. The reprievein such circumstances was omitted often enough to make the condemnedendure the real agony of death. 

Religion offered its consolations in the army and Washington gave muchthought to the service of the chaplains. He told his army that fine asit was to be a patriot it was finer still to be a Christian. It is anodd fact that, though he attended the Anglican Communion service beforeand after the war, he did not partake of the Communion during thewar. What was in his mind we do not know. He was disposed, as he saidhimself, to let men find "that road to Heaven which to them shall seemthe most direct, " and he was without Puritan fervor, but he had deepreligious feeling. During the troubled days at Valley Forge a neighborcame upon him alone in the bush on his knees praying aloud, and stoleaway unobserved. He would not allow in the army a favorite Puritancustom of burning the Pope in effigy, and the prohibition was noteasily enforced among men, thousands of whom bore scriptural names fromancestors who thought the Pope anti-Christ. 

Washington's winter quarters at Valley Forge were only twenty miles fromPhiladelphia, among hills easily defended. It is matter for wonder thatHowe, with an army well equipped, did not make some attempt to destroythe army of Washington which passed the winter so near and in acutedistress. The Pennsylvania Loyalists, with dark days soon to come, werebitter at Howe's inactivity, full of tragic meaning for themselves. Hesaid that he could achieve nothing permanent by attack. It may be so;but it is a sound principle in warfare to destroy the enemy when thisis possible. There was a time when in Washington's whole force notmore than two thousand men were in a condition to fight. Congresswas responsible for the needs of the army but was now, in sordidinefficiency, cooped up in the little town of York, eighty miles westof Valley Forge, to which it had fled. There was as yet no real federalunion. The seat of authority was in the State Governments, and we neednot wonder that, with the passing of the first burst of devotion whichunited the colonies in a common cause, Congress declined rapidly inpublic esteem. "What a lot of damned scoundrels we had in that secondCongress" said, at a later date, Gouverneur Morris of Philadelphia toJohn Jay of New York, and Jay answered gravely, "Yes, we had. " The body, so despised in the retrospect, had no real executive government, noorganized departments. Already before Independence was proclaimed therehad been talk of a permanent union, but the members of Congress hadshown no sense of urgency, and it was not until November 15, 1777, whenthe British were in Philadelphia and Congress was in exile at York, thatArticles of Confederation were adopted. By the following midsummer manyof the States had ratified these articles, but Maryland, the lastto assent, did not accept the new union until 1781, so that Congresscontinued to act for the States without constitutional sanction duringthe greater part of the war. 

The ineptitude of Congress is explained when we recall that it wasa revolutionary body which indeed controlled foreign affairs and theissues of war and peace, coined money, and put forth paper money buthad no general powers. Each State had but one vote, and thus a small andsparsely settled State counted for as much as populous Massachusettsor Virginia. The Congress must deal with each State only as a unit; itcould not coerce a State; and it had no authority to tax or to coerceindividuals. The utmost it could do was to appeal to good feeling, andwhen a State felt that it had a grievance such an appeal was likely tomeet with a flaming retort. 

Washington maintained towards Congress an attitude of deferenceand courtesy which it did not always deserve. The ablest men in theindividual States held aloof from Congress. They felt that they had moredignity and power if they sat in their own legislatures. The assemblywhich in the first days had as members men of the type of Washington andFranklin sank into a gathering of second-rate men who were divided intofierce factions. They debated interminably and did little. Each memberusually felt that he must champion the interests of his own Stateagainst the hostility of others. It was not easy to create a sense ofnational life. The union was only a league of friendship. States whichfor a century or more had barely acknowledged their dependence uponGreat Britain, were chary about coming under the control of a newcentralizing authority at Philadelphia. The new States were sovereignand some of them went so far as to send envoys of their own to negotiatewith foreign powers in Europe. When it was urged that Congress shouldhave the power to raise taxes in the States, there were patriots whoasked sternly what the war was about if it was not to vindicate theprinciple that the people of a State alone should have power of taxationover themselves. Of New England all the other States were jealous andthey particularly disliked that proud and censorious city which alreadywas accused of believing that God had made Boston for Himself and allthe rest of the world for Boston. The religion of New England did notsuit the Anglicans of Virginia or the Roman Catholics of Maryland, andthere was resentful suspicion of Puritan intolerance. John Adams saidquite openly that there were no religious teachers in Philadelphia tocompare with those of Boston and naturally other colonies drew away fromthe severe and rather acrid righteousness of which he was a type. 

Inefficiency meanwhile brought terrible suffering at Valley Forge, and the horrors of that winter remain still vivid in the memory of theAmerican people. The army marched to Valley Forge on December 17, 1777, and in midwinter everything from houses to entrenchments had still to becreated. At once there was busy activity in cutting down trees for thelog huts. They were built nearly square, sixteen feet by fourteen, inrows, with the door opening on improvised streets. Since boards werescarce, and it was difficult to make roofs rainproof, Washington triedto stimulate ingenuity by offering a reward of one hundred dollars foran improved method of roofing. The fireplaces of wood were protectedwith thick clay. Firewood was abundant, but, with little food for oxenand horses, men had to turn themselves into draught animals to bring insupplies. 

Sometimes the army was for a week without meat. Many horses died forlack of forage or of proper care, a waste which especially disturbedWashington, a lover of horses. When quantities of clothing were readyfor use, they were not delivered at Valley Forge owing to lack oftransport. Washington expressed his contempt for officers who resignedtheir commissions in face of these distresses. No one, he said, everheard him say a word about resignation. There were many desertions but, on the whole, he marveled at the patience of his men and that they didnot mutiny. With a certain grim humor they chanted phrases about "nopay, no clothes, no provisions, no rum, " and sang an ode glorifying warand Washington. Hundreds of them marched barefoot, their blood stainingthe snow or the frozen ground while, at the same time, stores of shoesand clothing were lying unused somewhere on the roads to the camp. 

Sickness raged in the army. Few men at Valley Forge, wrote Washington, had more than a sheet, many only part of a sheet, and some nothing atall. Hospital stores were lacking. For want of straw and blankets thesick lay perishing on the frozen ground. When Washington had beenat Valley Forge for less than a week, he had to report nearly threethousand men unfit for duty because of their nakedness in the bitterwinter. Then, as always, what we now call the "profiteer" was holding upsupplies for higher prices. To the British at Philadelphia, because theypaid in gold, things were furnished which were denied to Washingtonat Valley Forge, and he announced that he would hang any one whotook provisions to Philadelphia. To keep his men alive Washington hadsometimes to take food by force from the inhabitants and then there wasan outcry that this was robbery. With many sick, his horses so disabledthat he could not move his artillery, and his defenses very slight, he could have made only a weak fight had Howe attacked him. Yet thelegislature of Pennsylvania told him that, instead of lying quiet inwinter quarters, he ought to be carrying on an active campaign. In mostwars irresponsible men sitting by comfortable firesides are sure theyknew best how the thing should be done. 

The bleak hillside at Valley Forge was something more than a prison. Washington's staff was known as his family and his relations with themwere cordial and even affectionate. The young officers faced theirhardships cheerily and gave meager dinners to which no one might go ifhe was so well off as to have trousers without holes. They talked andsang and jested about their privations. By this time many of the badofficers, of whom Washington complained earlier, had been weeded out andhe was served by a body of devoted men. There was much good comradeship. Partnership in suffering tends to draw men together. In the companywhich gathered about Washington, two men, mere youths at the time, havea world-wide fame. The young Alexander Hamilton, barely twenty-one yearsof age, and widely known already for his political writings, had therank of lieutenant colonel gained for his services in the fighting aboutNew York. He was now Washington's confidential secretary, a positionin which he soon grew restless. His ambition was to be one of the greatmilitary leaders of the Revolution. Before the end of the war he hadgone back to fighting and he distinguished himself in the last battleof the war at Yorktown. The other youthful figure was the Marquis de LaFayette. It is not without significance that a noble square bears hisname in the capital named after Washington. The two men loved eachother. The young French aristocrat, with both a great name and greatpossessions, was fired in 1776, when only nineteen, with zeal for theAmerican cause. "With the welfare of America, " he wrote to his wife, "is closely linked the welfare of mankind. " Idealists in France believedthat America was leading in the remaking of the world. When it was knownthat La Fayette intended to go to fight in America, the King of Franceforbade it, since France had as yet no quarrel with England. Theyouth, however, chartered a ship, landed in South Carolina, hurried toPhiladelphia, and was a major general in the American army when he wastwenty years of age. 

La Fayette rendered no serious military service to the American cause. He arrived in time to fight in the battle of the Brandywine. Washingtonpraised him for his bravery and military ardor and wrote to Congressthat he was sensible, discreet, and able to speak English freely. It waswith an eye to the influence in France of the name of the young noblethat Congress advanced him so rapidly. La Fayette was sincere andgenerous in spirit. He had, however, little military capacity. Laterwhen he might have directed the course of the French Revolution he wasfound wanting in force of character. The great Mirabeau tried to workwith him for the good of France, but was repelled by La Fayette'sjealous vanity, a vanity so greedy of praise that Jefferson called it a"canine appetite for popularity and fame. " La Fayette once said thathe had never bad a thought with which he could reproach himself, andhe boasted that he has mastered three kings--the King of England in theAmerican Revolution, the King of France, and King Mob of Paris duringthe upheaval in France. He was useful as a diplomatist rather than as asoldier. Later, in an hour of deep need, Washington sent La Fayette toFrance to ask for aid. He was influential at the French court and cameback with abundant promises, which were in part fulfilled. 

Washington himself and Oliver Cromwell are perhaps the only two civiliangenerals in history who stand in the first rank as military leaders. It is doubtful indeed whether it is not rather character than militaryskill which gives Washington his place. Only one other general of theRevolution attained to first rank even in secondary fame. NathanaelGreene was of Quaker stock from Rhode Island. He was a natural studentand when trouble with the mother country was impending in 1774 hespent the leisure which he could spare from his forges in the study ofmilitary history and in organizing the local militia. Because of hiszeal for military service he was expelled from the Society of Friends. In 1775 when war broke out he was promptly on hand with a contingentfrom Rhode Island. In little more than a year and after a very slendermilitary experience he was in command of the army on Long Island. On theHudson defeat not victory was his lot. He had, however, as much sternresolve as Washington. He shared Washington's success in the attack onTrenton, and his defeats at the Brandywine and at Germantown. Now hewas at Valley Forge, and when, on March 2, 1778, he became quartermastergeneral, the outlook for food and supplies steadily improved. Later, inthe South, he rendered brilliant service which made possible the finalAmerican victory at Yorktown. 

Henry Knox, a Boston bookseller, had, like Greene, only slight trainingfor military command. It shows the dearth of officers to fight thehighly disciplined British army that Knox, at the age of twenty-five, and fresh from commercial life, was placed in charge of the meagerartillery which Washington had before Boston. It was Knox, who, withheart-breaking labor, took to the American front the guns capturedat Ticonderoga. Throughout the war he did excellent service with theartillery, and Washington placed a high value upon his services. Hevalued too those of Daniel Morgan, an old fighter in the Indian wars, who left his farm in Virginia when war broke out, and marched hiscompany of riflemen to join the army before Boston. He served withArnold at the siege of Quebec, and was there taken prisoner. He wasexchanged and had his due revenge when he took part in the capture ofBurgoyne's army. He was now at Valley Forge. Later he had a commandunder Greene in the South and there, as we shall see, he won the greatsuccess of the Battle of Cowpens in January, 1781. 

It was the peculiar misfortune of Washington that the three men, Arnold, Lee, and Gates, who ought to have rendered him the greatest service, proved unfaithful. Benedict Arnold, next to Washington himself, wasprobably the most brilliant and resourceful soldier of the Revolution. Washington so trusted him that, when the dark days at Valley Forge wereover, he placed him in command of the recaptured federal capital. Todaythe name of Arnold would rank high in the memory of a grateful countryhad he not fallen into the bottomless pit of treason. The same is insome measure true of Charles Lee, who was freed by the British in anexchange of prisoners and joined Washington at Valley Forge late inthe spring of 1778. Lee was so clever with his pen as to be one of thereputed authors of the Letters of Junius. He had served as a Britishofficer in the conquest of Canada, and later as major general in thearmy of Poland. He had a jealous and venomous temper and could neverconceal the contempt of the professional soldier for civilian generals. He, too, fell into the abyss of treason. Horatio Gates, also a regularsoldier, had served under Braddock and was thus at that early perioda comrade of Washington. Intriguer he was, but not a traitor. It wasincompetence and perhaps cowardice which brought his final ruin. 

Europe had thousands of unemployed officers some of whom had hadexperience in the Seven Years' War and many turned eagerly to Americafor employment. There were some good soldiers among these fightingadventurers. Kosciuszko, later famous as a Polish patriot, rose by hismerits to the rank of brigadier general in the American army; De Kalb, son of a German peasant, though not a baron, as he called himself, proved worthy of the rank of a major general. There was, however, aflood of volunteers of another type. French officers fleeing from theircreditors and sometimes under false names and titles, made their wayto America as best they could and came to Washington with pretentiousclaims. Germans and Poles there were, too, and also exiles from thatunhappy island which remains still the most vexing problem of Britishpolitics. Some of them wrote their own testimonials; some, too, werespies. On the first day, Washington wrote, they talked only of servingfreely a noble cause, but within a week were demanding promotion andadvance of money. Sometimes they took a high tone with members ofCongress who had not courage to snub what Washington called impudenceand vain boasting. "I am haunted and teased to death by the importunityof some and dissatisfaction of others" wrote Washington of these people. 

One foreign officer rendered incalculable service to the American cause. It was not only on the British side that Germans served in the AmericanRevolution. The Baron von Steuben was, like La Fayette, a man of rankin his own country, and his personal service to the Revolution was muchgreater than that of La Fayette. Steuben had served on the staff ofFrederick the Great and was distinguished for his wit and his polishedmanners. There was in him nothing of the needy adventurer. The sale ofHessian and other troops to the British by greedy German princes wasmet in some circles in Germany by a keen desire to aid the cause of theyoung republic. Steuben, who held a lucrative post, became convinced, while on a visit to Paris, that he could render service in training theAmericans. With quick sympathy and showing no reserve in his generousspirit he abandoned his country, as it proved forever, took ship for theUnited States, and arrived in November, 1777. Washington welcomed him atValley Forge in the following March. He was made Inspector Generaland at once took in hand the organization of the army. He prepared"Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the UnitedStates" later, in 1779, issued as a book. Under this German influenceBritish methods were discarded. The word of command became shortand sharp. The British practice of leaving recruits to be trainedby sergeants, often ignorant, coarse, and brutal, was discarded, andofficers themselves did this work. The last letter which Washingtonwrote before he resigned his command at the end of the war was tothank Steuben for his invaluable aid. Charles Lee did not believe thatAmerican recruits could be quickly trained so as to be able to face thedisciplined British battalions. Steuben was to prove that Lee was wrongto Lee's own entire undoing at Monmouth when fighting began in 1778. 

The British army in America furnished sharp contrasts to that ofWashington. If the British jeered at the fighting quality of citizens, these retorted that the British soldier was a mere slave. There weretwo great stains upon the British system, the press-gang and flogging. Press-gangs might seize men abroad in the streets of a town and, unlessthey could prove that they were gentlemen in rank, they could be sentin the fleet to serve in the remotest corners of the earth. In both navyand army flogging outraged the dignity of manhood. The liability to thisbrutal and degrading punishment kept all but the dregs of the populacefrom enlisting in the British army. It helped to fix the deep gulfbetween officers and men. Forty years later Napoleon Bonaparte, despotthough he might be, was struck by this separation. He himself wentfreely among his men, warmed himself at their fire, and talked to themfamiliarly about their work, and he thought that the British officer wastoo aloof in his demeanor. In the British army serving in America therewere many officers of aristocratic birth and long training in militaryscience. When they found that American officers were frequently drawnfrom a class of society which in England would never aspire to acommission, and were largely self-taught, not unnaturally they jeeredat an army so constituted. Another fact excited British disdain. TheAmericans were technically rebels against their lawful ruler, and rebelsin arms have no rights as belligerents. When the war ended more than athousand American prisoners were still held in England on the capitalcharge of treason. Nothing stirred Washington's anger more deeply thanthe remark sometimes made by British officers that the prisoners theytook were receiving undeserved mercy when they were not hanged. 

There was much debate at Valley Forge as to the prospect for the future. When we look at available numbers during the war we appreciate theview of a British officer that in spite of Washington's failures andof British victories the war was serious, "an ugly job, a damned affairindeed. " The population of the colonies--some 2, 500, 000--was aboutone-third that of the United Kingdom; and for the British the war wasremote from the base of supply. In those days, considering the meansof transport, America was as far from England as at the present day isAustralia. Sometimes the voyage across the sea occupied two and eventhree months, and, with the relatively small ships of the time, itrequired a vast array of transports to carry an army of twenty orthirty thousand men. In the spring of 1776 Great Britain had found itimpossible to raise at home an army of even twenty thousand men forservice in America, and she was forced to rely in large part uponmercenary soldiers. This was nothing new. Her island people did not likeservice abroad and this unwillingness was intensified in regard towar in remote America. Moreover Whig leaders in England discouragedenlistment. They were bitterly hostile to the war which they regarded asan attack not less on their own liberties than on those of America. Itwould be too much to ascribe to the ignorant British common soldier ofthe time any deep conviction as to the merits or demerits of the causefor which he fought. There is no evidence that, once in the army, hewas less ready to attack the Americans than any other foe. Certainly theAmericans did not think he was half-hearted. 

The British soldier fought indeed with more resolute determinationthan did the hired auxiliary at his side. These German troops playeda notable part in the war. The despotic princes of the lesser Germanstates were accustomed to sell the services of their troops. DespoticRussia, too, was a likely field for such enterprise. When, however, itwas proposed to the Empress Catherine II that she should furnish twentythousand men for service in America she retorted with the sage advicethat it was England's true interest to settle the quarrel in Americawithout war. Germany was left as the recruiting field. British effortsto enlist Germans as volunteers in her own army were promptly checked bythe German rulers and it was necessary literally to buy the troops fromtheir princes. One-fourth of the able-bodied men of Hesse-Cassel wereshipped to America. They received four times the rate of pay at home andtheir ruler received in addition some half million dollars a year. Themen suffered terribly and some died of sickness for the homes to whichthousands of them never returned. German generals, such as Knyphausenand Riedesel, gave the British sincere and effective service. TheHessians were, however, of doubtful benefit to the British. It angeredthe Americans that hired troops should be used against them, an angernot lessened by the contempt which the Hessians showed for the colonialofficers as plebeians. 

The two sides were much alike in their qualities and were skillful inpropaganda. In Britain lurid tales were told of the colonists scalpingthe wounded at Lexington and using poisoned bullets at Bunker Hill. InAmerica every prisoner in British hands was said to be treated brutallyand every man slain in the fighting to have been murdered. The use offoreign troops was a fruitful theme. The report ran through the coloniesthat the Hessians were huge ogre-like monsters, with double rows ofteeth round each jaw, who had come at the call of the British tyrantto slay women and children. In truth many of the Hessians became goodAmericans. In spite of the loyalty of their officers they were readilyinduced to desert. The wit of Benjamin Franklin was enlisted to composetelling appeals, translated into simple German, which promised grantsof land to those who should abandon an unrighteous cause. The Hessiantrooper who opened a packet of tobacco might find in the wrapper appealsboth to his virtue and to his cupidity. It was easy for him to resistthem when the British were winning victories and he was dreaming of areturn to the Fatherland with a comfortable accumulation of pay, but itwas different when reverses overtook British arms. Then many hundredsslipped away; and today their blood flows in the veins of thousands ofprosperous American farmers. 

CHAPTER VIII. THE ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE AND ITS RESULTS

Washington badly needed aid from Europe, but there every importantgovernment was monarchical and it was not easy for a young republic, the child of revolution, to secure an ally. France tingled with joy atAmerican victories and sorrowed at American reverses, but motives weremingled and perhaps hatred of England was stronger than love for libertyin America. The young La Fayette had a pure zeal, but he would not havefought for the liberty of colonists in Mexico as he did for those inVirginia; and the difference was that service in Mexico would not hurtthe enemy of France so recently triumphant. He hated England and said soquite openly. The thought of humiliating and destroying that "insolentnation" was always to him an inspiration. Vergennes, the French ForeignMinister, though he lacked genius, was a man of boundless zeal andenergy. He was at work at four o'clock in the morning and he spent hislong days in toil for his country. He believed that England was thetyrant of the seas, "the monster against whom we should be alwaysprepared, " a greedy, perfidious neighbor, the natural enemy of France. 

From the first days of the trouble in regard to the Stamp Act Vergenneshad rejoiced that England's own children were turning against her. Hehad French military officers in England spying on her defenses. Whenwar broke out he showed no nice regard for the rules of neutrality andhelped the colonies in every way possible. It was a French writer wholed in these activities. Beaumarchais is known to the world chiefly asthe creator of the character of Figaro, which has become the type of thebold, clever, witty, and intriguing rascal, but he played a real partin the American Revolution. We need not inquire too closely into hismotives. There was hatred of the English, that "audacious, unbridled, shameless people, " and there was, too, the zeal for liberal ideas whichmade Queen Marie Antoinette herself take a pretty interest in the "dearrepublicans" overseas who were at the same time fighting the nationalenemy. Beaumarchais secured from the government money with which hepurchased supplies to be sent to America. He had a great warehousein Paris, and, under the rather fantastic Spanish name of RoderigueHortalez & Co. , he sent vast quantities of munitions and clothingto America. Cannon, not from private firms but from the governmentarsenals, were sent across the sea. When Vergennes showed scruplesabout this violation of neutrality, the answer of Beaumarchais was thatgovernments were not bound by rules of morality applicable to privatepersons. Vergennes learned well the lesson and, while protesting tothe British ambassador in Paris that France was blameless, he permittedoutrageous breaches of the laws of neutrality. 

Secret help was one thing, open alliance another. Early in 1776 SilasDeane, a member from Connecticut of the Continental Congress, was namedas envoy to France to secure French aid. The day was to come whenDeane should believe the struggle against Britain hopeless and counselsubmission, but now he showed a furious zeal. He knew hardly a word ofFrench, but this did not keep him from making his elaborate programmewell understood. Himself a trader, he promised France vast profits fromthe monopoly of the trade of America when independence should be secure. He gave other promises not more easy of fulfillment. To Frenchmenzealous for the ideals of liberty and seeking military careers inAmerica he promised freely commissions as colonels and even generals andwas the chief cause of that deluge of European officers which provedto Washington so annoying. It was through Deane's activities that LaFayette became a volunteer. Through him came too the proposal to sendto America the Comte de Broglie who should be greater than colonel orgeneral--a generalissimo, a dictator. He was to brush aside Washington, to take command of the American armies, and by his prestige and skill tosecure France as an ally and win victory in the field. For such servicesBroglie asked only despotic power while he served and for life a greatpension which would, he declared, not be one-hundredth part of his realvalue. That Deane should have considered a scheme so fantastic revealsthe measure of his capacity, and by the end of 1776 Benjamin Franklinwas sent to Paris to bring his tried skill to bear upon the problemof the alliance. With Deane and Franklin as a third member of thecommission was associated Arthur Lee who had vainly sought aid at thecourts of Spain and Prussia. France was, however, coy. The end of 1776saw the colonial cause at a very low ebb, with Washington driven fromNew York and about to be driven from Philadelphia. Defeat is not a goodargument for an alliance. France was willing to send arms to America andwilling to let American privateers use freely her ports. The ship whichcarried Franklin to France soon busied herself as a privateer and reapedfor her crew a great harvest of prize money. In a single week of June, 1777, this ship captured a score of British merchantmen, of which morethan two thousand were taken by Americans during the war. France allowedthe American privateers to come and go as they liked, and gave Englandsmooth words, but no redress. There is little wonder that Englandthreatened to hang captured American sailors as pirates. 

It was the capture of Burgoyne at Saratoga which brought decision toFrance. That was the victory which Vergennes had demanded before hewould take open action. One British army had surrendered. Another wasin an untenable position in Philadelphia. It was known that the Britishfleet had declined. With the best of it in America, France was the morelikely to win successes in Europe. The Bourbon king of France could, too, draw into the war the Bourbon king of Spain, and Spain had goodships. The defects of France and Spain on the sea were not in ships butin men. The invasion of England was not improbable and then less thana score of years might give France both avenging justice for her recenthumiliation and safety for her future. Britain should lose America, she should lose India, she should pay in a hundred ways for her pasttriumphs, for the arrogance of Pitt, who had declared that he would soreduce France that she should never again rise. The future should belongnot to Britain but to France. Thus it was that fervent patriotism arguedafter the defeat of Burgoyne. Frederick the Great told his ambassadorat Paris to urge upon France that she had now a chance to strike Englandwhich might never again come. France need not, he said, fear his enmity, for he was as likely to help England as the devil to help a Christian. Whatever doubts Vergennes may have entertained about an open alliancewith America were now swept away. The treaty of friendship withAmerica was signed on February 6, 1778. On the 13th of March the Frenchambassador in London told the British Government, with studiedinsolence of tone, that the United States were by their own declarationindependent. Only a few weeks earlier the British ministry had said thatthere was no prospect of any foreign intervention to help the Americansand now in the most galling manner France told George III the one thingto which he would not listen, that a great part of his sovereignty wasgone. Each country withdrew its ambassador and war quickly followed. 

France had not tried to make a hard bargain with the Americans. She demanded nothing for herself and agreed not even to ask for therestoration of Canada. She required only that America should neverrestore the King's sovereignty in order to secure peace. Certainsections of opinion in America were suspicious of France. Was she notthe old enemy who had so long harassed the frontiers of New England andNew York? If George III was a despot what of Louis XVI, who had noteven an elected Parliament to restrain him? Washington himself wasdistrustful of France and months after the alliance had been concludedhe uttered the warning that hatred of England must not lead toover-confidence in France. "No nation, " he said, "is to be trustedfarther than it is bound by its interests. " France, he thought, mustdesire to recover Canada, so recently lost. He did not wish to see agreat military power on the northern frontier of the United States. Thiswould be to confirm the jeer of the Loyalists that the alliance was acase of the wooden horse in Troy; the old enemy would come back inthe guise of a friend and would then prove to be master and bring thecolonies under a servitude compared with which the British supremacywould seem indeed mild. 

The intervention of France brought a cruel embarrassment to the Whigpatriot in England. He could rejoice and mourn with American patriotsbecause he believed that their cause was his own. It was as much theinterest of Norfolk as of Massachusetts that the new despotism of aking, who ruled through a corrupt Parliament, should be destroyed. Itwas, however, another matter when France took a share in the fight. France fought less for freedom than for revenge, and the Englishman who, like Coke of Norfolk, could daily toast Washington as the greatestof men could not link that name with Louis XVI or with his ministerVergennes. The currents of the past are too swift and intricate to bemeasured exactly by the observer who stands on the shore of the present, but it is arguable that the Whigs might soon have brought about peacein England had it not been for the intervention of France. No seriousperson any longer thought that taxation could be enforced upon Americaor that the colonies should be anything but free in regulating theirown affairs. George III himself said that he who declared the taxing ofAmerica to be worth what it cost was "more fit for Bedlam than a seat inthe Senate. " The one concession Britain was not yet prepared to make wasIndependence. But Burke and many other Whigs were ready now for this, though Chatham still believed it would be the ruin of the BritishEmpire. 

Chatham, however, was all for conciliation, and it is not hard toimagine a group of wise men chosen from both sides, men British in bloodand outlook, sitting round a table and reaching an agreement to resultin a real independence for America and a real unity with Great Britain. A century and a quarter later a bitter war with an alien race in SouthAfrica was followed by a result even more astounding. The surrender ofBurgoyne had made the Prime Minister, Lord North, weary of his position. He had never been in sympathy with the King's policy and since the badnews had come in December he had pondered some radical step which shouldend the war. On February 17, 1778, before the treaty of friendshipbetween the United States and France had been made public, Northstartled the House of Commons by introducing a bill repealing the tax ontea, renouncing forever the right to tax America, and nullifying thosechanges in the constitution of Massachusetts which had so rankled in theminds of its people. A commission with full powers to negotiate peacewould proceed at once to America and it might suspend at its discretion, and thus really repeal, any act touching America passed since 1763. 

North had taken a sharp turn. The Whig clothes had been stolen by a ToryPrime Minister and if he wished to stay in office the Whigs had not thevotes to turn him out. His supporters would accept almost anything inorder to dish the Whigs. They swallowed now the bill, and it becamelaw, but at the same time came, too, the war with France. It united theTories; it divided the Whigs. All England was deeply stirred. Nearlyevery important town offered to raise volunteer forces at its ownexpense. The Government soon had fifteen thousand men recruited atprivate cost. Help was offered so freely that the Whig, John Wilkes, actually introduced into Parliament a bill to prohibit gifts of money tothe Crown since this voluntary taxation gave the Crown money withoutthe consent of Parliament. The British patriot, gentle as he mightbe towards America, fumed against France. This was no longer only adomestic struggle between parties, but a war with an age-long foreignenemy. The populace resented what they called the insolence and thetreachery of France and the French ambassador was pelted at Canterburyas he drove to the seacoast on his recall. In a large sense the Frenchalliance was not an unmixed blessing for America, since it confused thecounsels of her best friends in England. 

In spite of this it is probably true that from this time the mass of theEnglish people were against further attempts to coerce America. A changeof ministry was urgently demanded. There was one leader to whom thenation looked in this grave crisis. The genius of William Pitt, Earlof Chatham, had won the last war against France and he had promoted therepeal of the Stamp Act. In America his name was held in reverence sohigh that New York and Charleston had erected statues in his honor. Whenthe defeat of Burgoyne so shook the ministry that North was anxious toretire, Chatham, but for two obstacles, could probably have formed aministry. One obstacle was his age; as the event proved, he was nearhis end. It was, however, not this which kept him from office, butthe resolve of George III. The King simply said that he would not haveChatham. In office Chatham would certainly rule and the King intendedhimself to rule. If Chatham would come in a subordinate position, well;but Chatham should not lead. The King declared that as long as even tenmen stood by him he would hold out and he would lose his crown ratherthan call to office that clamorous Opposition which had attacked hisAmerican policy. "I will never consent, " he said firmly, "to removingthe members of the present Cabinet from my service. " He asked North:"Are you resolved at the hour of danger to desert me?" North remained inoffice. Chatham soon died and, during four years still, George III wasmaster of England. Throughout the long history of that nation thereis no crisis in which one man took a heavier and more disastrousresponsibility. 

News came to Valley Forge of the alliance with France and therewere great rejoicings. We are told that, to celebrate the occasion, Washington dined in public. We are not given the bill of fare in thatscene of famine; but by the springtime tension in regard to supplies hadbeen relieved and we may hope that Valley Forge really feasted inhonor of the great event. The same news brought gloom to the Britishin Philadelphia, for it had the stern meaning that the effort and lossinvolved in the capture of that city were in vain. Washington held mostof the surrounding country so that supplies must come chiefly by sea. With a French fleet and a French army on the way to America, the Britishrealized that they must concentrate their defenses. Thus the cheers atValley Forge were really the sign that the British must go. 

Sir William Howe, having taken Philadelphia, was determined not to bethe one who should give it up. Feeling was bitter in England over theghastly failure of Burgoyne, and he had gone home on parole to defendhimself from his seat in the House of Commons. There Howe had a seat andhe, too, had need to be on hand. Lord George Germain had censured himfor his course and, to shield himself; was clearly resolved to makescapegoats of others. So, on May 18, 1778, at Philadelphia there wasa farewell to Howe, which took the form of a Mischianza, somethingapproaching the medieval tournament. Knights broke lances in honorof fair ladies, there were arches and flowers and fancy costumes, and high-flown Latin and French, all in praise of the departing Howe. Obviously the garrison of Philadelphia had much time on its hands andcould count upon, at least, some cheers from a friendly population. Itis remembered still, with moralizings on the turns in human fortune, that Major Andre and Miss Margaret Shippen were the leaders in that gayscene, the one, in the days to come, to be hanged by Washington as aspy, because entrapped in the treason of Benedict Arnold, who became thehusband of the other. 

On May 24, 1778, Sir Henry Clinton took over from Howe the commandof the British army in America and confronted a difficult problem. Ifd'Estaing, the French admiral, should sail straight for the Delaware hemight destroy the fleet of little more than half his strength which laythere, and might quickly starve Philadelphia into surrender. The Britishmust unite their forces to meet the peril from France, and New York, asan island, was the best point for a defense, chiefly naval. A move toNew York was therefore urgent. It was by sea that the British had cometo Philadelphia, but it was not easy to go away by sea. There was notroom in the transports for the army and its encumbrances. Moreover, toembark the whole force, a march of forty miles to New Castle, on thelower Delaware, would be necessary and the retreating army was sure tobe harassed on its way by Washington. It would besides hardly be safeto take the army by sea for the French fleet might be strong enough tocapture the flotilla. 

There was nothing for it but, at whatever risk, to abandon Philadelphiaand march the army across New Jersey. It would be possible to take bysea the stores and the three thousand Loyalists from Philadelphia, someof whom would probably be hanged if they should be taken. Lord Howe, thenaval commander, did his part in a masterly manner. On the 18th of Junethe British army marched out of Philadelphia and before the day wasover it was across the Delaware on the New Jersey side. That same dayWashington's army, free from its long exile at Valley Forge, occupiedthe capital. Clinton set out on his long march by land and Howe workedhis laden ships down the difficult river to its mouth and, after delayby winds, put to sea on the 28th of June. By a stroke of good fortunehe sailed the two hundred miles to New York in two days and missed thegreat fleet of d'Estaing, carrying an army of four thousand men. On the8th of July d'Estaing anchored at the mouth of the Delaware. Had not hispassage been unusually delayed and Howe's unusually quick, as Washingtonnoted, the British fleet and the transports in the Delaware wouldprobably have been taken and Clinton and his army would have shared thefate of Burgoyne. 

As it was, though Howe's fleet was clear away, Clinton's army had a badtime in the march across New Jersey. Its baggage train was no less thantwelve miles long and, winding along roads leading sometimes throughforests, was peculiarly vulnerable to flank attack. In this type ofwarfare Washington excelled. He had fought over this country and he knewit well. The tragedy of Valley Forge was past. His army was now welltrained and well supplied. He had about the same number of men as theBritish--perhaps sixteen thousand--and he was not encumbered by a longbaggage train. Thus it happened that Washington was across the Delawarealmost as soon as the British. He marched parallel with them on a linesome five miles to the north and was able to forge towards the head oftheir column. He could attack their flank almost when he liked. Clintonmarched with great difficulty. He found bridges down. Not only wasWashington behind him and on his flank but General Gates was in frontmarching from the north to attack him when he should try to cross theRaritan River. The long British column turned southeastward toward SandyHook, so as to lessen the menace from Gates. Between the half of thearmy in the van and the other half in the rear was the baggage train. 

The crisis came on Sunday the 28th of June, a day of sweltering heat. Bythis time General Charles Lee, Washington's second in command, was ina good position to attack the British rear guard from the north, whileWashington, marching three miles behind Lee, was to come up in the hopeof overwhelming it from the rear. Clinton's position was difficult buthe was saved by Lee's ineptitude. He had positive instructions to attackwith his five thousand men and hold the British engaged until Washingtonshould come up in overwhelming force. The young La Fayette was with Lee. He knew what Washington had ordered, but Lee said to him: "You don'tknow the British soldiers; we cannot stand against them. " Lee's conductlooks like deliberate treachery. Instead of attacking the British heallowed them to attack him. La Fayette managed to send a message toWashington in the rear; Washington dashed to the front and, as he cameup, met soldiers flying from before the British. He rode straight toLee, called him in flaming anger a "damned poltroon, " and himself atonce took command. There was a sharp fight near Monmouth Court House. The British were driven back and only the coming of night ended thestruggle. Washington was preparing to renew it in the morning, butClinton had marched away in the darkness. He reached the coast on the30th of June, having lost on the way fifty-nine men from sunstroke, over three hundred in battle, and a great many more by desertion. Thedeserters were chiefly Germans, enticed by skillful offers of land. Washington called for a reckoning from Lee. He was placed under arrest, tried by court-martial, found guilty, and suspended from rank for twelvemonths. Ultimately he was dismissed from the American army, less itappears for his conduct at Monmouth than for his impudent demeanortoward Congress afterwards. 

These events on land were quickly followed by stirring events on thesea. The delays of the British Admiralty of this time seem almostincredible. Two hundred ships waited at Spithead for three months forconvoy to the West Indies, while all the time the people of the WestIndies, cut off from their usual sources of supply in America, were indistress for food. Seven weeks passed after d'Estaing had sailed forAmerica, before the Admiralty knew that he was really gone and sentAdmiral Byron, with fourteen ships, to the aid of Lord Howe. Whend'Estaing was already before New York Byron was still battling withstorms in mid-Atlantic, storms so severe that his fleet was entirelydispersed and his flagship was alone when it reached Long Island on the18th of August. 

Meanwhile the French had a great chance. On the 11th of July theirfleet, much stronger than the British, arrived from the Delaware, andanchored off Sandy Hook. Admiral Howe knew his danger. He asked forvolunteers from the merchant ships and the sailors offered themselvesalmost to a man. If d'Estaing could beat Howe's inferior fleet, thetransports at New York would be at his mercy and the British army, withno other source of supply, must surrender. Washington was near, to givehelp on land. The end of the war seemed not far away. But it did notcome. The French admirals were often taken from an army command, andd'Estaing was not a sailor but a soldier. He feared the skill of Howe, a really great sailor, whose seven available ships were drawn up in lineat Sandy Hook so that their guns bore on ships coming in across the bar. D'Estaing hovered outside. Pilots from New York told him that at hightide there were only twenty-two feet of water on the bar and this wasnot enough for his great ships, one of which carried ninety-one guns. Onthe 22d of July there was the highest of tides with, in reality, thirtyfeet of water on the bar, and a wind from the northeast which would havebrought d'Estaing's ships easily through the channel into the harbor. The British expected the hottest naval fight in their history. At threein the afternoon d'Estaing moved but it was to sail away out of sight. 

Opportunity, though once spurned, seemed yet to knock again. The oneother point held by the British was Newport, Rhode Island. Here GeneralPigot had five thousand men and only perilous communications by sea withNew York. Washington, keenly desirous to capture this army, sent GeneralGreene to aid General Sullivan in command at Providence, and d'Estaingarrived off Newport to give aid. Greene had fifteen hundred finesoldiers, Sullivan had nine thousand New England militia, and d'Estaingfour thousand French regulars. A force of fourteen thousand five hundredmen threatened five thousand British. But on the 9th of August Howesuddenly appeared near Newport with his smaller fleet. D'Estaing put tosea to fight him, and a great naval battle was imminent, when a terrificstorm blew up and separated and almost shattered both fleets. D'Estaingthen, in spite of American protests, insisted on taking the French shipsto Boston to refit and with them the French soldiers. Sullivan publiclydenounced the French admiral as having basely deserted him and his owndisgusted yeomanry left in hundreds for their farms to gather in theharvest. In September, with d'Estaing safely away, Clinton sailed intoNewport with five thousand men. Washington's campaign against RhodeIsland had failed completely. 

The summer of 1778 thus turned out badly for Washington. Help fromFrance which had aroused such joyous hopes in America had achievedlittle and the allies were hurling reproaches at each other. French andAmerican soldiers had riotous fights in Boston and a French officerwas killed. The British, meanwhile, were landing at small ports onthe coast, which had been the haunts of privateers, and were not onlyburning shipping and stores but were devastating the country withLoyalist regiments recruited in America. The French told the Americansthat they were expecting too much from the alliance, and the cautiousWashington expressed fear that help from outside would relax effort athome. Both were right. By the autumn the British had been reinforcedand the French fleet had gone to the West Indies. Truly the mountainin labor of the French alliance seemed to have brought forth onlya ridiculous mouse. None the less was it to prove, in the end, thedecisive factor in the struggle. 

The alliance with France altered the whole character of the war, whichceased now to be merely a war in North America. France soon gained anally in Europe. Bourbon Spain had no thought of helping the colonies inrebellion against their king, and she viewed their ambitions to extendwestward with jealous concern, since she desired for herself both sidesof the Mississippi. Spain, however, had a grievance against Britain, for Britain would not yield Gibraltar, that rocky fragment of Spaincommanding the entrance to the Mediterranean which Britain had wrestedfrom her as she had wrested also Minorca and Florida. So, in April, 1779, Spain joined France in war on Great Britain. France agreed notonly to furnish an army for the invasion of England but never to makepeace until Britain had handed back Gibraltar. The allies planned toseize and hold the Isle of Wight. England has often been threatened andyet has been so long free from the tramp of hostile armies that we aretempted to dismiss lightly such dangers. But in the summer of 1779 thedanger was real. Of warships carrying fifty guns or more France andSpain together had one hundred and twenty-one, while Britain hadseventy. The British Channel fleet for the defense of home coastsnumbered forty ships of the line while France and Spain together hadsixty-six. Nor had Britain resources in any other quarter upon which shecould readily draw. In the West Indies she had twenty-one ships of theline while France had twenty-five. The British could not find comfortin any supposed superiority in the structure of their ships. Then andlater, as Nelson admitted when he was fighting Spain, the Spanish shipswere better built than the British. 

Lurking in the background to haunt British thought was the growingAmerican navy. John Paul was a Scots sailor, who had been a slave traderand subsequently master of a West India merchantman, and on goingto America had assumed the name of Jones. He was a man of boundlessambition, vanity, and vigor, and when he commanded American privateershe became a terror to the maritime people from whom he sprang. In thesummer of 1779 when Jones, with a squadron of four ships, was hauntingthe British coasts, every harbor was nervous. At Plymouth a boom blockedthe entrance, but other places had not even this defense. Sir WalterScott has described how, on September 17, 1779, a squadron, under JohnPaul Jones, came within gunshot of Leith, the port of Edinburgh. Thewhole surrounding country was alarmed, since for two days the squadronhad been in sight beating up the Firth of Forth. A sudden squall, whichdrove Jones back, probably saved Edinburgh from being plundered. A fewdays later Jones was burning ships in the Humber and, on the 23d ofSeptember, he met off Flamborough Head and, after a desperate fight, captured two British armed ships: the Serapis, a 40-gun vessel newlycommissioned, and the Countess of Scarborough, carrying 20 guns, bothof which were convoying a fleet. The fame of his exploit rang throughEurope. Jones was a regularly commissioned officer in the navy ofthe United States, but neutral powers, such as Holland, had not yetrecognized the republic and to them there was no American navy. TheBritish regarded him as a traitor and pirate and might possibly havehanged him had he fallen into their hands. 

Terrible days indeed were these for distracted England. In India, France, baulked twenty years earlier, was working for her entireoverthrow, and in North Africa, Spain was using the Moors to the sameend. As time passed the storm grew more violent. Before the year 1780ended Holland had joined England's enemies. Moreover, the northernstates of Europe, angry at British interference on the sea with theirtrade, and especially at her seizure of ships trying to enter blockadedports, took strong measures. On March 8, 1780, Russia issued aproclamation declaring that neutral ships must be allowed to come and goon the sea as they liked. They might be searched by a nation at war forarms and ammunition but for nothing else. It would moreover be illegalto declare a blockade of a port and punish neutrals for violating it, unless their ships were actually caught in an attempt to enter theport. Denmark and Sweden joined Russia in what was known as the ArmedNeutrality and promised that they would retaliate upon any nation whichdid not respect the conditions laid down. 

In domestic affairs Great Britain was divided. The Whigs and Tories werecarrying on a warfare shameless beyond even the bitter partisan strifeof later days. In Parliament the Whigs cheered at military defeatswhich might serve to discredit the Tory Government. The navy was tornby faction. When, in 1778, the Whig Admiral Keppel fought an indecisivenaval battle off Ushant and was afterwards accused by one of hisofficers, Sir Hugh Palliser, of not pressing the enemy hard enough, party passion was invoked. The Whigs were for Keppel, the Tories forPalliser, and the London mob was Whig. When Keppel was acquitted therewere riotous demonstrations; the house of Palliser was wrecked, and hehimself barely escaped with his life. Whig naval officers declared thatthey had no chance of fair treatment at the hands of a Tory Admiralty, and Lord Howe, among others, now refused to serve. For a time Britishsupremacy on the sea disappeared and it was only regained in April, 1782, when the Tory Admiral Rodney won a great victory in the WestIndies against the French. 

A spirit of violence was abroad in England. The disabilities of theRoman Catholics were a gross scandal. They might not vote or hold publicoffice. Yet when, in 1780, Parliament passed a bill removing some oftheir burdens dreadful riots broke out in London. A fanatic, Lord GeorgeGordon, led a mob to Westminster and, as Dr. Johnson expressed it, "insulted" both Houses of Parliament. The cowed ministry did nothingto check the disturbance. The mob burned Newgate jail, released theprisoners from this and other prisons, and made a deliberate attempt todestroy London by fire. Order was restored under the personal directionof the King, who, with all his faults, was no coward. At the same timethe Irish Parliament, under Protestant lead, was making a Declaration ofIndependence which, in 1782, England was obliged to admit by formal actof Parliament. For the time being, though the two monarchies had thesame king, Ireland, in name at least, was free of England. 

Washington's enemy thus had embarrassments enough. Yet these very years, 1779 and 1780, were the years in which he came nearest to despair. Thestrain of a great movement is not in the early days of enthusiasm, butin the slow years when idealism is tempered by the strife of opinionand self-interest which brings delay and disillusion. As the war wenton recruiting became steadily more difficult. The alliance with Franceactually worked to discourage it since it was felt that the causewas safe in the hands of this powerful ally. Whatever Great Britain'sdifficulties about finance they were light compared with Washington's. In time the "continental dollar" was worth only two cents. Yet soldierslong had to take this money at its face value for their pay, with theresult that the pay for three months would scarcely buy a pair ofboots. There is little wonder that more than once Washington had to faceformidable mutiny among his troops. The only ones on whom he could relywere the regulars enlisted by Congress and carefully trained. The worthof the militia, he said, "depends entirely on the prospects of the day;if favorable, they throng to you; if not, they will not move. " Theyplayed a chief part in the prosperous campaign of 1777, when Burgoynewas beaten. In the next year, before Newport, they wholly failed GeneralSullivan and deserted shamelessly to their homes. 

By 1779 the fighting had shifted to the South. Washington personallyremained in the North to guard the Hudson and to watch the British inNew York. He sent La Fayette to France in January, 1779, there to urgenot merely naval but military aid on a great scale. La Fayette came backafter an absence of a little over a year and in the end Francepromised eight thousand men who should be under Washington's control ascompletely as if they were American soldiers. The older nation acceptedthe principle that the officers in the younger nation which she washelping should rank in their grade before her own. It was a magnanimityreciprocated nearly a century and a half later when a great Americanarmy in Europe was placed under the supreme command of a Marshal ofFrance. 

CHAPTER IX. THE WAR IN THE SOUTH

After 1778 there was no more decisive fighting in the North. The Britishplan was to hold New York and keep there a threatening force, but tomake the South henceforth the central arena of the war. Accordingly, in 1779, they evacuated Rhode Island and left the magnificent harbor ofNewport to be the chief base for the French fleet and army in America. They also drew in their posts on the Hudson and left Washington free tostrengthen West Point and other defenses by which he was blocking theriver. Meanwhile they were striking staggering blows in the South. OnDecember 29, 1778, a British force landed two miles below Savannah, inGeorgia, lying near the mouth of the important Savannah River, and bynightfall, after some sharp fighting, took the place with its storesand shipping. Augusta, the capital of Georgia, lay about a hundredand twenty-five miles up the river. By the end of February, 1779, theBritish not only held Augusta but had established so strong a line ofposts in the interior that Georgia seemed to be entirely under theircontrol. 

Then followed a singular chain of events. Ever since hostilities hadbegun, in 1775, the revolutionary party had been dominant in the South. Yet now again in 1779 the British flag floated over the capital ofGeorgia. Some rejoiced and some mourned. Men do not change lightlytheir political allegiance. Probably Boston was the most completelyrevolutionary of American towns. Yet even in Boston there had been a sadprocession of exiles who would not turn against the King. The Southhad been more evenly divided. Now the Loyalists took heart and began toassert themselves. 

When the British seemed secure in Georgia bands of Loyalists marchedinto the British camp in furious joy that now their day was come, andgave no gentle advice as to the crushing of rebellion. Many a patriotfarmhouse was now destroyed and the hapless owner either killed ordriven to the mountains to live as best he could by hunting. Sometimeseven the children were shot down. It so happened that a company ofmilitia captured a large band of Loyalists marching to Augusta tosupport the British cause. Here was the occasion for the republicanpatriots to assert their principles. To them these Loyalists were guiltyof treason. Accordingly seventy of the prisoners were tried before acivil court and five of them were hanged. For this hanging of prisonersthe Loyalists, of course, retaliated in kind. Both the British andAmerican regular officers tried to restrain these fierce passions butthe spirit of the war in the South was ruthless. To this day many a taleof horror is repeated and, since Loyalist opinion was finally destroyed, no one survived to apportion blame to their enemies. It is probable thateach side matched the other in barbarity. 

The British hoped to sweep rapidly through the South, to master it upto the borders of Virginia, and then to conquer that breeding ground ofrevolution. In the spring of 1779 General Prevost marched from Georgiainto South Carolina. On the 12th of May he was before Charlestondemanding surrender. We are astonished now to read that, in responseto Prevost's demand, a proposal was made that South Carolina should beallowed to remain neutral and that at the end of the war it should jointhe victorious side. This certainly indicates a large body of opinionwhich was not irreconcilable with Great Britain and seems to justify thehope of the British that the beginnings of military success mightrally the mass of the people to their side. For the moment, however, Charleston did not surrender. The resistance was so stiff that Prevosthad to raise the siege and go back to Savannah. 

Suddenly, early in September, 1779, the French fleet under d'Estaingappeared before Savannah. It had come from the West Indies, partly toavoid the dreaded hurricane season of the autumn in those waters. TheBritish, practically without any naval defense, were confronted atonce by twenty-two French ships of the line, eleven frigates, and manytransports carrying an army. The great flotilla easily got rid of thefew British ships lying at Savannah. An American army, under GeneralLincoln, marched to join d'Estaing. The French landed some threethousand men, and the combined army numbered about six thousand. A siegebegan which, it seemed, could end in only one way. Prevost, however, with three thousand seven hundred men, nearly half of them sick, wasdefiant, and on the 9th of October the combined French and Americanarmies made a great assault. They met with disaster. D'Estaing wasseverely wounded. With losses of some nine hundred killed and wounded inthe bitter fighting the assailants drew off and soon raised the siege. The British losses were only fifty-four. In the previous year Frenchand Americans fighting together had utterly failed. Now they had failedagain and there was bitter recrimination between the defeated allies. D'Estaing sailed away and soon lost some of his ships in a violentstorm. Ill-fortune pursued him to the end. He served no more in thewar and in the Reign of Terror in Paris, in 1794, he perished on thescaffold. 

At Charleston the American General Lincoln was in command with about sixthousand men. The place, named after King Charles II, had been a centerof British influence before the war. That critical traveler, LordAdam Gordon, thought its people clever in business, courteous, andhospitable. Most of them, he says, made a visit to England at some timeduring life and it was the fashion to send there the children to beeducated. Obviously Charleston was fitted to be a British rallyingcenter in the South; yet it had remained in American hands since theopening of the war. In 1776 Sir Henry Clinton, the British Commander, had woefully failed in his assault on Charleston. Now in December, 1779, he sailed from New York to make a renewed effort. With him were threeof his best officer--Cornwallis, Simcoe, and Tarleton, the last twoskillful leaders of irregulars, recruited in America and used chieflyfor raids. The wintry voyage was rough; one of the vessels laden withcannon foundered and sank, and all the horses died. But Clinton reachedCharleston and was able to surround it on the landward side with an armyat least ten thousand strong. Tarleton's irregulars rode throughthe country. It is on record that he marched sixty-four miles intwenty-three hours and a hundred and five miles in fifty-four hours. Such mobility was irresistible. On the 12th of April, after a rideof thirty miles, Tarleton surprised, in the night, three regiments ofAmerican cavalry regulars at a place called Biggin's Bridge, routed themcompletely and, according to his own account, with the loss of three menwounded, carried off a hundred prisoners, four hundred horses, andalso stores and ammunition. There is no doubt that Tarleton's dragoonsbehaved with great brutality and it would perhaps have taught aneeded lesson if, as was indeed threatened by a British officer, MajorFerguson, a few of them had been shot on the spot for these outrages. Tarleton's dashing attacks isolated Charleston and there was nothing forLincoln to do but to surrender. This he did on the 12th of May. Burgoyneseemed to have been avenged. The most important city in the South hadfallen. "We look on America as at our feet, " wrote Horace Walpole. TheBritish advanced boldly into the interior. On the 29th of May Tarletonattacked an American force under Colonel Buford, killed over a hundredmen, carried off two hundred prisoners, and had only twenty-onecasualties. It is such scenes that reveal the true character of the warin the South. Above all it was a war of hard riding, often in the night, of sudden attack, and terrible bloodshed. 

After the fall of Charleston only a few American irregulars were to befound in South Carolina. It and Georgia seemed safe in British control. With British successes came the problem of governing the South. On theroyalist theory, the recovered land had been in a state of rebellion andwas now restored to its true allegiance. Every one who had taken uparms against the King was guilty of treason with death as the penalty. Clinton had no intention of applying this hard theory, but he wasreturning to New York and he had to establish a government on some legalbasis. During the first years of the war, Loyalists who would not acceptthe new order had been punished with great severity. Their day had nowcome. Clinton said that "every good man" must be ready to join in armsthe King's troops in order "to reestablish peace and good government. ""Wicked and desperate men" who still opposed the King should be punishedwith rigor and have their property confiscated. He offered pardon forpast offenses, except to those who had taken part in killing Loyalists"under the mock forms of justice. " No one was henceforth to be exemptedfrom the active duty of supporting the King's authority. 

Clinton's proclamation was very disturbing to the large element in SouthCarolina which did not desire to fight on either side. Every one mustnow be for or against the King, and many were in their secret heartsresolved to be against him. There followed an orgy of bloodshed whichdiscredits human nature. The patriots fled to the mountains rather thanyield and, in their turn, waylaid and murdered straggling Loyalists. Under pressure some republicans would give outward compliance to royalgovernment, but they could not be coerced into a real loyalty. Itrequired only a reverse to the King's forces to make them again activelyhostile. To meet the difficult situation Congress now made a disastrousblunder. On June 13, 1780, General Gates, the belauded victor atSaratoga, was given the command in the South. 

Camden, on the Wateree River, lies inland from Charleston about ahundred and twenty-five miles as the crow flies. The British hadoccupied it soon after the fall of Charleston, and it was now held bya small force under Lord Rawdon, one of the ablest of the Britishcommanders. Gates had superior numbers and could probably have takenCamden by a rapid movement; but the man had no real stomach forfighting. He delayed until, on the 14th of August, Cornwallis arrivedat Camden with reinforcements and with the fixed resolve to attack Gatesbefore Gates attacked him. On the early morning of the 16th of August, Cornwallis with two thousand men marching northward between swamps onboth flanks, met Gates with three thousand marching southward, each ofthem intending to surprise the other. A fierce struggle followed. Gateswas completely routed with a thousand casualties, a thousand prisoners, and the loss of nearly the whole of his guns and transport. The fleeingarmy was pursued for twenty miles by the relentless Tarleton. GeneralKalb, who had done much to organize the American army, was killed. Theenemies of Gates jeered at his riding away with the fugitives and hardlydrawing rein until after four days he was at Hillsborough, two hundredmiles away. His defense was that he "proceeded with all possibledespatch, " which he certainly did, to the nearest point where he couldreorganize his forces. His career was, however, ended. He was deprivedof his command, and Washington appointed to succeed him GeneralNathanael Greene. 

In spite of the headlong flight of Gates the disaster at Camden had onlya transient effect. The war developed a number of irregular leaders onthe American side who were never beaten beyond recovery, no matter whatmight be the reverses of the day. The two most famous are Francis Marionand Thomas Sumter. Marion, descended from a family of Huguenot exiles, was slight in frame and courteous in manner; Sumter, tall, powerful, andrough, was the vigorous frontiersman in type. Threatened men livelong: Sumter died in 1832, at the age of ninety-six, the last survivinggeneral of the Revolution. Both men had had prolonged experience infrontier fighting against the Indians. Tarleton called Marion the "oldswamp fox" because he often escaped through using by-paths across thegreat swamps of the country. British communications were always indanger. A small British force might find itself in the midst of a hostwhich had suddenly come together as an army, only to dissolve next dayinto its elements of hardy farmers, woodsmen, and mountaineers. 

After the victory at Camden Cornwallis advanced into North Carolina, andsent Major Ferguson, one of his most trusted officers, with a forceof about a thousand men, into the mountainous country lying westward, chiefly to secure Loyalist recruits. If attacked in force Fergusonwas to retreat and rejoin his leader. The Battle of King's Mountain ishardly famous in the annals of the world, and yet, in some ways, itwas a decisive event. Suddenly Ferguson found himself beset by hostilebands, coming from the north, the south, the east, and the west. When, in obedience to his orders, he tried to retreat he found the wayblocked, and his messages were intercepted, so that Cornwallis was notaware of the peril. Ferguson, harassed, outnumbered, at last took refugeon King's Mountain, a stony ridge on the western border between the twoCarolinas. The north side of the mountain was a sheer impassable cliffand, since the ridge was only half a mile long, Ferguson thought thathis force could hold it securely. He was, however, fighting an enemydeadly with the rifle and accustomed to fire from cover. The sides andtop of King's Mountain were wooded and strewn with boulders. The motleyassailants crept up to the crest while pouring a deadly fire on any ofthe defenders who exposed themselves. Ferguson was killed and in the endhis force surrendered, on October 7, 1780, with four hundred casualtiesand the loss of more than seven hundred prisoners. The Americancasualties were eighty-eight. In reprisal for earlier acts on the otherside, the victors insulted the dead body of Ferguson and hanged nine oftheir prisoners on the limb of a great tulip tree. Then the improvisedarmy scattered. *

 * See Chapter IX, "Pioneers of the Old Southwest", by Constance Lindsay Skinner in "The Chronicles of America. "

While the conflict for supremacy in the South was still uncertain, inthe Northwest the Americans made a stroke destined to have astoundingresults. Virginia had long coveted lands in the valleys of the Ohio andthe Mississippi. It was in this region that Washington had first seenactive service, helping to wrest that land from France. The country waswild. There was almost no settlement; but over a few forts on the upperMississippi and in the regions lying eastward to the Detroit River therewas that flicker of a red flag which meant that the Northwest was underBritish rule. George Rogers Clark, like Washington a Virginian landsurveyor, was a strong, reckless, brave frontiersman. Early in 1778Virginia gave him a small sum of money, made him a lieutenant colonel, and authorized him to raise troops for a western adventure. He had lessthan two hundred men when he appeared a little later at Kaskaskia nearthe Mississippi in what is now Illinois and captured the small Britishgarrison, with the friendly consent of the French settlers about thefort. He did the same thing at Cahokia, farther up the river. TheFrench scattered through the western country naturally sided with theAmericans, fighting now in alliance with France. The British sent outa force from Detroit to try to check the efforts of Clark, but inFebruary, 1779, the indomitable frontiersman surprised and captured thisforce at Vincennes on the Wabash. Thus did Clark's two hundred famishedand ragged men take possession of the Northwest, and, when peace wasmade, this vast domain, an empire in extent, fell to the United States. Clark's exploit is one of the pregnant romances of history. *

 * See Chapters III and IV in "The Old Northwest" by Frederic Austin Ogg in "The Chronicles of America". 

Perhaps the most sorrowful phase of the Revolution was the internalconflict waged between its friends and its enemies in America, whereneighbor fought against neighbor. During this pitiless struggle thestrength of the Loyalists tended steadily to decline; and they came atlast to be regarded everywhere by triumphant revolution as a vile peoplewho should bear the penalties of outcasts. In this attitude towards themBoston had given a lead which the rest of the country eagerly followed. To coerce Loyalists local committees sprang up everywhere. It must besaid that the Loyalists gave abundant provocation. They sneered at rebelofficers of humble origin as convicts and shoeblacks. There should besome fine hanging, they promised, on the return of the King's men toBoston. Early in the Revolution British colonial governors, like LordDunmore of Virginia, adopted the policy of reducing the rebels byharrying their coasts. Sailors would land at night from ships and committheir ravages in the light of burning houses. Soldiers would dart outbeyond the British lines, burn a village, carry off some Whig farmers, and escape before opposing forces could rally. Governor Tryon of NewYork was specially active in these enterprises and to this day a specialodium attaches to his name. 

For these ravages, and often with justice, the Loyalists were heldresponsible. The result was a bitterness which fired even the calmspirit of Benjamin Franklin and led him when the day came for peace todeclare that the plundering and murdering adherents of King Georgewere the ones who should pay for damage and not the States which hadconfiscated Loyalist property. Lists of Loyalist names were sometimesposted and then the persons concerned were likely to be the victims ofany one disposed to mischief. Sometimes a suspected Loyalist would findan effigy hung on a tree before his own door with a hint that next timethe figure might be himself. A musket ball might come whizzing throughhis window. Many a Loyalist was stripped, plunged in a barrel of tar, and then rolled in feathers, taken sometimes from his own bed. 

Punishment for loyalism was not, however, left merely to chance. Evenbefore the Declaration of Independence, Congress, sitting itself ina city where loyalism was strong, urged the States to act sternly inrepressing Loyalist opinion. They did not obey every urging of Congressas eagerly as they responded to this one. In practically everyState Test Acts were passed and no one was safe who did not carry acertificate that he was free of any suspicion of loyalty to King George. Magistrates were paid a fee for these certificates and thus had a goldenreason for insisting that Loyalists should possess them. To secure acertificate the holder must forswear allegiance to the King and promisesupport to the State at war with him. An unguarded word even about thevalue in gold of the continental dollar might lead to the adding of thespeaker's name to the list of the proscribed. Legislatures passed billsdenouncing Loyalists. The names in Massachusetts read like a list ofthe leading families of New England. The "Black List" of Pennsylvaniacontained four hundred and ninety names of Loyalists charged withtreason, and Philadelphia had the grim experience of seeing twoLoyalists led to the scaffold with ropes around their necks and hanged. Most of the persecuted Loyalists lost all their property and remainedexiles from their former homes. The self-appointed committees took inhand the task of disciplining those who did not fly, and the rabbleoften pushed matters to brutal extremes. When we remember thatWashington himself regarded Tories as the vilest of mankind and unfit tolive, we can imagine the spirit of mobs, which had sometimes the furtherincentive of greed for Loyalist property. Loyalists had the experienceof what we now call boycotting when they could not buy or sell in theshops and were forced to see their own shops plundered. Mills would notgrind their corn. Their cattle were maimed and poisoned. They couldnot secure payment of debts due to them or, if payment was made, theyreceived it in the debased continental currency at its face value. Theymight not sue in a court of law, nor sell their property, nor make awill. It was a felony for them to keep arms. No Loyalist might holdoffice, or practice law or medicine, or keep a school. 

Some Loyalists were deported to the wilderness in the back country. Many took refuge within the British lines, especially at New York. ManyLoyalists created homes elsewhere. Some went to England only tofind melancholy disillusion of hope that a grateful motherland wouldunderstand and reward their sacrifices. Large numbers found their way toNova Scotia and to Canada, north of the Great Lakes, and there playeda part in laying the foundation of the Dominion of today. The city ofToronto with a population of half a million is rooted in the Loyalisttraditions of its Tory founders. Simcoe, the first Governor of UpperCanada, who made Toronto his capital, was one of the most enterprisingof the officers who served with Cornwallis in the South and surrenderedwith him at Yorktown. 

The State of New York acquired from the forfeited lands of Loyalistsa sum approaching four million dollars, a great amount in those days. Other States profited in a similar way. Every Loyalist whose propertywas seized had a direct and personal grievance. He could join theBritish army and fight against his oppressors, and this he did: NewYork furnished about fifteen thousand men to fight on the British side. Plundered himself, he could plunder his enemies, and this too he didboth by land and sea. In the autumn of 1778 ships manned chiefly byLoyalist refugees were terrorizing the coast from Massachusetts to NewJersey. They plundered Martha's Vineyard, burned some lesser towns, such as New Bedford, and showed no quarter to small parties of Americantroops whom they managed to intercept. 

What happened on the coast happened also in the interior. At Wyoming inthe northeastern part of Pennsylvania, in July, 1778, during a raid ofLoyalists, aided by Indians, there was a brutal massacre, the horrors ofwhich long served to inspire hate for the British. A little later inthe same year similar events took place at Cherry Valley, in central NewYork. Burning houses, the dead bodies not only of men but of women andchildren scalped by the savage allies of the Loyalists, desolation andruin in scenes once peaceful and happy such horrors American patriotismlearned to associate with the Loyalists. These in their turn rememberedthe slow martyrdom of their lives as social outcasts, the threats andplunder which in the end forced them to fly, the hardships, starvation, and death to their loved ones which were wont to follow. The conflictis perhaps the most tragic and irreconcilable in the whole story of theRevolution. 

CHAPTER X. FRANCE TO THE RESCUE

During 1778 and 1779 French effort had failed. Now France resolved to dosomething decisive. She never sent across the sea the eight thousand menpromised to La Fayette but by the spring of 1780 about this number weregathered at Brest to find that transport was inadequate. The leader wasa French noble, the Comte de Rochambeau, an old campaigner, now in hisfifty-fifth year, who had fought against England before in the SevenYears' War and had then been opposed by Clinton, Cornwallis, and LordGeorge Germain. He was a sound and prudent soldier who shares with LaFayette the chief glory of the French service in America. Rochambeau hadfought at the second battle of Minden, where the father of La Fayettehad fallen, and he had for the ardent young Frenchman the amiable regardof a father and sometimes rebuked his impulsiveness in that spirit. Hestudied the problem in America with the insight of a trained leader. Before he left France he made the pregnant comment on the outlook:"Nothing without naval supremacy. " About the same time Washington waswriting to La Fayette that a decisive naval supremacy was a fundamentalneed. 

A gallant company it was which gathered at Brest. Probably no other landthan France could have sent forth on a crusade for democratic liberty aband of aristocrats who had little thought of applying to their own landthe principles for which they were ready to fight in America. Over someof them hung the shadow of the guillotine; others were to ride the stormof the French Revolution and to attain fame which should surpass theirsanguine dreams. Rochambeau himself, though he narrowly escaped duringthe Reign of Terror, lived to extreme old age and died a Marshal ofFrance. Berthier, one of his officers, became one of Napoleon's marshalsand died just when Napoleon, whom he had deserted, returned from Elba. Dumas became another of Napoleon's generals. He nearly perished in theretreat from Moscow but lived, like Rochambeau, to extreme old age. Oneof the gayest of the company was the Duc de Lauzun, a noted libertine inFrance but, as far as the record goes, a man of blameless propriety inAmerica. He died on the scaffold during the French Revolution. So, too, did his companion, the Prince de Broglie, in spite of the protest ofhis last words that he was faithful to the principles of the Revolution, some of which he had learned in America. Another companion was theSwedish Count Fersen, later the devoted friend of the unfortunate QueenMarie Antoinette, the driver of the carriage in which the royal familymade the famous flight to Varennes in 1791, and himself destined to betrampled to death by a Swedish mob in 1810. Other old and famous namesthere were: Laval-Montmorency, Mirabeau, Talleyrand, Saint-Simon. It hasbeen said that the names of the French officers in America read like alist of medieval heroes in the Chronicles of Froissart. 

Only half of the expected ships were ready at Brest and only fivethousand five hundred men could embark. The vessels were, of course, very crowded. Rochambeau cut down the space allowed for personaleffects. He took no horse for himself and would allow none to go, buthe permitted a few dogs. Forty-five ships set sail, "a truly imposingsight, " said one of those on board. We have reports of their ennuion the long voyage of seventy days, of their amusements and theirdevotions, for twice daily were prayers read on deck. They sailed intoNewport on the 11th of July and the inhabitants of that still primitivespot illuminated their houses as best they could. Then the armysettled down at Newport and there it remained for many weary months. Reinforcements never came, partly through mismanagement in France, partly through the vigilance of the British fleet, which was on guardbefore Brest. The French had been for generations the deadly enemies ofthe English Colonies and some of the French officers noted the reservewith which they were received. The ice was, however, soon broken. Theybrought with them gold, and the New England merchants liked this relieffrom the debased continental currency. Some of the New England ladieswere beautiful, and the experienced Lauzun expresses glowing admirationfor a prim Quakeress whose simple dress he thought more attractive thanthe elaborate modes of Paris. 

The French dazzled the ragged American army by their display ofwaving plumes and of uniforms in striking colors. They wondered at thequantities of tea drunk by their friends and so do we when we rememberthe political hatred for tea. They made the blunder common in Europe ofthinking that there were no social distinctions in America. Washingtoncould have told him a different story. Intercourse was at firstdifficult, for few of the Americans spoke French and fewer still of theFrench spoke English. Sometimes the talk was in Latin, pronounced by anAmerican scholar as not too bad. A French officer writing in Latin toan American friend announces his intention to learn English: "Inglicamlinguam noscere conabor. " He made the effort and he and his fellowofficers learned a quaint English speech. When Rochambeau and Washingtonfirst met they conversed through La Fayette, as interpreter, but in timethe older man did very well in the language of his American comrade inarms. 

For a long time the French army effected nothing. Washington longedto attack New York and urged the effort, but the wise and experiencedRochambeau applied his principle, "nothing without naval supremacy, "and insisted that in such an attack a powerful fleet should act witha powerful army, and, for the moment, the French had no powerful fleetavailable. The British were blockading in Narragansett Bay the Frenchfleet which lay there. Had the French army moved away from Newport theirfleet would almost certainly have become a prey to the British. Forthe moment there was nothing to do but to wait. The French preserved anadmirable discipline. Against their army there are no records of outrageand plunder such as we have against the German allies of the British. Wemust remember, however, that the French were serving in the country oftheir friends, with every restraint of good feeling which this involved. Rochambeau told his men that they must not be the theft of a bit ofwood, or of any vegetables, or of even a sheaf of straw. He threatenedthe vice which he called "sonorous drunkenness, " and even lack ofcleanliness, with sharp punishment. The result was that a month afterlanding he could say that not a cabbage had been stolen. Our credulityis strained when we are told that apple trees with their fruit overhungthe tents of his soldiers and remained untouched. Thousands flocked tosee the French camp. The bands played and Puritan maidens of all gradesof society danced with the young French officers and we are told, whether we believe it or not, that there was the simple innocence ofthe Garden of Eden. The zeal of the French officers and the friendlydisposition of the men never failed. There had been bitter quarrelsin 1778 and 1779 and now the French were careful to be on their goodbehavior in America. Rochambeau had been instructed to place himselfunder the command of Washington, to whom were given the honors of aMarshal of France. The French admiral, had, however, been given no suchinstructions and Washington had no authority over the fleet. 

Meanwhile events were happening which might have brought a Britishtriumph. On September 14, 1780, there arrived and anchored at SandyHook, New York, fourteen British ships of the line under Rodney, thedoughtiest of the British admirals afloat. Washington, with his armyheadquarters at West Point, on guard to keep the British from advancingup the Hudson, was looking for the arrival, not of a British fleet, butof a French fleet, from the West Indies. For him these were very darkdays. The recent defeat at Camden was a crushing blow. Congress wasinept and had in it men, as the patient General Greene said, "withoutprinciples, honor or modesty. " The coming of the British fleet was anew and overwhelming discouragement, and, on the 18th of September, Washington left West Point for a long ride to Hartford in Connecticut, half way between the two headquarters, there to take counsel with theFrench general. Rochambeau, it was said, had been purposely created tounderstand Washington, but as yet the two leaders had not met. It isthe simple truth that Washington had to go to the French as a beggar. Rochambeau said later that Washington was afraid to reveal the extentof his distress. He had to ask for men and for ships, but he had alsoto ask for what a proud man dislikes to ask, for money from the strangerwho had come to help him. 

The Hudson had long been the chief object of Washington's anxiety andnow it looked as if the British intended some new movement up the river, as indeed they did. Clinton had not expected Rodney's squadron, but itarrived opportunely and, when it sailed up to New York from Sandy Hook, on the 16th of September, he began at once to embark his army, takingpains at the same time to send out reports that he was going to theChesapeake. Washington concluded that the opposite was true and that hewas likely to be going northward. At West Point, where the Hudson flowsthrough a mountainous gap, Washington had strong defenses on bothshores of the river. His batteries commanded its whole width, butshore batteries were ineffective against moving ships. The embarkingof Clinton's army meant that he planned operations on land. He might begoing to Rhode Island or to Boston but he might also dash up the Hudson. It was an anxious leader who, with La Fayette and Alexander Hamilton, rode away from headquarters to Hartford. 

The officer in command at West Point was Benedict Arnold. No general onthe American side had a more brilliant record or could show more scarsof battle. We have seen him leading an army through the wilderness toQuebec, and incurring hardships almost incredible. Later he is found onLake Champlain, fighting on both land and water. When in the next yearthe Americans succeeded at Saratoga it was Arnold who bore the brunt ofthe fighting. At Quebec and again at Saratoga he was severely wounded. In the summer of 1778 he was given the command at Philadelphia, afterthe British evacuation. It was a troubled time. Arnold was concernedwith confiscations of property for treason and with disputes aboutownership. Impulsive, ambitious, and with a certain element ofcoarseness in his nature, he made enemies. He was involved in bitterstrife with both Congress and the State government of Pennsylvania. After a period of tension and privation in war, one of slackness andluxury is almost certain to follow. Philadelphia, which had recentlysuffered for want of bare necessities, now relapsed into gay indulgence. Arnold lived extravagantly. He played a conspicuous part in societyand, a widower of thirty-five, was successful in paying court to MissShippen, a young lady of twenty, with whom, as Washington said, all theAmerican officers were in love. 

Malignancy was rampant and Arnold was pursued with great bitterness. Joseph Reed, the President of the Executive Council of Pennsylvania, not only brought charge against him of abusing his position for his ownadvantage, but also laid the charges before each State government. Inthe end Arnold was tried by court-martial and after long and inexcusabledelay, on January 26, 1780, he was acquitted of everything but theimprudence of using, in an emergency, public wagons to remove privateproperty, and of granting irregularly a pass to a ship to enter the portof Philadelphia. Yet the court ordered that for these trifles Arnoldshould receive a public reprimand from the Commander-in-Chief. Washington gave the reprimand in terms as gentle as possible, and when, in July, 1780, Arnold asked for the important command at West Point, Washington readily complied probably with relief that so important aposition should be in such good hands. 

The treason of Arnold now came rapidly to a head. The man wasembittered. He had rendered great services and yet had been persecutedwith spiteful persistence. The truth seems to be, too, that Arnoldthought America ripe for reconciliation with Great Britain. He dreamedthat he might be the saviour of his country. Monk had reconciled theEnglish republic to the restored Stuart King Charles II; Arnold mightreconcile the American republic to George III for the good of both. Thatreconciliation he believed was widely desired in America. He tried topersuade himself that to change sides in this civil strife was no moreculpable then to turn from one party to another in political life. Heforgot, however, that it is never honorable to betray a trust. 

It is almost certain that Arnold received a large sum in money for histreachery. However this may be, there was treason in his heart when heasked for and received the command at West Point, and he intended to usehis authority to surrender that vital post to the British. And nowon the 18th of September Washington was riding northeastward intoConnecticut, British troops were on board ships in New York and all wasready. On the 20th of September the Vulture, sloop of war, sailed up theHudson from New York and anchored at Stony Point, a few miles below WestPoint. On board the Vulture was the British officer who was treatingwith Arnold and who now came to arrange terms with him, MajorJohn Andre, Clinton's young adjutant general, a man of attractivepersonality. Under cover of night Arnold sent off a boat to bring Andreashore to a remote thicket of fir trees, outside the American lines. There the final plans were made. The British fleet, carrying an army, was to sail up the river. A heavy chain had been placed across the riverat West Point to bar the way of hostile ships. Under pretense of repairsa link was to be taken out and replaced by a rope which would breakeasily. The defenses of West Point were to be so arranged that theycould not meet a sudden attack and Arnold was to surrender with hisforce of three thousand men. Such a blow following the disasters atCharleston and Camden might end the strife. Britain was prepared toyield everything but separation; and America, Arnold said, could nowmake an honorable peace. 

A chapter of accidents prevented the testing. Had Andre been rowedashore by British tars they could have taken him back to the ship athis command before daylight. As it was the American boatmen, suspiciousperhaps of the meaning of this talk at midnight between an Americanofficer and a British officer, both of them in uniform, refused to rowAndre back to the ship because their own return would be dangerous indaylight. Contrary to his instructions and wishes Andre accompaniedArnold to a house within the American lines to wait until he could betaken off under cover of night. Meanwhile, however, an American batteryon shore, angry at the Vulture, lying defiantly within range, openedfire upon her and she dropped down stream some miles. This was alarming. Arnold, however, arranged with a man to row Andre down the river andabout midday went back to West Point. 

It was uncertain how far the Vulture had gone. The vigilance of thoseguarding the river was aroused and Andre's guide insisted that he shouldgo to the British lines by land. He was carrying compromising papers andwearing civilian dress when seized by an American party and held underclose arrest. Arnold meanwhile, ignorant of this delay, was waiting forthe expected advance up the river of the British fleet. He learnedof the arrest of Andre while at breakfast on the morning of thetwenty-fifth, waiting to be joined by Washington, who had just riddenin from Hartford. Arnold received the startling news with extraordinarycomposure, finished the subject under discussion, and then left thetable under pretext of a summons from across the river. Within a fewminutes his barge was moving swiftly to the Vulture eighteen miles away. Thus Arnold escaped. The unhappy Andre was hanged as a spy on the 2d ofOctober. He met his fate bravely. Washington, it is said, shed tears atits stern necessity under military law. Forty years later the bones ofAndre were reburied in Westminster Abbey, a tribute of pity for a fineofficer. 

The treason of Arnold is not in itself important, yet Washington wrotewith deep conviction that Providence had directly intervened to savethe American cause. Arnold might be only one of many. Washington said, indeed, that it was a wonder there were not more. In a civil war everyone of importance is likely to have ties with both sides, regrets forthe friends he has lost, misgivings in respect to the course he hasadopted. In April, 1779, Arnold had begun his treason by expressingdiscontent at the alliance with France then working so disastrously. His future lay before him; he was still under forty; he had just marriedinto a family of position; he expected that both he and his descendantswould spend their lives in America and he must have known that contemptwould follow them for the conduct which he planned if it was regardedby public opinion as base. Voices in Congress, too, had denounced thealliance with France as alliance with tyranny, political and religious. Members praised the liberties of England and had declared that theDeclaration of Independence must be revoked and that now it could bedone with honor since the Americans had proved their metal. There wasroom for the fear that the morale of the Americans was giving way. 

The defection of Arnold might also have military results. He hadbargained to be made a general in the British army and he had intimateknowledge of the weak points in Washington's position. He advisedthe British that if they would do two things, offer generous terms tosoldiers serving in the American army, and concentrate their effort, they could win the war. With a cynical knowledge of the weaker side ofhuman nature, he declared that it was too expensive a business to bringmen from England to serve in America. They could be secured morecheaply in America; it would be necessary only to pay them better thanWashington could pay his army. As matters stood the Continental troopswere to have half pay for seven years after the close of the war andgrants of land ranging from one hundred acres for a private to elevenhundred acres for a general. Make better offers than this, urged Arnold;"Money will go farther than arms in America. " If the British wouldconcentrate on the Hudson where the defenses were weak they could drivea wedge between North and South. If on the other hand they preferredto concentrate in the South, leaving only a garrison in New York, theycould overrun Virginia and Maryland and then the States farther southwould give up a fight in which they were already beaten. Energy andenterprise, said Arnold, will quickly win the war. 

In the autumn of 1780 the British cause did, indeed, seem near triumph. An election in England in October gave the ministry an increasedmajority and with this renewed determination. When Holland, long asecret enemy, became an open one in December, 1780, Admiral Rodneydescended on the Dutch island of St. Eustatius, in the West Indies, where the Americans were in the habit of buying great quantities ofstores and on the 3d of February, 1781, captured the place with twohundred merchant ships, half a dozen men-of-war, and stores to the valueof three million pounds. The capture cut off one chief source of supplyto the United States. By January, 1781, a crisis in respect to moneycame to a head. Fierce mutinies broke out because there was no moneyto provide food, clothing, or pay for the army and the men were in adestitute condition. "These people are at the end of their resources, "wrote Rochambeau in March. Arnold's treason, the halting voices inCongress, the disasters in the South, the British success in cutting offsupplies of stores from St. Eustatius, the sordid problem of money--allthese were well fitted to depress the worn leader so anxiously watchingon the Hudson. It was the dark hour before the dawn. 

CHAPTER XI. YORKTOWN

The critical stroke of the war was near. In the South, after GeneralGreene superseded Gates in the command, the tide of war began to turn. Cornwallis now had to fight a better general than Gates. Greene arrivedat Charlotte, North Carolina, in December. He found an army badlyequipped, wretchedly clothed, and confronted by a greatly superiorforce. He had, however, some excellent officers, and he did not scorn, as Gates, with the stiff military traditions of a regular soldier, hadscorned, the aid of guerrilla leaders like Marion and Sumter. Servingwith Greene was General Daniel Morgan, the enterprising and resourcefulVirginia rifleman, who had fought valorously at Quebec, at Saratoga, andlater in Virginia. Steuben was busy in Virginia holding the British incheck and keeping open the line of communication with the North. Themobility and diversity of the American forces puzzled Cornwallis. Whenhe marched from Camden into North Carolina he hoped to draw Greene intoa battle and to crush him as he had crushed Gates. He sent Tarleton witha smaller force to strike a deadly blow at Morgan who was threateningthe British garrisons at the points in the interior farther south. Therewas no more capable leader than Tarleton; he had won many victories; butnow came his day of defeat. On January 17, 1781, he met Morgan at theCowpens, about thirty miles west from King's Mountain. Morgan, not quitesure of the discipline of his men, stood with his back to a broad riverso that retreat was impossible. Tarleton had marched nearly all nightover bad roads; but, confident in the superiority of his weary andhungry veterans, he advanced to the attack at daybreak. The result was acomplete disaster. Tarleton himself barely got away with two hundredand seventy men and left behind nearly nine hundred casualties andprisoners. 

Cornwallis had lost one-third of his effective army. There was nothingfor him to do but to take his loss and still to press on northwardin the hope that the more southerly inland posts could take care ofthemselves. In the early spring of 1781, when heavy rains were makingthe roads difficult and the rivers almost impassable, Greene was luringCornwallis northward and Cornwallis was chasing Greene. At Hillsborough, in the northwest corner of North Carolina, Cornwallis issued aproclamation saying that the colony was once more under the authority ofthe King and inviting the Loyalists, bullied and oppressed during nearlysix years, to come out openly on the royal side. On the 15th of MarchGreene took a stand and offered battle at Guilford Court House. In theearly afternoon, after a march of twelve miles without food, Cornwallis, with less than two thousand men, attacked Greene's force of aboutfour thousand. By evening the British held the field and had capturedGreene's guns. But they had lost heavily and they were two hundred milesfrom their base. Their friends were timid, and in fact few, and theirnumerous enemies were filled with passionate resolution. 

Cornwallis now wrote to urge Clinton to come to his aid. Abandon NewYork, he said; bring the whole British force into Virginia and end thewar by one smashing stroke; that would be better than sticking tosalt pork in New York and sending only enough men to Virginia to stealtobacco. Cornwallis could not remain where he was, far from the sea. Goback to Camden he would not after a victory, and thus seem to admit adefeat. So he decided to risk all and go forward. By hard marching heled his army down the Cape Fear River to Wilmington on the sea, andthere he arrived on the 9th of April. Greene, however, simply would notdo what Cornwallis wished--stay in the north to be beaten by a secondsmashing blow. He did what Cornwallis would not do; he marched back intothe South and disturbed the British dream that now the country was heldsecurely. It mattered little that, after this, the British won minorvictories. Lord Rawdon, still holding Camden, defeated Greene on the25th of April at Hobkirk's Hill. None the less did Rawdon find hisposition untenable and he, too, was forced to march to the sea, whichhe reached at a point near Charleston. Augusta, the capital of Georgia, fell to the Americans on the 5th of June and the operations of thesummer went decisively in their favor. The last battle in the field ofthe farther South was fought on the 8th of September at Eutaw Springs, about fifty miles northwest of Charleston. The British held theirposition and thus could claim a victory. But it was fruitless. Theyhad been forced steadily to withdraw. All the boasted fabric of royalgovernment in the South had come down with a crash and the Tories whohad supported it were having evil days. 

While these events were happening farther south, Cornwallis himself, without waiting for word from Clinton in New York, had adopted his ownpolicy and marched from Wilmington northward into Virginia. BenedictArnold was now in Virginia doing what mischief he could to his formerfriends. In January he burned the little town of Richmond, destined inthe years to come to be a great center in another civil war. Some twentymiles south from Richmond lay in a strong position Petersburg, lateralso to be drenched with blood shed in civil strife. Arnold was alreadyat Petersburg when Cornwallis arrived on the 20th of May. He was now inhigh spirits. He did not yet realize the extent of the failure farthersouth. Virginia he believed to be half loyalist at heart. The negroeswould, he thought, turn against their masters when they knew that theBritish were strong enough to defend them. Above all he had a finelydisciplined army of five thousand men. Cornwallis was the more confidentwhen he knew by whom he was opposed. In April Washington had placedLa Fayette in charge of the defense of Virginia, and not only was LaFayette young and untried in such a command but he had at first onlythree thousand badly-trained men to confront the formidable Britishgeneral. Cornwallis said cheerily that "the boy" was certainly now hisprey and began the task of catching him. 

An exciting chase followed. La Fayette did some good work. It wasimpossible, with his inferior force, to fight Cornwallis, but he couldtire him out by drawing him into long marches. When Cornwallis advancedto attack La Fayette at Richmond, La Fayette was not there but hadslipped away and was able to use rivers and mountains for his defense. Cornwallis had more than one string to his bow. The legislature ofVirginia was sitting at Charlottesville, lying in the interior nearlya hundred miles northwest from Richmond, and Cornwallis conceivedthe daring plan of raiding Charlottesville, capturing the Governor ofVirginia, Thomas Jefferson, and, at one stroke, shattering the civiladministration. Tarleton was the man for such an enterprise of hardriding and bold fighting and he nearly succeeded. Jefferson indeedescaped by rapid flight but Tarleton took the town, burned the publicrecords, and captured ammunition and arms. But he really effectedlittle. La Fayette was still unconquered. His army was growing and theBritish were finding that Virginia, like New England, was definitelyagainst them. 

At New York, meanwhile, Clinton was in a dilemma. He was dismayed at thenews of the march of Cornwallis to Virginia. Cornwallis had been so longpractically independent in the South that he assumed not only the rightto shape his own policy but adopted a certain tartness in his despatchesto Clinton, his superior. When now, in this tone, he urged Clinton toabandon New York and join him Clinton's answer on the 26th of June wasa definite order to occupy some port in Virginia easily reached fromthe sea, to make it secure, and to send to New York reinforcements. The French army at Newport was beginning to move towards New York andClinton had intercepted letters from Washington to La Fayette revealinga serious design to make an attack with the aid of the French fleet. Such was the game which fortune was playing with the British generals. Each desired the other to abandon his own plans and to come to hisaid. They were agreed, however, that some strong point must be held inVirginia as a naval base, and on the 2d of August Cornwallis establishedthis base at Yorktown, at the mouth of the York River, a mile wide whereit flows into Chesapeake Bay. His cannon could command the whole widthof the river and keep in safety ships anchored above the town. Yorktownlay about half way between New York and Charleston and from here a fleetcould readily carry a military force to any needed point on the sea. La Fayette with a growing army closed in on Yorktown, and Cornwallis, almost before he knew it, was besieged with no hope of rescue except bya fleet. 

Then it was that from the sea, the restless and mysterious sea, camethe final decision. Man seems so much the sport of circumstance thatapparent trifles, remote from his consciousness, appear at times todetermine his fate; it is a commonplace of romance that a pretty faceor a stray bullet has altered the destiny not merely of families but ofnations. And now, in the American Revolution, it was not forts on theHudson, nor maneuvers in the South, that were to decide the issue, butthe presence of a few more French warships than the British could musterat a given spot and time. Washington had urged in January that Franceshould plan to have at least temporary naval superiority in Americanwaters, in accordance with Rochambeau's principle, "Nothing withoutnaval supremacy. " Washington wished to concentrate against New York, but the French were of a different mind, believing that the greateffort should be made in Chesapeake Bay. There the British could haveno defenses like those at New York, and the French fleet, which wasstationed in the West Indies, could reach more readily than New York apoint in the South. 

Early in May Rochambeau knew that a French fleet was coming to his aidbut not yet did he know where the stroke should be made. It was clear, however, that there was nothing for the French to do at Newport, and, by the beginning of June, Rochambeau prepared to set his army in motion. The first step was to join Washington on the Hudson and at any ratealarm Clinton as to an imminent attack on New York and hold him to thatspot. After nearly a year of idleness the French soldiers were delightedthat now at last there was to be an active movement. The long march fromNewport to New York began. In glowing June, amid the beauties of nature, now overcome by intense heat and obliged to march at two o'clock in themorning, now drenched by heavy rains, the French plodded on, and joinedtheir American comrades along the Hudson early in July. 

By the 14th of August Washington knew two things--that a great Frenchfleet under the Comte de Grasse had sailed for the Chesapeake and thatthe British army had reached Yorktown. Soon the two allied armies, bothlying on the east side of the Hudson, moved southward. On the 20th ofAugust the Americans began to cross the river at King's Ferry, eightmiles below Peekskill. Washington had to leave the greater part of hisarmy before New York, and his meager force of some two thousand was soonover the river in spite of torrential rains. By the 24th of August theFrench, too, had crossed with some four thousand men and with theirheavy equipment. The British made no move. Clinton was, however, watching these operations nervously. The united armies marched downthe right bank of the Hudson so rapidly that they had to leave usefuleffects behind and some grumbled at the privation. Clinton thought hisenemy might still attack New York from the New Jersey shore. He knewthat near Staten Island the Americans were building great bakeries as ifto feed an army besieging New York. Suddenly on the 29th of August thearmies turned away from New York southwestward across New Jersey, andstill only the two leaders knew whither they were bound. 

American patriotism has liked to dwell on this last great march ofWashington. To him this was familiar country; it was here that he hadharassed Clinton on the march from Philadelphia to New York three longyears before. The French marched on the right at the rate of aboutfifteen miles a day. The country was beautiful and the roads were good. Autumn had come and the air was bracing. The peaches hung ripe on thetrees. The Dutch farmers who, four years earlier, had been plaintiveabout the pillage by the Hessians, now seemed prosperous enough andbrought abundance of provisions to the army. They had just gatheredtheir harvest. The armies passed through Princeton, with its finecollege, numbering as many as fifty students; then on to Trenton, andacross the Delaware to Philadelphia, which the vanguard reached on the3d of September. 

There were gala scenes in Philadelphia. Twenty thousand people witnesseda review of the French army. To one of the French officers the cityseemed "immense" with its seventy-two streets all "in a straight line. "The shops appeared to be equal to those of Paris and there were prettywomen well dressed in the French fashion. The Quaker city forgot its oldsuspicion of the French and their Catholic religion. Luzerne, the FrenchMinister, gave a great banquet on the evening of the 5th of September. Eighty guests took their places at table and as they sat down good newsarrived. As yet few knew the destination of the army but now Luzerneread momentous tidings and the secret was out: twenty-eight French shipsof the line had arrived in Chesapeake Bay; an army of three thousand menhad already disembarked and was in touch with the army of La Fayette;Washington and Rochambeau were bound for Yorktown to attack Cornwallis. Great was the joy; in the streets the soldiers and the people shoutedand sang and humorists, mounted on chairs, delivered in advance mockfuneral orations on Cornwallis. 

It was planned that the army should march the fifty miles to Elkton, atthe head of Chesapeake Bay, and there take boat to Yorktown, two hundredmiles to the south at the other end of the Bay. But there were not shipsenough. Washington had asked the people of influence in the neighborhoodto help him to gather transports but few of them responded. A deadlyapathy in regard to the war seems to have fallen upon many parts of thecountry. The Bay now in control of the French fleet was quite safe forunarmed ships. Half the Americans and some of the French embarked andthe rest continued on foot. There was need of haste, and the troopsmarched on to Baltimore and beyond at the rate of twenty miles a day, over roads often bad and across rivers sometimes unbridged. At Baltimoresome further regiments were taken on board transports and most of themmade the final stages of the journey by water. Some there were, however, and among them the Vicomte de Noailles, brother-in-law of La Fayette, who tramped on foot the whole seven hundred and fifty-six miles fromNewport to Yorktown. Washington himself left the army at Elkton and rodeon with Rochambeau, making about sixty miles a day. Mount Vernon layon the way and here Washington paused for two or three days. It was thefirst time he had seen it since he set out on May 4, 1775, to attend theContinental Congress at Philadelphia, little dreaming then of himself aschief leader in a long war. Now he pressed on to join La Fayette. By theend of the month an army of sixteen thousand men, of whom about one-halfwere French, was besieging Cornwallis with seven thousand men inYorktown. 

Heart-stirring events had happened while the armies were marching tothe South. The Comte de Grasse, with his great fleet, arrived at theentrance to the Chesapeake on the 30th of August while the British fleetunder Admiral Graves still lay at New York. Grasse, now the pivot uponwhich everything turned, was the French admiral in the West Indies. Taking advantage of a lull in operations he had slipped away with hiswhole fleet, to make his stroke and be back again before his absence hadcaused great loss. It was a risky enterprise, but a wise leader takesrisks. He intended to be back in the West Indies before the end ofOctober. 

It was not easy for the British to realize that they could be outmatchedon the sea. Rodney had sent word from the West Indies that ten shipswere the limit of Grasse's numbers and that even fourteen British shipswould be adequate to meet him. A British fleet, numbering nineteen shipsof the line, commanded by Admiral Graves, left New York on the 31st ofAugust and five days later stood off the entrance to Chesapeake Bay. Onthe mainland across the Bay lay Yorktown, the one point now held by theBritish on that great stretch of coast. When Graves arrived he had anunpleasant surprise. The strength of the French had been well concealed. There to confront him lay twenty-four enemy ships. The situation waseven worse, for the French fleet from Newport was on its way to joinGrasse. 

On the afternoon of the 5th of September, the day of the great rejoicingin Philadelphia, there was a spectacle of surpassing interest off CapeHenry, at the mouth of the Bay. The two great fleets joined battle, under sail, and poured their fire into each other. When night came theBritish had about three hundred and fifty casualties and the Frenchabout two hundred. There was no brilliant leadership on either side. Oneof Graves's largest ships, the Terrible, was so crippled that heburnt her, and several others were badly damaged. Admiral Hood, oneof Graves's officers, says that if his leader had turned suddenly andanchored his ships across the mouth of the Bay, the French Admiral withhis fleet outside would probably have sailed away and left the Britishfleet in possession. As it was the two fleets lay at sea in sight ofeach other for four days. On the morning of the tenth the squadron fromNewport under Barras arrived and increased Grasse's ships to thirty-six. Against such odds Graves could do nothing. He lingered near the mouth ofthe Chesapeake for a few days still and then sailed away to New Yorkto refit. At the most critical hour of the whole war a British fleet, crippled and spiritless, was hurrying to a protecting port and thefleurs-de-lis waved unchallenged on the American coast. The actionof Graves spelled the doom of Cornwallis. The most potent fleet evergathered in those waters cut him off from rescue by sea. 

Yorktown fronted on the York River with a deep ravine and swamps at theback of the town. From the land it could on the west side be approachedby a road leading over marshes and easily defended, and on the east sideby solid ground about half a mile wide now protected by redoubts andentrenchments with an outer and an inner parallel. Could Cornwallis holdout? At New York, no longer in any danger, there was still a keen desireto rescue him. By the end of September he received word from Clintonthat reinforcements had arrived from England and that, with a fleet oftwenty-six ships of the line carrying five thousand troops, he hoped tosail on the 5th of October to the rescue of Yorktown. There was delay. Later Clinton wrote that on the basis of assurances from Admiral Graveshe hoped to get away on the twelfth. A British officer in New Yorkdescribes the hopes with which the populace watched these preparations. The fleet, however, did not sail until the 19th of October. A speaker inCongress at the time said that the British Admiral should certainly hangfor this delay. 

On the 5th of October, for some reason unexplained, Cornwallis abandonedthe outer parallel and withdrew behind the inner one. This left him inYorktown a space so narrow that nearly every part of it could beswept by enemy artillery. By the 11th of October shells were droppingincessantly from a distance of only three hundred yards, and before thispowerful fire the earthworks crumbled. On the fourteenth the Frenchand Americans carried by storm two redoubts on the second parallel. Theredoubtable Tarleton was in Yorktown, and he says that day and nightthere was acute danger to any one showing himself and that every gun wasdismounted as soon as seen. He was for evacuating the place and marchingaway, whither he hardly knew. Cornwallis still held Gloucester, on theopposite side of the York River, and he now planned to cross to thatplace with his best troops, leaving behind his sick and wounded. Hewould try to reach Philadelphia by the route over which Washington hadjust ridden. The feat was not impossible. Washington would have had astern chase in following Cornwallis, who might have been able to liveoff the country. Clinton could help by attacking Philadelphia, which wasalmost defenseless. 

As it was, a storm prevented the crossing to Gloucester. The defensesof Yorktown were weakening and in face of this new discouragement theBritish leader made up his mind that the end was near. Tarleton andother officers condemned Cornwallis sharply for not persisting in theeffort to get away. Cornwallis was a considerate man. "I thought itwould have been wanton and inhuman, " he reported later, "to sacrificethe lives of this small body of gallant soldiers. " He had alreadywritten to Clinton to say that there would be great risk in trying tosend a fleet and army to rescue him. On the 19th of October came theclimax. Cornwallis surrendered with some hundreds of sailors and aboutseven thousand soldiers, of whom two thousand were in hospital. Theterms were similar to those which the British had granted at Charlestonto General Lincoln, who was now charged with carrying out the surrender. Such is the play of human fortune. At two o'clock in the afternoon theBritish marched out between two lines, the French on the one side, theAmericans on the other, the French in full dress uniform, the Americansin some cases half naked and barefoot. No civilian sightseers wereadmitted, and there was a respectful silence in the presence of thisgreat humiliation to a proud army. The town itself was a dreadfulspectacle with, as a French observer noted, "big holes made by bombs, cannon balls, splinters, barely covered graves, arms and legs of blacksand whites scattered here and there, most of the houses riddled withshot and devoid of window-panes. "

On the very day of surrender Clinton sailed from New York with arescuing army. Nine days later forty-four British ships were counted offthe entrance to Chesapeake Bay. The next day there were none. Thegreat fleet had heard of the surrender and had turned back to New York. Washington urged Grasse to attack New York or Charleston but the FrenchAdmiral was anxious to take his fleet back to meet the British menacefarther south and he sailed away with all his great array. The watersof the Chesapeake, the scene of one of the decisive events in humanhistory, were deserted by ships of war. Grasse had sailed, however, tomeet a stern fate. He was a fine fighting sailor. His men said of himthat he was on ordinary days six feet in height but on battle days sixfeet and six inches. None the less did a few months bring the Britisha quick revenge on the sea. On April 12, 1782, Rodney met Grasse in aterrible naval battle in the West Indies. Some five thousand in bothfleets perished. When night came Grasse was Rodney's prisoner andBritain had recovered her supremacy on the sea. On returning to FranceGrasse was tried by court-martial and, though acquitted, he remained indisgrace until he died in 1788, "weary, " as he said, "of the burden oflife. " The defeated Cornwallis was not blamed in England. His charactercommanded wide respect and he lived to play a great part in public life. He became Governor General of India, and was Viceroy of Ireland when itsrestless union with England was brought about in 1800. 

Yorktown settled the issue of the war but did not end it. For morethan a year still hostilities continued and, in parts of the South, embittered faction led to more bloodshed. In England the news ofYorktown caused a commotion. When Lord George Germain received the firstdespatch he drove with one or two colleagues to the Prime Minister'shouse in Downing Street. A friend asked Lord George how Lord Northhad taken the news. "As he would have taken a ball in the breast, " hereplied; "for he opened his arms, exclaiming wildly, as he paced up anddown the apartment during a few minutes, 'Oh God! it is all over, ' wordswhich he repeated many times, under emotions of the deepest agitationand distress. " Lord North might well be agitated for the news meant thecollapse of a system. The King was at Kew and word was sent to him. That Sunday evening Lord George Germain had a small dinner party and theKing's letter in reply was brought to the table. The guests were curiousto know how the King took the news. "The King writes just as he alwaysdoes, " said Lord George, "except that I observe he has omitted to markthe hour and the minute of his writing with his usual precision. " Itneeded a heavy shock to disturb the routine of George III. TheKing hoped no one would think that the bad news "makes the smallestalteration in those principles of my conduct which have directed me inpast time. " Lesser men might change in the face of evils; George III wasresolved to be changeless and never, never, to yield to the coercion offacts. 

Yield, however, he did. The months which followed were months ofpolitical commotion in England. For a time the ministry held itsmajority against the fierce attacks of Burke and Fox. The House ofCommons voted that the war must go on. But the heart had gone out ofBritish effort. Everywhere the people were growing restless. Eventhe ministry acknowledged that the war in America must henceforth bedefensive only. In February, 1782, a motion in the House of Commons forpeace was lost by only one vote; and in March, in spite of the franticexpostulations of the King, Lord North resigned. The King insisted thatat any rate some members of the new ministry must be named by himselfand not, as is the British constitutional custom, by the Prime Minister. On this, too, he had to yield; and a Whig ministry, under the Marquisof Rockingham, took office in March, 1782. Rockingham died on the 1st ofJuly, and it was Lord Shelburne, later the Marquis of Lansdowne, underwhom the war came to an end. The King meanwhile declared that he wouldreturn to Hanover rather than yield the independence of the colonies. Over and over again he had said that no one should hold office in hisgovernment who would not pledge himself to keep the Empire entire. Buteven his obstinacy was broken. On December 5, 1782, he opened Parliamentwith a speech in which the right of the colonies to independence wasacknowledged. "Did I lower my voice when I came to that part of myspeech?" George asked afterwards. He might well speak in a subduedtone for he had brought the British Empire to the lowest level in itshistory. 

In America, meanwhile, the glow of victory had given way to wearinessand lassitude. Rochambeau with his army remained in Virginia. Washingtontook his forces back to the lines before New York, sparing what men hecould to help Greene in the South. Again came a long period of watchingand waiting. Washington, knowing the obstinate determination of theBritish character, urged Congress to keep up the numbers of the army soas to be prepared for any emergency. Sir Guy Carleton now commanded theBritish at New York and Washington feared that this capable Irishmanmight soothe the Americans into a false security. He had to speaksharply, for the people seemed indifferent to further effort andCongress was slack and impotent. The outlook for Washington's allies inthe war darkened, when in April, 1782, Rodney won his crushing victoryand carried De Grasse a prisoner to England. France's ally Spain hadbeen besieging Gibraltar for three years, but in September, 1782, when the great battering-ships specially built for the purpose began afurious bombardment, which was expected to end the siege, the Britishdefenders destroyed every ship, and after that Gibraltar was safe. These events naturally stiffened the backs of the British in negotiatingpeace. Spain declared that she would never make peace without thesurrender of Gibraltar, and she was ready to leave the question ofAmerican independence undecided or decided against the colonies if shecould only get for herself the terms which she desired. There was aperiod when France seemed ready to make peace on the basis of dividingthe Thirteen States, leaving some of them independent while othersshould remain under the British King. 

Congress was not willing to leave its affairs at Paris in the capablehands of Franklin alone. In 1780 it sent John Adams to Paris, and JohnJay and Henry Laurens were also members of the American Commission. Theaustere Adams disliked and was jealous of Franklin, gay in spite of hisyears, seemingly indolent and easygoing, always bland and reluctant tosay No to any request from his friends, but ever astute in the interestsof his country. Adams told Vergennes, the French foreign minister, thatthe Americans owed nothing to France, that France had entered the warin her own interests, and that her alliance with America had greatlystrengthened her position in Europe. France, he added, was reallyhostile to the colonies, since she was jealously trying to keep themfrom becoming rich and powerful. Adams dropped hints that America mightbe compelled to make a separate peace with Britain. When it was proposedthat the depreciated continental paper money, largely held in France forpurchases there, should be redeemed at the rate of one good dollarfor every forty in paper money, Adams declared to the horrified Frenchcreditors of the United States that the proposal was fair and just. Atthe same time Congress was drawing on Franklin in Paris for money tomeet its requirements and Franklin was expected to persuade the Frenchtreasury to furnish him with what he needed and to an amazing degreesucceeded in doing so. The self interest which Washington believed to bethe dominant motive in politics was, it is clear, actively at work. In the end the American Commissioners negotiated directly with GreatBritain, without asking for the consent of their French allies. OnNovember 30, 1782, articles of peace between Great Britain and theUnited States were signed. They were, however, not to go into effectuntil Great Britain and France had agreed upon terms of peace; and itwas not until September 3, 1783, that the definite treaty was signed. Sofar as the United States was concerned Spain was left quite properly toshift for herself. 

Thus it was that the war ended. Great Britain had urged especiallythe case of the Loyalists, the return to them of their property andcompensation for their losses. She could not achieve anything. Franklinindeed asked that Americans who had been ruined by the destruction oftheir property should be compensated by Britain, that Canada shouldbe added to the United States, and that Britain should acknowledge herfault in distressing the colonies. In the end the American Commissionersagreed to ask the individual States to meet the desires of the Britishnegotiators, but both sides understood that the States would do nothing, that the confiscated property would never be returned, that most ofthe exiled Loyalists would remain exiles, and that Britain herselfmust compensate them for their losses. This in time she did on a scaleinadequate indeed but expressive of a generous intention. The UnitedStates retained the great Northwest and the Mississippi became thewestern frontier, with destiny already whispering that weak and graspingSpain must soon let go of the farther West stretching to the PacificOcean. When Great Britain signed peace with France and Spain in January, 1783, Gibraltar was not returned; Spain had to be content with thereturn of Minorca, and Florida which she had been forced to yield toBritain in 1763. Each side restored its conquests in the West Indies. France, the chief mainstay of the war during its later years, gainedfrom it really nothing beyond the weakening of her ancient enemy. Themagnanimity of France, especially towards her exacting American ally, isone of the fine things in the great combat. The huge sum of nearly eighthundred million dollars spent by France in the war was one of the chieffactors in the financial crisis which, six years after the signing ofthe peace, brought on the French Revolution and with it the overthrowof the Bourbon monarchy. Politics bring strange bedfellows and they haverarely brought stranger ones than the democracy of young America and thepolitical despotism, linked with idealism, of the ancient monarchy ofFrance. 

The British did not evacuate New York until Carleton had gathered therethe Loyalists who claimed his protection. These unhappy people madetheir way to the seaports, often after long and distressing journeysoverland. Charleston was the chief rallying place in the South and fromthere many sad-hearted people sailed away, never to see again theirformer homes. The British had captured New York in September, 1776, andit was more than seven years later, on November 25, 1783, that the lastof the British fleet put to sea. Britain and America had broken forevertheir political tie and for many years to come embittered memories keptup the alienation. 

It was fitting that Washington should bid farewell to his army at NewYork, the center of his hopes and anxieties during the greater part ofthe long struggle. On December 4, 1783, his officers met at a tavern tobid him farewell. The tears ran down his cheeks as he parted with thesebrave and tried men. He shook their hands in silence and, in a fashionstill preserved in France, kissed each of them. Then they watched him ashe was rowed away in his barge to the New Jersey shore. Congress wasnow sitting at Annapolis in Maryland and there on December 23, 1783, Washington appeared and gave up finally his command. We are told thatthe members sat covered to show the sovereignty of the Union, a quainttouch of the thought of the time. The little town made a brave show and"the gallery was filled with a beautiful group of elegant ladies. " Withsolemn sincerity Washington commended the country to the protection ofAlmighty God and the army to the special care of Congress. Passion hadalready subsided for the President of Congress in his reply praised the"magnanimous king and nation" of Great Britain. By the end of theyear Washington was at Mount Vernon, hoping now to be able, as he saidsimply, to make and sell a little flour annually and to repair housesfast going to ruin. He did not foresee the troubled years and thevexing problems which still lay before him. Nor could he, in his modestestimate of himself, know that for a distant posterity his character andhis words would have compelling authority. What Washington's countryman, Motley, said of William of Orange is true of Washington himself: "Aslong as he lived he was the guiding star of a brave nation and when hedied the little children cried in the streets. " But this is not all. Tothis day in the domestic and foreign affairs of the United States thewords of Washington, the policies which he favored, have a living andalmost binding force. This attitude of mind is not without its dangers, for nations require to make new adjustments of policy, and the pastis only in part the master of the present; but it is the tribute of agrateful nation to the noble character of its chief founder. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

In Winsor, "Narrative and Critical History of America", vol. VI (1889), and in Larned (editor), "Literature of American History", pp. 111-152(1902), the authorities are critically estimated. There are excellentclassified lists in Van Tyne, "The American Revolution" (1905), vol. Vof Hart (editor), "The American Nation", and in Avery, "History of theUnited States", vol. V, pp. 422-432, and vol. VI, pp. 445-471 (1908-09). The notes in Channing, "A History of the United States", vol. III(1913), are useful. Detailed information in regard to places will befound in Lossing, "The Pictorial Field Book of the Revolution", 2 vols. (1850). 

In recent years American writers on the period have chiefly occupiedthemselves with special studies, and the general histories have beenfew. Tyler's "The Literary History of the American Revolution", 2vols. (1897), is a penetrating study of opinion. Fiske's "The AmericanRevolution", 2 vols. (1891), and Sydney George Fisher's "The Strugglefor American Independence", 2 vols. (1908), are popular works. The shortvolume of Van Tyne is based upon extensive research. The attentionof English writers has been drawn in an increasing degree to theRevolution. Lecky, "A History of England in the Eighteenth Century", chaps. XIII, XIV, and XV (1903), is impartial. The most elaborateand readable history is Trevelyan, "The American Revolution", and his"George the Third" and "Charles Fox" (six volumes in all, completed in1914). If Trevelyan leans too much to the American side the opposite istrue of Fortescue, "A History of the British Army", vol. III (1902), ascientific account of military events with many maps and plans. CaptainMahan, U. S. N. , wrote the British naval history of the period in Clowes(editor), "The Royal Navy, a History", vol. III, pp. 353-564 (1898). Ofgreat value also is Mahan's "Influence of Sea Power on History" (1890)and "Major Operations of the Navies in the War of Independence"(1913). He may be supplemented by C. O. Paullin's "Navy of the AmericanRevolution" (1906) and G. W. Allen's "A Naval History of the AmericanRevolution", 2 vols. (1913). 

CHAPTERS I AND II. 

Washington's own writings are necessary to an understanding of hischaracter. Sparks, "The Life and Writings of George Washington", 2 vols. (completed 1855), has been superseded by Ford, "The Writings of GeorgeWashington", 14 vols. (completed 1898). The general reader will probablyput aside the older biographies of Washington by Marshall, Irving, andSparks for more recent "Lives" such as those by Woodrow Wilson, HenryCabot Lodge, and Paul Leicester Ford. Haworth, "George Washington, Farmer" (1915) deals with a special side of Washington's character. Theproblems of the army are described in Bolton, "The Private Soldier underWashington" (1902), and in Hatch, "The Administration of the AmericanRevolutionary Army" (1904). For military operations Frothingham, "TheSiege of Boston"; Justin H. Smith, "Our Struggle for the FourteenthColony", 2 vols. (1907); Codman, "Arnold's Expedition to Quebec" (1901);and Lucas, "History of Canada", 1763-1812 (1909). 

CHAPTER III. 

For the state of opinion in England, the contemporary "Annual Register", and the writings and speeches of men of the time like Burke, Fox, HoraceWalpole, and Dr. Samuel Johnson. The King's attitude is found in Donne, "Correspondence of George III with Lord North", 1768-83, 2 vols. (1867). Stirling, "Coke of Norfolk and his Friends", 2 vols. (1908), givesthe outlook of a Whig magnate; Fitzmaurice, "Life of William, Earl ofShelburne", 2 vols. (1912), the Whig policy. Curwen's "Journalsand Letters", 1775-84 (1842), show us a Loyalist exile in England. Hazelton's "The Declaration of Independence, its History" (1906), is anelaborate study. 

CHAPTERS IV, V, AND VI. 

The three campaigns--New York, Philadelphia, and the Hudson--are coveredby C. F. Adams, "Studies Military and Diplomatic" (1911), which makessevere strictures on Washington's strategy; H. P. Johnston's "Campaignof 1776 around New York and Brooklyn, " in the Long Island HistoricalSociety's "Memoirs", and "Battle of Harlem Heights" (1897); Carrington, "Battles of the American Revolution" (1904); Stryker, "The Battlesof Trenton and Princeton" (1898); Lucas, "History of Canada" (1909). Fonblanque's "John Burgoyne" (1876) is a defense of that leader; whileRiedesel's "Letters and Journals Relating to the War of the AmericanRevolution" (trans. W. L. Stone, 1867) and Anburey's "Travels throughthe Interior Parts of America" (1789) are accounts by eye-witnesses. Mereness' (editor) "Travels in the American Colonies", 1690-1783 (1916)gives the impressions of Lord Adam Gordon and others. 

CHAPTERS VII AND VIII. 

On Washington at Valley Forge, Oliver, "Life of Alexander Hamilton"(1906); Charlemagne Tower, "The Marquis de La Fayette in the AmericanRevolution", 2 vols. (1895); Greene, "Life of Nathanael Greene" (1893);Brooks, "Henry Knox" (1900); Graham, "Life of General Daniel Morgan"(1856); Kapp, "Life of Steuben" (1859); Arnold, "Life of BenedictArnold" (1880). On the army Bolton and Hatch as cited; Mahan gives alucid account of naval effort. Barrow, "Richard, Earl Howe" (1838) isa dull account of a remarkable man. On the French alliance, Perkins, "France in the American Revolution" (1911), Corwin, "French Policy andthe American Alliance of 1778" (1916), and Van Tyne on "Influences whichDetermined the French Government to Make the Treaty with America, 1778, "in "The American Historical Review", April, 1916. 

CHAPTER IX. 

Fortescue, as cited, gives excellent plans. Other useful books areMcCrady, "History of South Carolina in the Revolution" (1901); Draper, "King's Mountain and its Heroes" (1881); Simms, "Life of Marion" (1844). Ross (editor), "The Cornwallis Correspondence", 3 vols. (1859), andTarleton, "History of the Campaigns of 1780 and 1781 in the SouthernProvinces of North America" (1787), give the point of view of Britishleaders. On the West, Thwaites, "How George Rogers Clark won theNorthwest" (1903); and on the Loyalists Van Tyne, "The Loyalists in theAmerican Revolution" (1902), Flick, "Loyalism in New York" (1901), andStark, "The Loyalists of Massachusetts" (1910). 

CHAPTERS X AND XI. 

For the exploits of John Paul Jones and of the American navy, Mrs. DeKoven's "The Life and Letters of John Paul Jones", 2 vols. (1913), Don C. Seitz's "Paul Jones", and G. W. Allen's "A Naval History of theAmerican Revolution", 2 vols. (1913), should be consulted. Jusserand's"With Americans of Past and Present Days" (1917) contains a chapteron 'Rochambeau and the French in America'; Johnston's "The YorktownCampaign" (1881) is a full account; Wraxall, "Historical Memoirs of myown Time" (1815, reprinted 1904), tells of the reception of the news ofYorktown in England. 

The "Encyclopaedia Britannica" has useful references to authoritiesfor persons prominent in the Revolution and "The Dictionary of NationalBiography" for leaders on the British side.