Moreover independence would, in
the eyes at least of foreign governments, give the colonies the
rights of belligerents and enable them to claim for their
fighting forces the treatment due to a regular army and the
exchange of prisoners with the British. They could, too, make
alliances with other nations. Some clamored for independence for
a reason more sinister--that they might punish those who held to
the King and seize their property. There were thirteen colonies
in arms and each of them had to form some kind of government
which would work without a king as part of its mechanism. One by
one such governments were formed. King George, as we have seen,
helped the colonies to make up their minds. They were in no mood
to be called erring children who must implore undeserved mercy
and not force a loving parent to take unwilling vengeance. "Our
plantations" and "our subjects in the colonies" would simply not
learn obedience. If George III would not reply to their petitions
until they laid down their arms, they could manage to get on
without a king. If England, as Horace Walpole admitted, would not
take them seriously and speakers in Parliament called them
obscure ruffians and cowards, so much the worse for England.
It was an Englishman, Thomas Paine, who fanned the fire into
unquenchable flames.
Pages:
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89