The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-10-17

that the alliance with France had proved disas-
trous. and that a speedy reconciliation with Eng.
land. on terms acceptable TO both tho mother
country and the colonies, was the only means
left by which America could escape from tho
doom to which she was hurrying. These letters
aro described by tho author of this
book as well written, plausible. and pow
erful, and no thinks that. had 1t not
been for the favorable turn given to
American affairs by tho capture Of Cornwallis's
army, n few months after they were written,
they might have had serious effect. They wcro
collected and published in 1882; but as by that
time the success Of the Revolution was assured.
their prophecies of It's failure and lamentations
over the fatal blunGer OF having undertaken 1t
sounded like the rawlings of . mailman.
l1I.
or tho Loyalist verse writers whose work can
now, in some measure, be identified. two were
especially conspicuous, namely, Joseph STAINS
bury and Jonathan Odell. 1t seems that, MS n
satirist, no one on the Tory side Of tho contro-
vcrsy approached Odell. either In passionate
energy OF thought or in pungcncy and polish OF
style, while Stansbury was equally without a
rival as a writer OF festive political songs and
OF satire in verso distinguished by playful hui
NOR rather than by hatred.
Born in London in 1740, and for several years
n brilliant pupil in ST. Paul's school, Joseph
Stansbnry was put into trade at All early ago.
Ia l'o' he came To America ana estaohsheu
himself in business in Philadelphia. Here he
coon evinced great facility in the writing Of
songs, which he sang with n mclodious voice and
with much riHacity OF expression. Like most OF
those Americans whorefusedt to Join in the final
measures OF opposition to the mother country.
he appears to have regarded tho colonial policy
nf thu hnma (yncnrn ont ms rnry inrNn ndI.
ont. as n policy which was persisted in just
long enough to spoil tho former good
humor of the colonies and to ripcn irrita-
ton into revolution. Stansbury's sympathics
were strongly with the colonies until
they proceeded 10 the extremity OF declaring
independence. Ihls he did not consider tho
only remedy, or even the best remedy. for their
wrongs. A better remedy than secession lay.
he thought. in constitutional opposition inside
the empire. He stroyc. therefore,. to stir in the
hearts OF his fellow colonists the old sense OF
aiectionatc kinship to the mother land, and Of
pride in the splendid historic achievements of
their race. The optimism of Stansbury seems
to have been more than equal to the disasters
which eventually thickened about him and
about the doomed political party with the for.
tunes of which his own were allied. Prof.
Tyler regards II as not the least of the services
to which his life was put during the trying years
Of the war. that he could be a messenger OF hope
and chceriu,ncss to many noble-minGcd and
sensitive people who were associated with him
in misfortune. or course his fortitude was
brought to a supreme test by the surrender Of
CORVALLIS in 1881. whereby it was made appar-
cnt to the rest OF the world that tho stake for
which he and his friends had been playing was
lost; that nothing was in store for them but to
be banished from the land and the homes they
loved as dearly as did the men who were ~victori-
Gus over them. When the war was really ended.
the party OF the Iloyalists gradually fell into
two groups. those who were willing to become