New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-10-23
Literary Nesa's and Criticism.

eioquence in defence of the colonists and made
MN hesitate to declare that the coonists had
contributed. and We're fully willing to contribute
lher snare If only they were allowed TO do so
40 Hlelr own way. AS a matter of fact almost
"n 'he colonies had shown extreme reluctance
- contribute even during the critical period of
'he seven years Summing up his expert
ehce OF the colonies during the French wars the
Governor of New Jersey wrote, in INA: THE
want OF union among the colonies must ever
occasion delay in their military operations The
IIst mat happens to be called upon postponcs
coming TO any determination till it's known
what the other colonies will do: and each of
lhose others think that they have an equal right
TO act IN the same manner. This procrastinat-
ing conduct. owing to the jealousies and appre-
tensions each colony has lest it should con-
tribute somewhat more than its share is the
reason why the American levies are sometimes
DELAYED till the season for action is nearly
elapsed"
When the French war came to an end there
Siil remained the need of colonial defence
against the Indians-a need which had been
greatly augmented by the wide extension of ter
utorN. The British policy as regards the pro-
lection Of the colonies called for the help Of the
mother country in case Of European aggression.
but defence against the Indians or other natives
was regarded Il charge TO he borne by the
colonists themselves. The mpossihility of or
ganizng a sufficient defence even against the
incians made necessary the retention Of a Brit
iSh army in America, and il was for the defray-
ing of the cost OF this defence-a cost which the
British ministers considered rightly belonged to
the colonies. and cost which was expended in
the colonies, which brought about the impOsi
ton of revenue taxes by the British Parliament.
SAYS Air. Beer:
In consequence Of the patent fact that the colo
mes as whole would not voluntarily contribute
1helT share or The military burden II was decided 20
tax them for this purpose This decision was the
union Of the colonies. it had done In 1854. hut
scheme that any such attempt was inevitably
doomed 10 failure. on the other hand. the mother
defence. even though this would have violated the
however. decidedly unadyisable not only because
\ might he The entering wedge for st larger
future increases in the colonial budget. but also
because Of the existing STRAIN on British finances
The war had about doubled the debt, In
on the navy. which was regarded as the empires
ciai resources were severely strained and the al
ready oyerhurdened taxpayer in the mother coun-
fair share of defending the colonies.
II is perhaps logical that Mr. Beer CON
WINGED he is that the colonsts had little claim
to justice or high principle in their cause. should
deny 70 the American Revolution the high place
which has hitherto been assigned 70 II in the
history of civilization 1T is too early at this
day" he writes, in eXpounding this final heresy,
"to decide dogmatically whether the movement
spelt progress or reaction or merely temporary
repression necessary to a further step in ad-
vance. II is easily conceivable and not at all
improbable that the political evolution Of the
next centuries may take such a course that the
American Revolution VIII lose the great signih-
canoe that is now attached TO II, and viii ap-
pear merely the temporary separation Of two
kindred peoples whose inherent similarity
obscuTed by superficial differences resulting
from dissimilar economic and social conditions"
We may be pardoned for being amused. rather
than impressed. by this solemn conclusion.