Albuquerque morning journal., 1922-12-19
BY ALGERNoN TASSIN and ARTHUR BARTLETT NJ

NE may write the history of coln-
try and say very little about its
~ literature. but one cannot write o;
its literature without saying good deal
about its history. For the literature OF a
people is the expression OF their life. THAI
is whv you will find that this chapter, de-
voted to the Revolutionary period, has
more in It Of history than of literature,
The thing Of chief Importance as 1t
seems to us, about the War for Inde-
pendence we were never taught when we
went to school, 1t was very unfortunate
because it allowed US to grow up with
very wrong ideas Did you know that the
only difference between rebellion and
revolution is that the one fails and the
other succeeds? When man loses, fu-
ture generation says he was rebel and
although his cause may have been righr,
he took the wrong method of protesting
against what he called tyranny. When
he wins a future generation says that he
took the right method and that he was
patriot But that future generation is
very unjust If 1t assumes that the first
man loved his country any less than the
second man. That is what we were not
taught when we went to school, and It
was a long time before we found out how
unjust our judgments I'd been about the
people Of the Revolutit nary period and
what a false notion we had Of the whole
state Of affairs then.
:, First of all, we were unjust to the
1oyalists the Americans who wanted to re-
main loyal to England. Nobody told us
that the thing which even patriotic boys
can see so clearly at this end Of 1t was all
confused to grown men at that end of IT,
Nobody knew then whether the event
would show him to be rebel or a pa
trtot. There were doubtless as many
loyalists as there were nationalists who
had only selfish and commercial mo-
tives. But the majority on the one side
were equally as patriotic and liberty low
ing as the majority on the other. They
differed merely in their definition of lib
erty. The loyalists were those who went
on thinking as all the colonists had
thought ever since they landed in America.
that their liberty lay in upholding their
thought their liberty lay in setting up
government of their owe. Each side called
the other side traitor.
Another thing no one told us in school
was that these loyalists and nationalsts
were not two different kinds of men, set
definitely apart from each other by op-
posing interests, They were neighbor
against neighbor, friend against friend, one
member of the family against another
member OF the family. Ben Franklins son
was loyalist, working against the cause
for which his father was striving; Ran
dolph of Virginia saw his father driven
into exile by the cause he eagerly left
home to join. And the third thing we
were not taught is even more important
still. One cannot say that even the
greater number Of people in America were
those whom we now call patriots 1t Is
possible that the majority were loyalists
and that the minority were simply more
strong wiled and ore ef ergetic and better
organized. But wherever the patriots
grew powerful enough to do so they
senced the loyalists or drove them out OF
the country.
This was not wise or right, but perhaps
It was necessary. At least when it was
matter of life or death you cannot blame
: them. But we live at different time, and
we see now that we at any rate have no
right to blame the loyalists for remaining
true to their convictions. For they were
convictions which even the greatest
patriots shared at the beginning. The very
war itself did not begin as a war for sepa-
ration. when first took command of the
Continental army" wrote George Wash
ington II abhorred the idea of Indepen-
dence." Thomas jefferson and Ben Frank
lin felt the same way. The first Continental
Congress demanded only representation in
return for taxation; otherwise it was as
loyal to England as England itself could
have wished 1t was rushed into changing
its mind only by subsequent events. How
ever natural, therefore. it was not fair for
one man at the time to call another
traitor merely because he had now given
up an idea which the other man wanted to
hold on to. The Declaration of Indepen-
dence itself was passed by Congress only
with difficulty, and it came as a startling
surprise to most people In the country,
About the Constitution and the articles
which should compose 1t there was a SINH
lar clash of opinion between neighbors and
brothers, and hurting back and forth of
the ugly word traitor" Though the Sec
ond difference of opinion was very violent,
it did not at the time lead to the bitter
civil war which the other difference had
resulted in. But it was this same differ
ence which seventy-fve years later the
North and the South fought out on the
battlefield. Nor is 1t ended yet. Even at
this very moment some of the States of
our country are again raising the question
which people Just after the Revolution
were quarreling about with such angry
words. In way. it. was the same question
as the one they had Just been fighting
about with gun and bayonet Shall we be
| a loyal part of an empire or shall we be
home rulers? So you see, 1t is very unfair
| of us to call the loyalists traitors because
| they could not settle at once questions
which we ourselves have not yet settled
entirely.
II the colonists when they began the war