eld and others had everywhere roused a keen religious feeling,
and the people were as likely as ever to open town-meeting with prayer,
and to go into battle with psalms.

Such, then, were the contestants in the struggle. On the one side was
the king with his privileges, backed by his Parliamentary majority, and
having at command an efficient army and navy, and a full treasury. There
was at hand no one to resist him successfully at home, none to whose
warnings he would listen. And on the other side were the colonists,
quite capable of fighting for what they knew to be the "rights of
Englishmen." Both hoped to proceed peaceably. In ignorance, each was
hoping for the impossible, for the king would not retreat, and the
colonists would not yield. As soon as each understood the other's full
intention, there would be a rupture.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It may appear to a hasty consideration that Frothingham's "Siege of
Boston" treats the siege as an isolated military event. It must,
however, be remembered that Mr. Frothingham had treated previous events
in a preliminary volume, his "Life of Joseph Warren."

[2] "Memorial History of Boston," ii, 31.

[3] "They nourished by your indulgence? They grew up by your neglect of
them!" Barre's speech in Parliament, February, 1765.

[4] "Memorial History of Boston," i, 340, 376.

[5] See, on this point, Sabine's "American Loyalists," 7.

[6] Bancroft's "United States," ed. 1855, v, 265. References to Bancroft
will at first be to this edition.

[7] Bancroft's "United States," v, 266.

[8] Trevelyan, "American Revolution," Part i, 21.

[9] "Memorial History of Boston," ii, 116.

CHAPTER II

WRITS OF ASSISTANCE AND THE STAMP ACT

The men who, whether in America or England, took sides with the king or
the colonies as Tories and Whigs, or as "prerogative men" and "friends
of liberty," fall naturally into two classes. A line of cleavage could
be seen at the time, and can even be traced now, among the supporters of
either side, according as they followed principle or self-interest.
There were those who sought profit in supporting the colonies, as well
as those who knowingly faced loss in defending the king. It is well for
Americans to remember, therefore, that while many sided with the king
for what they could get, there were others whose minds could not
conceive a country without a king, or a subject with inalienable rights.
The best of the Tories honestly believed the Whig a