Page:EB1911 - Volume 27.djvu/696

HISTORY 1606-1760] Quebec and the Gulf ports were then connected by a series of forts which, though few and weak, sufficed for communication and for the establishment of a claim to the Mississippi Valley. They were Niagara and Detroit, commanding the approaches to lakes Erie and Huron; Fort Miami, on the Maumee river; Fort St Joseph, at the southern end of Lake Michigan; Vincennes and French Fort, on the Wabash; Fort Chartres, on the Mississippi opposite St Louis; Michillimackinac and Ste Marie, which guarded the upper lakes. French zeal and enterprise had thus seized upon the heart of the continent, and was prepared to oppose any westward movement which the English might in the future attempt. It seemed possible that English settlements might be confined to the coast, for they expanded slowly and no genius for exploration or sympathy with Indian life was shown. The tendency of British commercial policy was likewise to confine them there, for in no other way did it seem possible to restrict the trade of the colonists to British markets. The Indian alliances of the English were also far less extensive than those of the French. The provinces of South Carolina and Georgia had conflicts with the Spanish on the Florida frontier, and in these the Indian tribes of the south were also involved. But these rivalries were slight and local in character, when compared with the struggle for supremacy which was preparing between the French and English.

39. The conflict with the French was precipitated by events in Europe. It was the English Revolution of 1689 that opened the great conflict between France and England. The question of Protestantism versus Catholicism was involved, but at bottom the struggle was one for the balance of power among European states. Rival claims between the two powers in America, Africa and Asia existed at the beginning of the conflict, or originated and were intensified as it progressed. Questions of commercial and naval supremacy world-wide in extent were involved, and the colonial possessions of the two states were necessarily drawn into the struggle. In America it involved four intercolonial wars, which were closed respectively by the treaties of Ryswick (1697), Utrecht(1713), Aix-la-Chapelle (1748), and Paris (1763). Between the second and third wars intervened thirty years of peace, the early period of Hanoverian and Whig ascendancy in England, the so-called Walpole era. On the American continent during the first two wars the struggle was confined to the northern frontier, and consisted of devastating raids by the French and Indians, which in turn provoked retaliatory efforts on the part of the English. These took the form in part of attacks on Acadia and of unsuccessful efforts to conquer Canada by means of joint expeditions by sea and land. The favourite land route was that from New York by way of Lake Champlain to Montreal, while the expeditions by sea were forced to make the long and perilous voyage round Nova Scotia and through the Gulf and River St Lawrence to Quebec. In 1690, and again in 1711, an enterprise of this kind was actually undertaken. Acadia, “with its ancient limits,” and the claim of France to Newfoundland and the Hudson Bay territory were, however, ceded to England by the treaty of Utrecht.

40. As the great world-conflict progressed the relative importance of the colonial and maritime issues which were involved

increased. The first two wars had their origin primarily in European questions. The third war had its beginning in the Spanish West Indies, and clearly revealed the existence of the Bourbon Family Compact, which bound France and Spain together in active alliance. On the American continent its most striking event was the capture, in 1745, of Louisburg, a stronghold which the French had recently fortified on Cape Breton for the purpose of defending its interests in the Gulf of St Lawrence. This victory was secured largely by the efforts of the New England colonists. In the following year another plan for the conquest of Canada was thwarted by the necessities of war in Europe. At the close of the war Louisburg, too, was restored to the French. After this fashion did the world-struggle react upon the special interests of the English in North America, and perplex and irritate the

colonists. In the fourth intercolonial war (1754-63) the struggle between the two nationalities in North America was decided. Events which immediately preceded this war—the occupation of the Ohio Valley and the building of Fort Duquesne—clearly revealed an intention on the part of the French to exclude the English from the Mississippi Valley and confine them to the Atlantic slope. A persistent effort was also made to recover Acadia. The western, as well as the northern, frontier was not threatened, and the war which followed affected all the colonies. Great Britain sent over a succession of commanders-in-chief. Great improvement was made upon the crude efforts at joint colonial action which had characterized the earlier wars. To as great a degree did the Albany Congress of 1754 (see ) surpass in importance the meetings of governors and military officers which had occasionally been held in previous times, though its plan of colonial union failed to meet the approval both of the colonists and of the government of Great Britain. The campaigns of this war were all upon a comparatively large scale. Campaigns were carried on not merely along the line of Lake Champlain and in Acadia, but against Fort Duquesne (see ), Oswego, and Fort Frontenac, Louisburg, and (q.v.) itself. The weak Spanish power was overthrown in Florida and expeditions were sent against the southern Indians. In all quarters, and especially after Pitt became secretary of state, the British assumed the offensive. The navy of Great Britain, as well as its army, was called into action on a much larger scale in America than ever before. The result was the conquest by the British of Canada, and with it of all North America east of the Mississippi river; the French claim to territory west of this river was ceded to Spain in 1762.

41. The wars with the French brought the problem of colonial defence among the English into greater prominence than ever before, and added it to the other questions which had been of practical moment from the first. Against the Indians the colonists in the 17th century had provided for their own defence. Chiefly with this object in view, each colony had developed a militia system, modelled in general after that of England. But such a force was not fitted for long campaigns or large operations. It was comparatively undisciplined; both officers and men were inexperienced and destitute of proper habits of command, as well as those of subordination; the commissariat was poor or totally lacking, and the men were able to remain away from their homes for only brief periods. The colonists possessed no navy, and for coast defence only a few rude forts. So poor were means of communication and so isolated were the colonies from one another, that co-operation in joint expeditions was very difficult. Equally difficult was it to secure proportional contributions of money from the colonies. Early in the French wars the British government prescribed quotas both of men and money to be raised by the colonies, but little attention was paid to these except by the colonies which were in immediate peril. Because of the limited amount of available money and the modest resources of the colonists heavy taxation was impossible, and the financing of the wars was a matter of great difficulty. The assemblies-resorted to the issue of bills of credit, to which they gave the legal tender quality, and for the redemption of which in nearly all cases they made inadequate provision. The paper depreciated and in some colonies became worthless. Great confusion resulted, involving loss to all, and among the sufferers were British merchants. Strained relations were produced between the assemblies and the colonial executive, because the latter, acting under royal instructions, persisted in vetoing bills for additional issues of currency. For this reason, in addition to others, the assemblies withheld the salaries of governors and other officials, and in this way sought to coerce the executives into submission. In some colonies the Assembly secured the right of electing the treasurer, and in most of them appropriations were made specific. Thus by skilfully utilizing their control over the purse, and that during a long period of war, the colonial assemblies were able materially to limit the authority of the executives and to establish not a few privileges for