seen much of British officers in America. Some of them had been
men of high birth and station who treated the young colonial
officer with due courtesy. When, however, he had served on the
staff of the unfortunate General Braddock in the calamitous
campaign of 1755, he had been offended by the tone of that
leader. Probably it was in these days that Washington first
brooded over the contrasts between the Englishman and the
Virginian. With obstinate complacency Braddock had disregarded
Washington's counsels of prudence. He showed arrogant confidence
in his veteran troops and contempt for the amateur soldiers of
whom Washington was one. In a wild country where rapid movement
was the condition of success Braddock would halt, as Washington
said, "to level every mole hill and to erect bridges over every
brook." His transport was poor and Washington, a lover of horses,
chafed at what he called "vile management" of the horses by the
British soldier. When anything went wrong Braddock blamed, not
the ineffective work of his own men, but the supineness of
Virginia. "He looks upon the country," Washington wrote in wrath,
"I believe, as void of honour and honesty." The hour of trial
came in the fight of July, 1755, when Braddock was defeated and
killed on the march to the Ohio. Washington told his mother that
in the fight the Virginian troops stood their ground and were
nearly all killed but the boasted regulars "were struck with such
a panic that they behaved with more cowardice than it is possible
to conceive." In the anger and resentment of this comment is
found the spirit which made Washington a champion of the colonial
cause from the first hour of disagreement.

That was a fatal day in March, 1765, when the British Parliament
voted that it was just and necessary that a revenue be raised in