Narrative and Critical History of America, Vol. 6 (of 8) / The United States of North America, Part I

by Unknown

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The liberal party; for even as late as the Declaration of Independence, the Tory party were, by estimation, two fifths of the whole population.

[2] The validity of this title in the crown was recognized by the congress at Albany in 1754. Proceedings, in Mass. Hist. Coll., xxv. 64.

[3] The exercise of the prerogative, as a cause of the Revolution, finds its just prominence in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, passim.

[4] Franklin thought differently. "The charters are sacred. Violate them, and then the present bond of union (the kingly power over us) will be broken." Works, iv. 296; Hutchinson, History, iii. 172. But see Chalmers's Opinions concerning Colonies, Index, under King.

[5] Its most serious invasion was when the Long Parliament, from the necessity of the case, exercised sovereign powers,—that of the prerogative among others.

[6] There is a notable instance in the case of the judicial tenure. By the British Constitution, the king is not only the fountain of justice, but by a legal fiction he administers it in person, as James I. once proposed to do; and on this theory of actual presence, he chooses his representative and removes him at pleasure. It follows that, when the king dies, the authority of his representative ceases. And such was the case until the reign of William III., when it was attempted to limit the king's prerogative, but with only partial success. By 12 and 13 Will. III. ch. 2 (1701), the judicial tenure was during good behavior instead of the king's pleasure. But George III., a most strenuous asserter of his prerogative, in 1761, soon after his accession, declared to the two Houses that he regarded the independence of the judges as one of the best securities of the rights and liberties of his subjects, and recommended that they should hold office, with settled and permanent salaries, during good behavior, notwithstanding the demise of the crown (House Journal, vol. xxviii. 1094); and this became the law by I Geo. III. ch. 23. Constitutionally the king sat in his provincial courts as well as in British courts, and his surrender of the prerogative ought to have extended to the former. That, however, was not the decision in 1763, when the New York Assembly remonstrated at the appointment of Chief Justice Prat, to hold during the king's pleasure, by whom his salary was paid. This caused great dissatisfaction in the colonies, and in Massachusetts especially, in 1773, when the judges were paid by the king. The matter was not free from practical difficulties. The king had rights to the revenue which colonial juries would not respect; and consequently in 1698 Parliament set up admiralty courts without juries. The king was also interested in the administration of the civil and criminal law; but unless the judges conducted themselves so as to suit the people, the representatives cut down their salaries,—that is, starved them into compliance with the popular will; consequently, the king thought it best not only to retain but to use his prerogative, with respect to the appointment, tenure, and pay of the provincial judges.

[7] "Give me leave to ask you, young man, what it is you mean by repeating to me so often, in every letter, the Spirit of the Constitution?" (Dean Tucker, Letter from a Merchant in London to his Nephew in America, 1766.)

[8] This was Jefferson's position, but he said he could get only Wythe to agree with him in the early days of the Revolution (Writings, Boston ed., 1830, vol. i. 6).

[9] "Why may not an American plead for the just prerogatives of the crown?" (Works, iv. 218.) "The sovereignty of the crown I understand. The sovereignty of the British legislature out of Britain I do not understand" (Ibid., 208). "Our former kings governed their colonies as they had governed their dominions in France, without the participation of British Parliaments" (Ibid., 262). "America is not part of the dominions of England, but of the king's dominions" (Ibid., 284). This theory he carried to the farthest extent, and wrote that "when money is wanted of the colonies for any public service, in which they ought to bear a part, call upon them by requisitional letters from the crown (according to the long-established custom) to grant such aids as their loyalty shall dictate and their abilities permit" (Ibid., 156).

[10] Works, x. 321.

[11] The Rights of Great Britain Asserted, 82.

[12] An American annual revenue of less than two thousand pounds cost Great Britain between seven and eight thousand pounds a year (Bancroft, orig, ed. v. 88, citing the Grenville Papers).

[13] Vol. III. pp. 182, 267, and 381.

[14] A summary of these acts may be found in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, ii. 201; and they are discussed by John Adams in a series of letters to William Tudor (Works, vol. x. passim). The first act is understood to be a substantial reënactment of a law of the Long Parliament in 1651, suggested by Sir George Downing, a native of New England.

[15] Such, at least, seems to be the effect of the words "in English-built shipping", in the act of 1663, excluding those "of the built and belonging to" the colonies which were permitted by the act of 1660. But were the commodities and manufactures of England included among those of "Europe" which could be exported to the colonies only in English-built ships, or could the colonists send their own ships for them?

[16] From overlooking this option, this clause of the act has received unmerited obloquy. It was simple justice to the British trader.

[17] This legislation may be traced in the Table to the Statutes at Large, vol. ix., title Plantations, and, in part, in John Adams's Works, vol. x. 350, note. See also Franklin's Works, iv. 250, 400.

[18] Wealth of Nations, vol. ii. 435.

[19] Colonial Policy, vol. i. 7, 239.

[20] Cf. on this point a paper by Charles Deane in the Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1886.

[21] Rights of Great Britain Asserted, 87. But see Franklin's opinion as to these bounties (Works, iv. 225).

[22] Burke's Works, i. 457, Boston ed.

[23] Colonial Policy, i. 156.

[24] But see Works, iv. 301: "Depend upon it, the Americans are not so impolitic as to neglect settlements for unprofitable manufactures; but some manufactures may be more advantageous to some persons than the cultivation of lands."

[25] Burke's European Settlements in America, ch. vii.; Works, ix. 328.

[26] See Franklin's "Rules for Reducing a Great Empire to a Small One", in Works, iv. 387.

[27] See Thacher's "Draft of an Address to the King and Parliament", in Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., vol. xx. p. 49.

[28] Works, x. 248.

[29] The writs to which he attributed so much importance require explanation. A vessel laden with dutiable goods ought to enter some established port and manifest her cargo at the custom-house for payment of duties. This the government justly demands, and with it the fair trader readily complies. Not so the illicit trader. Before reaching port he may discharge a portion of the cargo in some place remote from the custom-house; or in a regular port, by connivance, he may secrete a portion of it, and thus escape paying duties. In either case the revenue officer needs a search-warrant for such goods. If he applies to the court, he must set forth a general description of the goods concealed and the place where, together with the names of witnesses. This is recorded, and may be known to all parties interested. The result is, that the informer subjects himself to private animosity and public obloquy, and the goods meanwhile may be removed to some other place. This process may be repeated indefinitely, with like results. What the officer needs, therefore, is a general warrant, good for an indefinite time, not returnable into the court, and authorizing search of all suspected places at all hours of the day, for any dutiable goods supposed to be concealed. This is a Writ of Assistance. Its formidable nature is readily understood, and the objections to it are apparent. It is like those General Warrants which made a great noise in England in connection with John Wilkes (Campbell's Lord Chancellors, v. 207, American ed.; Parliamentary History, 1764, vol. xv. 1393). They are prohibited by the Bill of Rights in the Massachusetts Constitution, drafted by John Adams, as infringing the right of the citizen to protect his house from unreasonable search; and when the Constitution of the United States, without a similar provision, was submitted to the people, its absence was noticed, and the omission supplied by the fourth amendment. Such writs are now in force in England (16 and 17 Vict., ch. 107, sec. 221), but not in the United States.

[30] 7 and 8 Wm. 3, ch. 22, sec. 5.

[31] "Boston, Feb. 19th, 1753. Whereas, I am informed there still continues to be carried on an illicit trade between Holland and other parts of Europe, and the neighboring colonies, and that great quantities of European and Asiatic commodities are clandestinely brought from thence unto this port by land as well as by sea; and as I am determined to use my utmost endeavors to prevent the carrying on of a trade prejudicial to our mother country and detrimental to the fair trader, I hereby again give this public notice that if any person or persons will give me information where such goods are concealed, that they may be proceeded against according to law, they, upon condemnation, shall be very handsomely rewarded, and their names concealed; and I hereby direct all the officers of the customs within my district to be very vigilant in discovering and seizing all such contraband goods. H. Frankland, Coll." (Nason's Frankland, p. 44.)

[32] Hutchinson, History, iii. 92.

[33] Quincy's Reports, Appendix, 407.

[34] It is of little consequence whether the merchants were instigated by one Barons, a dismissed revenue officer, or by Otis, supposed to have been influenced by the appointment of Hutchinson as Chief Justice to the exclusion of his father, who had cherished expectations of elevation to the bench on the first vacancy (Hutchinson, History, iii. 86; Tudor's Life of Otis, 55; and John Adams's Works, x. 281).

[35] Quincy's report, which is of the second hearing, Nov. 18, 1761, gives little more than the authorities cited. Minot adds a point in Gridley's argument (History, ii. 89). John Adams's notes, taken at the first hearing in February, may be found in his Works, ii. 521, and a more extended report, in Minot, ut supra, 91, and in Tudor's Life of Otis, 63. See also John Adams's Works, vol. x. passim.

[36] Horace Gray, Jr., sums up the whole matter in the following paragraph: "A careful examination of the subject compels the conclusion that the decision of Hutchinson and his associates has been too strongly condemned as illegal, and that there was at least reasonable ground for holding, as matter of mere law, that the British Parliament had power to bind the colonies that even a statute contrary to the Constitution could not be declared void by the judicial courts; that by the English statutes, as practically construed by the courts in England, Writs of Assistance might be general in form; that the Superior Court of Judicature of the province had the power of the English Court of Exchequer; and that the Writs of Assistance prayed for, though contrary to the spirit of the English Constitution, could hardly be refused by a provincial court, before general warrants had been condemned in England, and before the Revolution had actually begun in America. The remedy adopted by the colonies was to throw off the yoke of Parliament; to confer on the judiciary the power to declare unconstitutional statutes void; to declare general warrants unconstitutional in express terms; and thus to put an end here to general Writs of Assistance" (Quincy's Reports, Appendix, 540).

[37] Works, x. 183.

[38] Hutchinson, iii. 100.

[39] Pownall's Administration of the Colonies, 3d ed., Appendix, iii. 40.

[40] In 1763, when the Indians on the southern frontiers were menacing, Gen. Gage required 750 men from Massachusetts to assist in a movement against the Indians on the lakes. The House declined nor would it yield even when the Secretary of State urged compliance (Minot's History, ii. 142). But while Massachusetts refused the required assistance, Connecticut, though reluctantly, granted it,—a fact of much significance in respect to the reliability of voluntary contributions for the common defence of the colonies.

[41] More than 400 privateers had been fitted out from the colonial ports, which had cruised against French property even as far as the coast of France (Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 40).

[42] Grahame, Hist. U. S., iv. 138.

[43] See Vol. V. p. 613.

[44] See Vol. V. p. 177.

[45] In England, admiralty courts were without juries; but revenue cases were tried in the Court of Exchequer, with juries.

[46] Grahame gives a full and graphic account of these changes (Hist. U. S., iv. 170).

[47] "For some time before and after the termination of the war of 1755, a considerable intercourse had been carried on between the British and Spanish colonies, consisting of the manufactures of Great Britain imported by the former and sold to the latter, by which the British colonies acquired gold and silver, and were enabled to make remittances to the mother country" (Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 44).

[48] History, ii. p. 147.

[49] Works, x. 345.

[50] The expression is Governor Bernard's in January, 1764 (Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 123, note). The consequences of breaking up the West India trade by the enforcement of the navigation laws, and its influence upon the minds of the commercial colonies, will more fully appear in the following facts. The sugar colonies, being cultivated by slaves, afforded an insufficient market for English manufactures. Consequently, the large ships which were needed to bring off sugar and molasses were obliged to proceed thither without profitable freight. But the Northern colonies, and New England in particular, could supply the islands with the commodities they needed,—cattle, horses, lumber for buildings, casks for sugar and molasses. A cargo of these commodities sent to the islands was exchanged for sugar and molasses, which were brought to New England; or for bullion, which, with a cargo of sugar, was carried to Old England. The freight money and bullion were exchanged for British merchandise, which was brought to New England, thus making a profitable double voyage. With her advantages of position and of profitable freight, New England also became the carrier of the sugar of the French islands to Spain.

[51] As to illicit trade in Rhode Island, and the measures to prevent it, see Bartlett's Destruction of the Gaspee, 6.

[52] History, iii. 108.

[53] Ibid., iii. 106.

[54] Hist. U. S., final revision, iii. 73. Two things in the above summary require explanation. Merchandise imported into England was subject to heavy duties; but if it was reëxported to America, then these duties, in whole or in part, were repaid to the importer, and the result would be that the colonists could purchase wines and Continental goods cheaper than could be done by British subjects at home. To equalize this burden, and still to derive a revenue, these drawbacks were reduced; and, of course, the British Exchequer would gain the amount of this reduction.

In the Treaty of 1763, two small islands, St. Pierre and Miquelon, on the south coast of Newfoundland, were accorded to France for the convenience of her fishing vessels. But they had been made ports of an illicit trade with the American colonies. Hence the prohibition of all trade with them.

[55] Printed as an appendix to Otis's Rights of the British Colonies.

[56] Journal of the House, 1764, 53. This paper was not Otis's pamphlet with a similar title, though it may have been the substance of it. See Frothingham, Rise of the Republic, 169, n.

[57] Ibid., 66.

[58] Ibid., p. 72.

[59] The reader of Tudor's Life of Otis, 170, would infer that Hutchinson was chosen agent at this time instead of in the January preceding. House Journal, 1763-4, 236.

[60] Hutchinson's History, iii. 112.

[61] Minot's History, ii. 168.

[62] Mass. State Papers, 18 et seq.

[63] Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, p. 171.

[64] Hutchinson's History, iii. 103. Two Americans, Franklin and William S. Johnson, were reporting on the Wilkes turmoils in England, at this time, to their home correspondents. Cf. Franklin's Works (Sparks's ed.), vii. 401, 403; Bigelow's Life of F., ii. 9; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xlix., 270 et seq.

[65] Bancroft, History, v. 275.

[66] These resolutions are in Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 59.

[67] The proceedings, with the circular letter, may be found in the Mass. State Papers, 35.

[68] Of the colonies south of New England, South Carolina was the first to agree to the proposed congress. Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 68.

[69] Later, in December, he was compelled to renounce his office under circumstances of special ignominy, from which his age and character afforded no protection.

[70] Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 184.

[71] Frothingham gives a summary of these papers, with the names of the committees who drafted them (Rise of the Republic, pp. 186, 187).

[72] Though this day was observed in several colonies by the tolling of bells, closing of shops, funeral processions, and other demonstrations of hostility to the act, there was no violence (Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 68, 70).

[73] Mass. State Papers, 61.

[74] Parliamentary History, xvi. 133 et seq.

[75] Mass. State Papers, 81.

[76] Mass. State Papers, 91, 92.

[77] Mass. State Papers, 94.

[78] Parliamentary History, vol. xvi. 359; Prior Documents, 134. During the adjournment a double broadside had been issued, containing the proposed bill for compensation, an extract from Secretary Conway's letter to Governor Bernard, and letters from De Berdt, the agent, advising compliance with the parliamentary recommendation. A copy is in the Boston Public Library.

[79] Mahon's Hist. of Eng., v. 81.

[80] Parliamentary History, vol. xvi. 331.

[81] Bradford, History of Mass., i. 97.

[82] Parliamentary Hist., xvi. 375.

[83] 7 Geo. III. ch. 41, Statutes at Large, vol. x. 340.

[84] 7 Geo. III. ch. 46, Ibid., 369. Bancroft's account of these Acts is not quite accurate (History, vi. 84, 85): "By another Act (7 Geo. III. ch. xli.) a Board of Customs was established at Boston, and general Writs of Assistance were legalized." The execution of the Laws of Trade was placed under the direction of Commissioners of Customs, "to reside in the said Plantations", where the king should direct,—not localized at Boston. It was by ch. xlvi. sec. x., not xli., that Writs of Assistance were legalized. But a more serious error is in the statement that "Townshend's revenue was to be disposed of under the sign-manual at the king's pleasure. This part of the system had no limit as to time or place, and was intended as a perpetual menace." This is far from being accurate. By section iv. it is provided that the revenue arising from the act should be applied, in the first place, "for the charge of the administration of justice, and the support of civil government" in the colonies; and the residue was to be paid into the receipt of the Exchequer, and entered separate and apart from all other moneys, and reserved to be disposed by Parliament for the defence of the colonies. It was the civil administration alone that could be paid by the king's warrant. The expense of the army could be appropriated only by Parliament; and the difference is worthy of attention.

[85] It was reported at a town meeting held at Boston on October 28, 1767, in which James Otis presided, that Lynn, in the previous year, had turned out forty thousand pairs of women's shoes,—an industry which has since grown to very large proportions,—and that another town had made thirty thousand yards of cloth (Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 208).

[86] Mass. State Papers, 121, 124, 134.

[87] The circular letter was not adopted without opposition. Bernard says that the proposition was first rejected two to one; and after the measure was finally carried, in order to give the appearance of greater unanimity, the former proceedings of dissent were obliterated from the journal (Letters, 8).

[88] Mass. State Papers, 113.

[89] Abstracts of these papers convey no adequate idea of their strength. They must be read in their completeness, and so read, in connection with Lord Mansfield's speech in the House of Lords, one sees the arguments of each party stated at their best.

[90] Hutchinson's History, iii. 188.

[91] Gordon, i. 231. Governor Bernard has given an account of these transactions in a series of letters addressed to Shelburne or Hillsborough, and published in a collected volume. It is a graphic narrative, in many cases of events in which he had participated, or which he had learned from eye-witnesses. Apparently they are as fair as other partisan accounts of the transactions, which may be found in various histories. The truth yet waits to be told; but it will not be accurately told by one who assigns all sublimated virtues to one party, and the most malignant depravity to the other.

[92] See Hutchinson's History, iii. 192, and 488 for the address.

[93] Mass. State Papers, 156.

[94] For a summary of these replies, see Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 213.

[95] Letters 41.

[96] History, iii. 196.

[97] Ibid., iii. 197; see also Frothingham, 239.

[98] Letters 40.

[99] Mass. State Papers, 147.

[100] Otis was chairman. On the first day several committees were appointed: one to learn from Governor Bernard the grounds of his apprehensions that additional regiments were expected; another to present a petition for convening the General Court "with the utmost speed;" and a third to take into consideration the state of public affairs, and report salutary measures at an adjourned meeting. The next day the governor replied that his information in regard to the troops was private: when he had public letters on the subject he would communicate them to the Council. As for calling another assembly, he could do nothing without his majesty's commands. Whereupon a series of resolutions and votes was passed to the effect that the inhabitants of Boston would defend the king, the charter, and their own rights; that levying of money within the province, or keeping a standing army, except by consent of the General Assembly, was in violation of the charter and of natural rights; that the several towns be asked (the letter is in Hutchinson, iii. 492) to send delegates to a convention to be held on the 22d; that on account of a "prevailing apprehension, in the minds of many, of an approaching war with France", the inhabitants be provided with arms; and that the ministers in town set apart a day of fasting and prayer. A broadside of these proceedings was published, of which a fac-simile is in the Boston Public Library.

[101] Hutchinson's History, iii. 212. They were the Fourteenth, Twenty-ninth, and part of the Fifty-ninth British regiments.

[102] Parliamentary History, vol. xvi. 476 et seq.; Mahon's History, v. 240; Hutchinson's History, iii. 219.

[103] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 317.

[104] Hutchinson's History, iii. 221.

[105] Ibid., iii. 494.

[106] Writings, i. 3 (Boston ed.).

[107] North Carolina adopted resolutions similar to those of Virginia, and associations were formed to prevent importation of British goods. Ramsay, Amer. Rev., i. 84.

[108] Part of the Sixty-fourth and Sixty-fifth regiments, under Colonels Mackey and Pomeroy, arrived at Boston November 10th.

[109] Hutchinson's History, iii. 233.

[110] Ibid., vol. iii. 498.

[111] He was created a baronet March 20, 1769 (Gordon, History, i. 275).

[112] An unpublished letter of this date, from Charles Lloyd to George Grenville, giving an account of the affair, is in the possession of the writer.

[113] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 423.

[114] May, 1770. "Agreeably to a vote of the town of Boston, Capt. Scott sailed from thence this month for London, with the cargo of goods he had brought from thence, contrary to the non-importation agreement; to give evidence, on the other side the water, of the sincerity of said agreement" (Mass. Hist. Coll., ii 44).

[115] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 421. The Minute of the Cabinet, May 1, 1769, by which Hillsborough was authorized to make the promise contained in his circular letter, may be seen in Mahon's History of England, v. Appendix, xxxvii.; and the reasons upon which the minute rests are both interesting and significant—"upon consideration of such duties having been laid contrary to the true principles of commerce."

[116] Parliamentary History, xvi. 855, 979

[117] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 430.

[118] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 435.

[119] Parliamentary History, xvi. 981

[120] Ibid., 1006.

[121] W. S. Johnson, Trumbull Papers, 437.

[122] Administration of the Colonies.

[123] Mass. State Papers, 306.

[124] Lossing's Field-Book of the Revolution, i. 630. For a full account of this affair, see Bartlett's History of the Destruction of the Gaspee.

[125] W. E. Foster's Stephens Hopkins, Pt. ii. 95.

[126] Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 266.

[127] For a full account of the formation and purpose of the Committee of Correspondence, with the names of the Boston members, see Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 263.

[128] See resolutions and members of the committee in Mass. State Papers, 400.

[129] History, iii. 397.

[130] Ramsay gives these resolutions. Hist. Amer. Rev., i. 98.

[131] Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 294; Hutchinson's History, iii. 441.

[132] Hutchinson's History, iii. 441.

[133] He died at Brompton, England, June 3, 1780.

[134] Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 347.

[135] The action of the other colonies in respect to the proposed Continental Congress may be found in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 331, n.

[136] See authorities in John Adams, a pamphlet by the writer of this chapter, 1884.

[137] Works, iv. 109. I find in the works of no other writer, historical or political, more accurate conceptions of the causes, immediate and remote, of the Revolution, and so fair and judicial a statement of them. Works, i. 24, 92.

[138] Bancroft, v. 250.

[139] See Rights of Great Britain asserted against the claims of America (London, 1776).

[140] Works, x. 321.

[141] History, ii. 43.

[142] Ibid., vi. 85.

[143] Hist. N. E., ii. 444.

[144] New York, 1882 by Eben Greenough Scott.

[145] In the absence of such a work, the student will find something to his purpose in the Hutchinson Papers (Prince Soc. ed.), ii. 150, 232, 265, 301, 313 et passim; Andros Tracts, ii. 69, 215, 224, 233 et passim; Sewall's Letters, i. 4; Chalmers's Political Annals, in the notes particularly, and in his Introduction to the History of the Revolt of the Colonies; Palfrey, Hist. New England, ii. 444; iii. 276, 279, n. For the commerce and products of Virginia in 1671, and the effect of the navigation laws, see Chalmers's Political Annals, 327; and in 1675, Ibid., 353, 354; and for duties imposed on commerce by colonial assemblies, Ibid., 354, 404. For complaints of British merchants to Charles II. of infractions of the navigation laws by New England, Ibid., 400, 433, 437. See Ramsay's American Revolution, i. 19, 22, 23, 45, 46, 49; and Franklin's Works, iv. 37, for British trade with the colonies. Jefferson's Notes, 277, gives the amount of Virginia exports just before the Revolution. Queries and Answers, relative to the commerce of Connecticut in 1774 (Mass. Hist. Coll., vii. 234), affords much interesting information as to shipping, sailors, and importations from Great Britain, the course and subjects of foreign trade of the colony. For similar papers relating to New York, see O'Callaghan's Documentary Hist. of New York, 8vo ed., vol. i. 145, 699, 709, 737, and vol. iv. 163.

[146] Works, Boston ed., vol. ix.

[147] The Late Revelations Respecting the British Colonies (published at Philadelphia, 1765, and attributed to John Dickinson) contains valuable statistics of commerce, and discusses the British commercial and revenue policy with great ability; also, Considerations on the Propriety of Imposing Taxes in the British Colonies, attributed to Daniel Dulaney, of Maryland, 1765; The Right to the Tonnage, by the same, Annapolis, 1766.

[148] Cf. Felt's Massachusetts Currency; Pownall's Administration of the Colonies, 102 et seq.

[149] Hist. N. E., iii. ch. ix.

[150] Sewall says that the first admiralty court was held July 5, 1686, and that several ships had been seized for trading contrary to the acts (Letters, i. 34). Dudley was inaugurated May 26, 1686, and soon got to the work of enforcing the laws. See also Andros Tracts, iii. 69.

[151] The history of these writs is given, with a fulness and accuracy which leaves nothing to be desired, in the Appendix to Quincy's Reports, by Horace Gray, Jr. (now Mr. Justice Gray, of the Supreme Court of the United States). Besides other sources of unpublished information, in England and America, Mr. Gray had access to the Bernard Papers (now in Harvard University library); in his administration these writs were legalized and efficiently used.

[152] See Vol. V. p. 612. For more than a century in the government of the colonies political considerations were subordinated to a commercial policy; New England was favored during the Protectorate, and Virginia after the Restoration, equally on political grounds. But with the beginning of the French War this commercial policy began to give way to an imperial policy. To the Congress of 1754 is due the distinction of being the only body, among similar gatherings before or since, which of its own motion seriously entertained and adopted a project of bringing the colonies, as a unit, into defined relations to the mother country, for general government in respect to their defence. Nobody saw more clearly than Franklin, or has more explicitly pointed out the necessity of some general government for the defence of the colonies (Works, by Sparks, iii. 32 et seq.); and to secure these ends he was willing to go further, in some respects, even than Hutchinson. He admitted the power and necessity of parliamentary action in the alteration of colonial charters (Works, iii. 36). He provided that the President-General should be appointed and his salary paid by the crown (3 Mass. Hist. Coll., v. 70); that the Speaker should be approved by the President-General, thus admitting the validity of the prerogative (Works, iii. 44; and see Plan, that the assent of the President-General should be requisite to all acts of the Grand Council, instead of all laws, as stated by Bancroft, iv. 123); and that the Grand Council should have power to "lay and levy such general duties, imposts, or taxes as to them shall appear most equal and just" (Works, iii. 50). Bancroft, in summarizing the Plan of Union, drawn by Franklin, says (Hist., iv. 124) the general government was empowered "to make laws and levy just and equitable taxes", thus giving the impression that the powers of the Council were limited by absolute justice and equity, or by what each colony should so judge. But this is what Franklin neither meant nor said. He lodged the powers in the sole discretion of the Council, which is quite a different thing. Grenville or Townshend asked no more for Parliament. The General Assembly of Connecticut knew what the words meant. In their reasons for rejecting the proposed plan (I Mass. Hist. Coll., vii. 212) they say, "The proposal, in said plan contained, for the President-General and Council to levy taxes, &c., as they please, throughout this extensive government, is a very extraordinary thing, and against the rights and privileges of Englishmen." Their objections to Franklin's Plan read like an answer of the Massachusetts General Court, drawn by Samuel Adams, to a message of Bernard. The governor and council of Rhode Island had similar fears. They said that they found it to be "a scheme which, if carried into execution, will virtually deprive this government, at least, of some of its most valuable privileges, if not effectually overturn and destroy our present happy constitution" (Rhode Island Hist. Tracts, ix. 61). And that sturdy patriot, Stephen Hopkins, who was associated with Franklin, Hutchinson, Pitkin, and Howard in the Albany Plan, was subjected to much worry for invoking the parliamentary authority in modifying the Rhode Island charter, and was driven to self-vindication in A True Representation (Ibid., I). Whatever modifications Franklin's opinions may have undergone in later years on other matters, "it was his opinion thirty years afterwards that his plan was near the true medium" (Works, iii. 24, Sparks's note).

There is a plan of union in the handwriting of Thomas Hutchinson (Mass. Archives, vi. 171, and in the Trumbull MSS., in Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 97; and printed in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, Appendix) which probably expressed his sentiments in 1754, when it was rejected by the General Court. Like Franklin, he was willing to acknowledge and invoke the parliamentary authority for the union, with the power in the Grand Council to levy such taxes as they deemed just and equal; but, unlike Franklin, he did not allow the President to negative the choice of the Speaker by the Grand Council.

But no one wrote from a more varied experience, or more careful examination of colonial constitutions, and of their possible relations to the mother country, than Thomas Pownall. His connection with the Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, as their secretary in 1745, made him familiar with the difficulties of colonial administration from the British point of view; and his successive administrations, as lieutenant-governor, or governor, of New Jersey, Massachusetts, and South Carolina from 1755 to 1761, extended his acquaintance with the state of colonial affairs in the Northern, Middle, and Southern colonies. He was a moderate Whig, and, like all moderate men in those days, his counsels were duly regarded by neither party. He embodied his views in a work entitled The Administration of the Colonies, which passed through several editions. His scheme was elaborate and wise, if his concurrence with Franklin in points which they treat in common may be regarded as a test of wisdom. His commercial scheme was predicated on the general law that colonial trade follows capital, and, while sharing the benefits, pays profit to it. He would have left that trade free to develop itself within certain limits; but inasmuch as it must tend somewhere,—to the English, French, or Dutch,—he thought it right that the trade of English colonies should pay profit to England, as the country whose navy defended it, and by whose capital it was developed. But England ought to grasp this trade only as the centre of a commercial dominion of which America was a part and entitled to parliamentary representation, which he thought practicable. In theory he acknowledged the prerogative of the crown in respect to colonial government, but recognized the necessity of parliamentary intervention, and would have reduced both to cases of actual necessity, and would always have subordinated the question of power to the dictates of reason and expediency.

[153] See letter of Pownall to Franklin, on this subject, and Franklin's remarks (Works, iv. 199).

[154] See the whole passage, not often quoted by historians, in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 149, n.

[155] Sidney S. Rider (Rhode Island Hist. Tracts, 9, xxx.) denies that Rhode Island rejected the Plan, as affirmed by Sparks.

[156] Massachusetts State Papers.

[157] Published at Boston in 1818, and edited by Alden Bradford. It is often quoted as Mass. State Papers. The answers were chiefly from the industrious pen of Samuel Adams.

[158] Journals of the House of Lords, xxxiv. 124.

[159] Works, iv. 466.

[160] Memoir of Josiah Quincy, Jr., 355.

[161] History, vi. p. 244.

[162] Hist. of the Revolution, i. 175.

[163] What we know of this speech is derived mainly from the notes of it taken by John Adams (Works, ii. 521-525), and from the reminiscent account of it which Adams gave to William Tudor in 1818, with his description of the scene in court during its delivery. Minot, in his Hist. of Massachusetts, 1748-1765 (vol. ii. 91-99), worked up these notes, and they form the basis of the narrative in Tudor's Life of Otis (p. 62). The legal aspects have been specially examined by Horace Gray in an appendix to the Reports of Cases in the Superior Court 1761-1772, by Josiah Quincy, Jr., printed from his original manuscripts, and edited by Samuel M. Quincy (Boston, 1865). Cf. John Adams's Works, x. pp. 182, 233, 244, 274, 314, 317, 338, 342, 362. Cf. also Ibid., vol. i. p. 58; ii. 124, 521; and the Adams-Warren Correspondence in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 340, 355. Cf. also Hutchinson's Mass. Bay, vol. iii.; Essex Institute Hist. Coll., Aug., 1860; Bancroft's United States, ii. 546, 553; Thornton's Pulpit of the Rev., 112; Barry's Massachusetts, ii. 264; Everett's Orations, i. 388; Scott's Constitutional Liberty, 237; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 5; Palfrey's Compend. Hist. N. E., iv. 306; Wells's Sam. Adams, i. 43. There is a copy of one of these writs in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Society. W. S. Johnson wrote to Governor Trumbull that the process was in vogue in England (Trumbull Papers; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xlix. pp. 292, 374), as it is to-day. The most conspicuous instance of an attempt to search under these writs was when the officers tried to enter the house of Daniel Malcom in Oct., 1766, and were forcibly resisted. The papers connected with this, as transmitted to London, and telling the story on both sides, are among the Lee Papers in Harvard College library (vol. i. nos. 14-25).

[164] Sabin, xiv. p. 84. Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 559; John Adams, x. p. 300. Lecky skilfully sketches the condition of the colonies at this time (England in the Eighteenth Century, iii. ch. 12), and Lodge's Short Hist. of the English Colonies depicts, under the heads of the various colonies, the prevailing characteristics.

[165] Dickinson's speech in the Assembly, May 24, 1764, passed through two editions (Philad., 1764), and was reprinted in London (1764). (Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,387-88.) Galloway's Speech in Answer (Philad., 1764; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,395) was reprinted in London (1765), with a preface by Franklin (Carter-Brown, iii. 1,452), and Dickinson's Reply was printed in London, 1765 (Carter-Brown, iii. 1,444). Dickinson's speech is also in his Works (i. p. 1). Cf. Franklin's Works, iv. pp. 78, 101, 143.

[166] Rise of the Republic, p. 167.

[167] It is analyzed in John Adams's Works (x. 293), and in Frothingham, p. 169. It was published in Boston in 1765, and in London the same year, by Almon, and was circulated through the instrumentality of Thomas Hollis (Sabin, xiv. p. 83).

[168] John Adams's Works, x. 189. Cf. Palfrey, New England (Compend. ed., iv. 343), and Tudor's Otis. See ante, p. 28.

[169] Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,456; Sabin, viii. no. 32,966; Cooke Catalogue, no. 1,202. It was reprinted in London in 1766, at the instigation of the Rhode Island agent, as The Grievances of the American Colonies carefully examined (Sparks, no. 1,272; Cooke, no. 1,203). There is a reprint in the R. I. Col. Records, vi. 416. The London text is followed in Selim H. Peabody's American Patriotism (N. Y., 1880). The original edition of all was published by order of the R. I. Assembly in 1764, but no copy is known. Cf. Wm. E. Foster's Stephen Hopkins, a Rhode Island Statesman; study in the political history of the eighteenth century (Providence, 1884,—no. 19 of R. I. Hist. Tracts), who examines (ii. p. 227) the claims of Hopkins to its authorship, for the tract was printed anonymously. Cf. Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, p. 172; Palfrey's New England (Compend. ed.), iv. 369. Hopkins's tract was controverted in a Letter from a gentleman at Halifax (Newport, 1765,—Sabin, x. 40,281); and James Otis replied in a Vindication of the British Colonies against the aspersions of the Halifax gentleman (Boston, 1765; Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,480); and this in turn was followed by a Defence of the Letter, etc. (Newport, 1765), and Brief Remarks (Brinley, i. nos. 190, 198). A tract usually cited by a similar title, but which was called at length Coloniæ Anglicanæ illustratæ: or the Acquest of dominion and the plantation of Colonies made by the English in America, with the rights of the Colonists examined, stated, and illustrated. Part I. (London, 1762; Sabin, ii. 6,209; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,314) was never completed, and was mostly occupied with irrelevant matter. Its author was William Bollan, who was dismissed as the Massachusetts agent during that same year, and John Adams (x. 355) says he scarce ever knew a book so utterly despised. Otis (Tudor, p. 114) expressed his contempt for it (Sabin, ii. p. 265-6).

[170] Reasons why the Brit. Colonies in America should not be charged with internal taxes, etc. (New Haven, 1764). It is reprinted in Conn. Col. Records, vol. xii. Cf. Pitkin's United States, i. 165, and Ingersoll's Letters, p. 2.

[171] Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,427. John Adams's Works, iv. 129; x. 292. Palfrey, iv. 349. Thacher died in 1765, aged 45 years.

[172] Mayhew had early sounded the alarm, and Thornton begins his Pulpit of the Revolution with a reprint of Mayhew's sermon in 1750 on Unlimited submission and non-resistance to the higher powers (Boston, 1750; again, 1818; Brinley, no. 1,529). The controversy with Apthorpe, who was settled over Christ Church in Cambridge, as representative of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, began with his Considerations on the institution and conduct of the Society, etc. (Boston, 1763), to which Mayhew responded in his Observations on the charter and conduct of the Society, etc., designed to show their non-conformity to each other (Boston, 1763; London, 1763; Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. no. 383; Haven, p. 564). Dr. Caner, of King's Chapel, Boston, replied in A Candid Examination of Dr. Mayhew's Observations, etc. (Boston, 1763). Another Answer (London, 1764) was perhaps by Apthorpe. Mayhew published A Defence of his Observations (Boston, 1763), and a second defence, called Remarks, etc. (Boston, 1764; London, 1765), which was followed by a Review by Apthorpe (London, 1765). These and other tracts of the controversy are recorded in Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. nos. 378-391; in Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,433, 1,465; in Haven's list, pp. 562, 564, 565.

A later controversy, between Thomas Bradbury Chandler and Charles Chauncy, produced other tracts printed in New York, Philad., and Boston (1767-68). Cf. Brinley, iv. nos. 6, 127-31, and Haven's list; and for these religious controversies, Thornton's Pulpit, p. 109; Lecky, iii. 435; Palfrey's New England (Compend. ed., iv. 324); E. H. Gillett in Hist. Mag., Oct., 1870; Perry's Amer. Episc. Church, i. 395; Gambrall's Church life in Colonial Maryland (1885); O. S. Straus's Origin of Repub. form of gov't in the U. S. (1885), ch. 3 and 7; Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv. 198, 202.

[173] Cf. Bancroft (original ed., ii. 353; vi. 9); Adams's Works (x. 236); Dawson's Sons of Liberty in N. Y. (p. 42); Barry's Mass. (ii. 252-255); Scott's Development of Constitutional Liberty (pp. 189-214). In 1764 courts of vice-admiralty for British America had been established (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvii. 291), and the sugar act passed, placing a duty on molasses, etc.,—a modification of the act of 1733. "I know not", wrote John Adams in 1818, "why we should blush to confess that molasses was an essential ingredient in American independence." John Adams's Works, x. 345.

[174] Ames's Almanac for 1766 has this notice: "Price before the Stamp Act takes place, half-a-dollar per dozen, and six coppers single; after the act takes place, more than double that price." The act was called, Anno regni Georgii III. regis Magnæ Britanniæ, Franciæ, & Hiberniæ, quinto. 1765. An act for granting and applying certain stamp duties, and other duties in the British colonies and plantations in America, towards defraying the expenses of defending, protecting, and securing the same [etc.]. It was reprinted at once in Boston, New London, New York, and Philadelphia, and will be found in the official records and in various modern books like Spencer's Hist. U. S. (i. 274), etc. The stamps are found in various cabinets (Catal. Mass. Hist. Soc. Cab., pp. 104, 118, 123, 125), and cuts of the stamp are found in Mem. Hist. Boston (iii. 12), Thornton's Pulpit of the Rev., etc.

[175] Cf. Bancroft, orig. ed., v. 151. There was a proposition for a colonial stamp act in a tract published in London in 1755, called A Miscellaneous Essay concerning the courses pursued by Great Britain in the affairs of the Colonies (London, 1755).

[176] Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Cent. (iii. 324). Mahon (v. 86) quotes Burke's speech of 1774 as proving the small interest in the debate of 1765, and thinks that Walpole's failure to mention the debate in his letters proves the truth of Burke's recollections. Adolphus had earlier relied on Burke. Mahon even intimates that Barré's famous speech was an interpolation in the later accounts; but the Letters printed by Jared Ingersoll show that it was delivered. (Cf. Palfrey's Review of Mahon.) The Parliamentary History says that Barré's speech was in reply to Grenville; but Ingersoll says Charles Townshend was the speaker who provoked it. Cf. Frothingham's Rise of the Republic (p. 175); Ryerson's Loyalists (i. 294); H. F. Elliot on "Barré and his Times" in Macmillan's Mag., xxxv. 109 (Dec., 1876); and Hist. MSS. Com. Report, viii. pp. 189, 190.

It was in the speech of Feb. 6, 1765, that Barré applied the words "Sons of Liberty" to the patriots in America, which they readily adopted (Bancroft, v. 240; Thornton's Pulpit, 131). Dr. J. H. Trumbull, in a paper, "Sons of Liberty in 1755", published in the New Englander, vol. xxxv. (1876), showed that the term had ten years earlier been applied in Connecticut to organizations to advance theological liberty. It is also sometimes said that the popular party at the time of the Zenger trial had adopted the name. The new organization embraced the young and ardent rather than the older and more prudent patriots, and at a later period they became the prime abettors of the non-importation movements. For their correspondence in New England, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (x. 324) and the Belknap Papers (MSS., iii. p. 110, etc.) in the Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet. A list of those dining together in 1769 at Dorchester is given in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Aug., 1869. The correspondence of those in Boston with John Wilkes, 1768-69, is noted in the Brit. Mus. Catal., Add. MSS. 30,870, ff. 45, 46, 75, 135, 222. H. B. Dawson's Sons of Liberty in N. Y. was privately printed in N. Y., 1859.

[177] A letter of Aug. 11, 1764, from Halifax had forewarned the colonial governors of the intention (N. Y. Col. Docs., vii. 646; N. J. Archives, ix. 448).

[178] Thomas's Hist. of Printing, Am. Antiq. Soc. ed., ii. 223; Sargent's Dealings with the Dead, i. 140, 144; Lossing's Field-Book, i. 466; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 159; Thomas Paine's "Liberty Tree Ballad" in the Penna. Mag., July, 1775; and Moore's Songs and Ballads of the Rev., p. 18. The selecting of a large tree and its dedication to the cause became general. Cf. Silas Downer's Discourse, July 25, 1768, at dedication of a tree of liberty in Providence (Providence, 1768), and the Providence Gazette, July 30, 1768 (Sabin, v. 20, 767; J. R. Bartlett's Bibliog. of R. I., p. 112; Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,622).

[179] Hutchinson had expressed disapproval of the Stamp Act; but doubting its expediency did not affect his judgment of the necessity of enforcing it (P. O. Hutchinson, i. 577; ii. 58). On the destruction of his house, see his own statement in P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, i. 70, 72, and his letter, dated Aug. 30, 1765, in the Mass. Archives, xxvi. 146, printed in the Mass. Senate Docs. (1870, no. 187, p. 3). He says: "The lieutenant-governor, with his children, lodged the next night at the Castle, but after that in his house at Milton, though not without apprehension of Danger." Quincy's diary (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., iv. 47) preserves Hutchinson's speech, when a few days later he took his seat on the bench, clad with such clothing as was left to him. Cf. the accounts in Boston Newsletter, Sept. 3, 1765; Parliamentary History, iv. 316; Conduct of a late Administration, 102; Memorial Hist. Boston, iii. 14, etc.; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Jan., 1862, p. 364.

[180] Boston Town Records, 1758-1769, p. 152 (Rec. Com. Rept., xvi.).

[181] These papers are given in Hutchinson's Mass. Bay (iii. 467, 471, 476). Samuel Dexter was the head of the committee to draft the reply of the assembly, but it is thought Sam. Adams wrote the paper (Bancroft, v. 347). Cf. Speeches of the Governors of Mass., 1765-1775, and the answers of the House of Representatives, with other public papers relating to the dispute between this Country and Great Britain (Boston, 1818). This collection was edited by Alden Bradford, and is sometimes cited by historians as "Bradford's Collection", "Mass. State Papers", etc.

There is a portrait of Dexter (b. 1726; d. 1810) by Copley, and a photograph of it in Daniel Goodwin, Jr.'s Provincial Pictures (Chicago, 1886).

[182] There is a likeness of Andrew Oliver, by Copley, in the possession of Dr. F. E. Oliver; and a photograph of it is in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Society (Perkins's Copley, p. 90), and in P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson (vol. ii. 17); and a woodcut in Mem. Hist. Boston (iii. 43). Another portrait, by N. Emmons (1728), is given in a photograph in P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson (i. 129).

[183] This paper is preserved, and a fac-simile is given in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., June, 1872, and in the Mem. Hist. Boston (iii. 15). Cf. Bancroft, orig. ed., v. 375, etc.

For other accounts of the feelings and proceedings in Boston and Massachusetts, see a letter of Joshua Henshaw, in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (1878, p. 268), and the histories of Boston by Snow and Drake; Tudor's Otis; John Adams's Works (iii. 465; x. 192, 197); Adams-Warren Correspondence, p. 341; Frothingham's Warren; Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, p. 50; the instructions of Lexington, in Hudson's Lexington, p. 88; the instructions of Braintree, in John Adams's Works, iii. 465, and many other similar documents; beside Dr. Benjamin Church's poem, The Times (Boston Pub. Library, H. 95, 117, no. 3).

[184] Bancroft, orig. ed., v. ch. 14; Boston Rec. Com. Rept., xvi. p.155.

[185] For details, see—

For New Hampshire, a letter from Portsmouth, Jan. 13, 1766, to the New Hampshire agent in London, in the Belknap MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc., 61, C. p. 108).

For Connecticut, Stuart's Governor Trumbull; Jared Ingersoll's Letters relating to the Stamp Act (New Haven, 1766); and some tracts by Governor Fitch (Brinley Catal., nos. 2,116-2,118).

For New York, the Journal of the N. Y. Assembly; histories of the City and State of New York; N. Y. Col. Docs., vii. 770; N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1876; Lossing's Schuyler, i. 203; Leake's Lamb, ch. 2-4; a long and interesting letter from Wm. Smith to Geo. Whitefield in Hist. MSS. Com. Rept., ii. (Dartmouth Papers); a letter of R. R. Livingston to General Monckton, in Aspinwall Papers, ii. 554; Penna. Mag. of Hist., ii. 296; J. A. Stevens in Mag. of Amer. Hist., June, 1777 (i. 337), and on "Old Coffee-Houses" in Harper's Monthly, lxiv. p. 493 (see view of Burns's Coffee-house, the headquarters of the Sons of Liberty, in Valentine's Manual of N. Y. City, 1858, p. 588; 1864, pp. 513, 514; and in Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 456); and Dawson's Sons of Liberty in N. Y.

For New Jersey, letter of Governor Franklin to Lords of Trade, in N. J. Archives, ix. 499, with other papers.

For Pennsylvania, Sparks's Franklin, vii. 297, 303, 307, 308, 310-13, 317-19, 328; the account in the Penna. Gazette, no. 1,239, Supplement, reprinted in Hazard's Reg. of Penna., ii. 243; Watson's Annals of Philad., vol. ii.; Muhlenberg's journal in Penna. Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. i. 78; Wallace's Col. Bradford, p. 95.

For Delaware, Life of Geo. Read, p. 30.

For Maryland, the Gilmor Papers in the Maryland Hist. Soc. library, vol. iii., division 2; and references in vol. xi. of the Stevens-Peabody index of Maryland MSS.

For Virginia, the Resolves (May 29th) of the Assembly (to which Patrick Henry made his bold speech), given in Hutchinson's Mass., iii., App. p. 466; Geo. Tucker's United States, i., App., and cf. Franklin's Works, vii. 298; C. R. Hildeburn in Penna. Mag. of Hist., ii. 296; Huguenot Family, p. 424; Ryerson's Loyalists, i. 286; and Randall's Jefferson, i. ch. 2.

For North Carolina, J. H. Wheeler's Reminiscences and Memoir of No. Carolina (1884).

For South Carolina, R. W. Gibbs's Doc. Hist. of the Amer. Rev., p. 1; Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 319; Charleston Year-Book, 1885, p. 331, with a fac-simile of broadside of schedule of stamps; Ramsay's South Carolina; Flanders's Rutledge, p. 456. There are in the Sparks MSS. (xliii. vol. iv.) various official letters of the governors of the different colonies to the home government. Gage's reminiscent letter to Chalmers is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (xxxiv. 367, etc.); and other letters are in the Hist. Mag. (May, 1862, vol. vi. 137).

[186] Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. 341), for a view of the hall.

[187] Authentic Account of the proceedings of the Congress held in New York in 1765 on the subject of the American Stamp Act (Philad., 1767; Lond., 1767; Philad., 1813; in Almon's Tracts, 1773; in Niles's Principles and Acts, 1876, p. 155,—see Sabin, xiii. nos. 53,537, etc.); Journal of the first Congress of the American Colonies, N. Y., Oct. 7, 1775, ed. by Lewis Cruger (Sabin, iv. 15,541). They passed a declaration of rights, an address to the king, a memorial to the lords, and a petition to the commons. (Cf. Hutchinson's Mass., vol. iii., App. pp. 479, 481, 483, 485; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 87, 89; H. W. Preston's Docs. illus. Amer. Hist.,1886). John Adams and McKean at a later day exchanged memories of the Congress (John Adams's Works, x. 60, 63). Beardsley, in his W. S. Johnson (p. 32), explains the position of that member for Connecticut. Cf., among the general writers, Bancroft, v. ch. 18; N. C. Towle, Hist. and Analysis of the Constitution, 307; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 185; Palfrey's New England, iv. 399; Barry's Mass., ii. 304; Dunlap's New York, i. 416; Green's Hist. View of the Amer. Rev., 72; Lossing in Harper's Monthly, xxvi. 34, and Mahon's England, v. 126.

Timothy Ruggles (b. 1711), who later joined the Tories, was chosen president by a single vote. Cf. sketch in Worcester Mag. (1826), vol. ii., p. 54, and Sabine's Amer. Loyalists.

[188] Works relating to Franklin in Boston Pub. Lib., p. 20; Bancroft, orig. ed., v. 306; Penna. Mag. of Hist., viii. 426, and x. 220; Sparks's Franklin, i. 290; iv. 156, 161, 206; vii. 281; x. 429-32; Parton's Franklin, i. 436. The grounds of the accusation against Franklin are discussed in a correspondence of Franklin with Dean Tucker (Sparks's Franklin, iv. 518; Bigelow's Franklin, i. 460-466), and Tucker so far admitted his error as to omit the passage.

[189] Smyth's Lectures, ii. 383.

[190] The Examination of Franklin [before the House of Commons] relative to the repeal of the American Stamp Act in 1766 (Williamsburg, n. d.; London, 1766; Philad.? 1766?; n. p. and n. d.; London, 1767—the titles vary in some of these editions). The report is also in Almon's Prior Documents (London, 1777, pp. 64-81; Sparks's Franklin (iv. p. 161; cf. vii. 311, 328); Bigelow's Franklin, i. 467); Bancroft, v. 428; Ryerson, i. 308.

[191] In recording the debates in Parliament, Bancroft (orig. ed., v. 383, 415) used the accounts in the Political Debates, in Walpole's Letters, the précis in the French archives, the report set down by Moffat of Rhode Island, and the copious extracts made by Garth, a member, who sent his notes to South Carolina. William Strahan's account is given in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., April, 1886, p. 95. It is said in P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson (i. 288) that Pitt was in doubt at first which side to take. Cf. lives of Pitt and editions of his speeches, and the comment in Mahon, v. 133, 138, and Ryerson, i. 302. Smyth (ii. 365) considers the protest of the lords against the repeal (Protests of the Lords, ed. by J. E. T. Rogers, ii. 77) the best exposition of the government view of taxation. For a Paris edition of this Protests, with Franklin's marginal notes, see Brinley Catal., no. 3,219. See also, for English comment, Fitzmaurice's Shelburne (i. ch. 7), and Lecky, (iii. 344); and for American, Bancroft, v. 421, 450; Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. 19; and in Franklin's Works (iv. 156; vii. 308, 317).

There were rumors of the coming repeal in Boston as early as April 1st (Thornton's Pulpit, 120), but the confirmation came May 16th, when public rejoicing soon followed, and on a Thanksgiving, July 24, Charles Chauncy delivered a Discourse in Boston (Boston, 1766; reprinted by Thornton, p. 105). The Boon Catalogue (no. 2,949) and others show numerous sermons in commemoration of the repeal; and the public prints give the occasional ballads (F. Moore's Songs and Ballads, p. 22).

The town of Boston ordered portraits of Conway and Barré to be painted, and the pictures hung in Faneuil Hall till the British made way with them during the siege (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii, 181). There is a head of Conway in the European Mag. (i. 159), and another in the London Mag., April, 1782.

The Mass. Assembly, June 20th, thanked Pitt. Cf. Mass. State Papers, by Bradford, pp. 10, 92. For the general scope of the whole period of the Stamp Act turmoil, see, on the American side, beside the contemporary newspapers, Tudor's Otis, ch. 14; Bancroft, v. ch. 11, etc.; Gay, iii. 338; Palfrey, iv. 375; Barry, ii. ch. 10; E. G. Scott's Constitutional Liberty, p. 253; Irving's Washington, i. ch. 28; Parton's Franklin, i. 459-483; Bigelow's Franklin, i. 457; Thornton's Pulpit, etc., 133; Lossing's Field-Book, i. 463; ii. 877. Sparks made sketches and notes for a history of the Stamp Act, which are in the Sparks MSS., no. xliv. On the English side, beside the acts themselves and the current press, the Annual Register, Gentleman's Mag., etc., see Le Marchant's George the Third by Walpole, ii. 217, 236, 260, 277; the Pictorial Hist. England; Mahon; Massey; C. D. Yonge's Constitutional Hist. England, ch. 3; Sir Thomas Erskine May's Const. Hist. England, ii. 550-562; Rockingham and his Contemporaries, i. 250; Fitzmaurice's Shelburne, i. 319; Macknight's Burke, i. ch. 10, 11; J. C. Earle's English Premiers (London, 1871), vol. i. ch. 5; Smyth's Lectures, ii. 379, 423; Lecky, iii. 314, 340 ("Every farthing which it was intended to raise in America, it was intended also to spend there"), and Ryerson's Loyalists, i. ch. 10.

[192] There was a History of Amer. Taxation from 1763, published in a third ed. at Dublin in 1775 (Sabin, vii. 32,125). Franklin contended that at this time taxation of the colonies was a popular idea in England (Works, vii. 350), while Smyth found that at a later day (Lectures, ii. 371) he could get sympathy in speaking of "the miserable, mortifying, melancholy facts of our dispute with America." See synopsis of the arguments pro et con in Life of George Read, 76; Palfrey, iv. 327; Smyth's Lectures, ii. 471; Green's Hist. View, 55; Gardiner and Mullinger's Eng. Hist. for Students (N. Y., 1881), p. 183. Cf. also Bigelow's Franklin, i. 515; Foster's Stephen Hopkins, ii. 244.

A few of the most indicative tracts on the subject may be mentioned:—

Soame Jenyns's Objections to the Taxation of our American Colonies briefly considered (London, 1765; also in his Works, 1790, vol. ii. p. 189), which was answered in James Otis's Considerations on behalf of the British Colonies, dated Boston, Sept. 4, 1765 (Boston and London, 1765).

George Grenville is credited with the authorship of The Regulations lately made concerning the Colonies and the taxes imposed upon them considered (London, 1765,—Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,472; Sparks Catal., p. 83).

William Knox, the agent of Georgia, printed The Claim of the Colonies to exemption from internal taxes imposed by authority of Parliament examined (Lond., 1765). The Brinley Catal., no. 3,218, shows Franklin's copy, with his annotations.

Daniel Dulaney's Considerations on the propriety of imposing taxes in the British Colonies for the purpose of raising a revenue by Act of Parliament (North America, 1765; Annapolis, 1765; New York, 1765; London, 1766) is in most copies without the author's name. (Cf. Sabin, v. no. 21,170; Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,438-39, 1,503; Brinley, i. no. 188; also Frothingham's Rise of the Repub., p. 194, and Chatham Correspondence, iii. 192.)

The late regulations respecting the British colonies in America considered in a letter from a gentleman in Philadelphia to his friend in London (Philad., 1765; Lond., 1765) is usually said to have been by John Dickinson. It is included in his Political Writings, vol. i. A brief tract of two pages, A denunciation of the Stamp Act (Philad., 1765), is also said to be Dickinson's.

The right of Parliament is sustained, but the Stamp Act as a measure condemned, in A letter to a member of Parliament wherein the power of the British legislature and the case of the colonists are briefly and impartially considered (London, 1765,—Sabin, x. 40,406; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,462).

Objections to the taxation of our American Colonies briefly considered (Lond., 1765).

See also Charles Thomson's letter to Cook, Laurence & Co., Nov. 9, 1765, in N. Y. Hist. Society Coll. (1878, p. 7).

[193] The first is a Letter from a merchant in London to his nephew in No. America relative to the present posture of affairs in the Colonies (Lond., 1766), and the last A series of answers to certain popular objections against separating from the rebellious colonies and discarding them entirely: being the concluding tract of the Dean of Gloucester on the subject of American affairs (Gloucester, 1776). The dean's plan of separation is best unfolded, however, in his Humble Address and Ernest appeal (London, 1775; 3rd ed., corrected, 1776). The views of Tucker are given synoptically by Smyth (Lectures, ii. 392), Lecky (iii. 421), Hildreth (iii. 58). If Haven's list is correct, only two of Tucker's tracts were reprinted in the colonies. Cf. Menzies Catal., no. 1,997. The letters of Franklin and Wm. S. Johnson reflect opinions in England at this time.

[194] Published in London in 1767, two editions; Boston, 1767; also in Almon's Tracts, vol. iii. Cf. Sabin, iv. nos. 15,202-3; Brinley, iii. p. 185; Carter-Brown, iii., no. 1,498. 18 It is sometimes attributed to C. Jenkinson. The published tracts of 1766 are enumerated in Carter-Brown and Haven under 1766; in Cooke, 1,336, 1,929, 1,934; in Brinley, i. p. 21; ii. p. 154; and in Sabin, under the authors' names.

During 1767 also there was something of a flurry in the religious part of the community induced by a sermon (London, 1767) which the Bishop of Landaff had preached before the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, in Feb., in which he had styled the Americans "infidels and barbarians." William Livingston, of New York, addressed a Letter to the Bishop (London, 1768), and Charles Chauncy, of Boston, published a Letter to a friend (Boston, 1767), in which the bishop was taken to task, while an anonymous friend undertook a Vindication of the Bishop (New York, 1768). Cf. Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,585, 1,629, 1,630.

The other tracts of 1767 are not numerous. Cf. Carter-Brown, and Haven under 1767.

[195] Sabin, xiv. 61,646.

[196] Rec. Com. Rept., xvi. p. 22.

[197] Following a copy in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library.

[198] Franklin (Sparks), vii. 371, 373, 376, 378, 387; (Bigelow), i. 551, 556. The resolutions were printed in the public prints, in Ames's Almanac (1768), etc.

[199] For the movements in Boston, see Frothingham's "Sam. Adams's Regiments" in the Atlantic Monthly, June and Aug., 1867, and Nov., 1863. The letter of the town to Dennis Deberdt, the London agent, sets forth their side of the case (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 29). John Mein, the Boston printer, one of the proscribed, published his State of the importation of Great Britain with the port of Boston from Jan. to Aug., 1768, to show that his assailants were also importers (Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. no. 393; Quaritch, 1885, no. 29,618). There is one of the agreements among the Boston merchants, Aug. 14, 1769, in Misc. MSS., 1632-1795, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet. Samuel Cooper tells Franklin how the agreements are adhered to (Sparks's Franklin, vii. 448). Moore, Songs and Ballads of the Rev., p. 48, gives some verses from the Boston Newsletter, urging the "daughters of liberty" to lend their influence in this direction. In the early part of 1770 the movement seemed to be vigorous (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 150; cf. papers of Cushing, Hancock, and others, in Letters and Papers, 1761-1776, in Mass. Hist Soc. cabinet). Late in the year Hutchinson could write: "The confederacy in all the governments against importing seemed in the latter end of the summer to be breaking to pieces" (P. O. Hutchinson, i. 24). For such matters in Philadelphia, see Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia; Franklin (Sparks), vii. 445; (Bigelow), ii. 39. In Delaware, see Life of George Read, 82. In Charlestown (S. C.) there was a controversy over the non-importation association, in which Christopher Gadsden and John Mackenzie supported the movement, and W. H. Drayton and William Wragg opposed it. These letters, which appeared in Timothy's S. C. Gazette, June-Dec., 1769, were issued together in The letters of Freeman, etc. ([London], 1771, Brinley, no. 3,976).

[200] Thornton, Pulpit of the Rev., 150. It is printed in the Penna. Archives, 1st ser., iv. 286, and N. Jersey Archives, x. 14.

[201] New Jersey Archives, x. 14.

[202] New Jersey Archives, x. 21. Cf. William E. Foster on the development of colonial coöperation, 1754-1774,—a chapter in his Stephen Hopkins, vol. ii. A symbol, common at this time, of a disjointed snake, the head representing New England, and the other fragments standing for the remaining colonies, and accompanied by the motto "Join or Die", seems to have first appeared in The Constitutional Courant, no. 1, Sept. 21, 1765, and was used later by the Boston Evening Post. Cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1882, p. 768; 1883, p. 213; and Preble's Hist. of the Amer. Flag.

[203] Hutchinson's side of the story is in his History, iii. 189. At a large town meeting, over which Otis presided, and at which no direct reference was made to the riots, the people recapitulated grievances, and petitioned (Rec. Com. Rept., xvi. 254) the governor to order the "Romney" away from the harbor. Hutchinson (iii. App. J and K) prints the address and the instructions which were given to their representatives. (Cf. John Adams's Works, iii. 501.) The examination of Robert Hallowell, controller of the port, is in the Lee MSS. (H. C. library), i. no. 40.. Johnson (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xlix. 301) speaks of the effect in England. See the general historians, and also special reports in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1868, p. 402; 1869, p. 452; and also 1883, p. 404, for Hancock's spirit of challenge in naming a sloop, the next year, the "Rising Liberty."

[204] Caruthers's Life of Dr. Caldwell; Foote's Sketches of No. Carolina; Martin's Hist. of No. Carolina; a paper by Francis L. Hawks in Revolutionary Hist. of No. Carolina, ed. by W. D. Cooke (Raleigh and New York, 1853), which has a sketch of the "Battle of Alamance;" papers by David L. Swain in the University Magazine (Chapel Hill, N. C.); J. H. Wheeler's Reminiscences and Memoirs of No. Carolina (1884); Southern Literary Messenger, xi. 144, 231. Cf. also Lossing's Field-Book of the Rev., ii. 577, and Jones's New York during the Rev., ii. 5; and a paper on James Few, "the first American anarchist", in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1886.

[205] A Fan for Fanning and a Touchstone for Tryon, containing an impartial account of the rise and progress of the so much talked of Regulation in North Carolina, by Regulus (Brinley, ii. no 3,866). They had organized for the purpose of "regulating public grievances." Such, at least, was their profession.

[206] An impartial relation of the first rise and cause of the recent differences in public affairs in North Carolina, and of the past tumults and riots that lately happened in that province.... Printed for the Compiler, 1770 (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,744).

[207] Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania to the inhabitants of the British Colonies (Philad., Boston, New York, 1768). They originally appeared in twelve numbers in the Penna. Chronicle and Universal Advertiser, between Dec. 2, 1767, and Feb. 15, 1768. When reprinted in London (1768) Franklin added a preface, and they were again printed there in 1774. (Cf. Sparks's Franklin, i. 316; iv. 256; vii. 391, x. 433; Bigelow's Franklin, i. 566; Sabin, v. nos. 20,044-20,052; Haven, p. 594; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,620, 1,621.) They are included in Dickinson's Political Writings (Wilmington, 1801, vol. ii.). Lecky (iii. 419) calls these letters "one of the ablest statements of the American case." Cf. Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, p. 208, and Shea's Hamilton, p. 255. For Boston's letter of gratitude to Dickinson, see Record Com. Rept., xvi. p. 243. Lecky (iii. 320, 348) thinks the ablest presentation of the case against the colonies is The Controversy between Great Britain and her Colonies (London, 1769; Boston, 1769), written to offset the Farmer's Letters. Bancroft says that Grenville himself wrote the constitutional argument in it, and the Board of Trade furnished the material. The pamphlet itself is usually ascribed to William Knox, the Under-Secretary of State, though the names of Whately, Israel Mauduit, and John Mein have been sometimes preferred. (Cf. Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,666; Sabin, x. p. 532.)

[208] The True Sentiments of America contained in a Collection of Letters sent from the House of Representatives of the Province of Massachusetts Bay to several persons of high rank in this kingdom. Together with certain papers relating to a supposed Libel on the Governor of that Province and a Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law (London, 1768). The volume includes the petition to the king of Jan. 20, 1768; the letter of Jan. 12, 1768, to Dennis Deberdt; letters to Shelburne, Conway, Camden, Chatham, and others,—most of these papers being written by Sam. Adams; Joseph Warren's attack on Bernard, from the Boston Gazette and the Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, attributed here to Jeremy Gridley, but written in fact by John Adams (Sabin, viii. 32,551; Brinley, ii. 4,163 Menzies, 946; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,603. Cf. John Adams's Works, x. 367).

A Letter to the Right Honorable the Marquis of Rockingham from the Province of Massachusetts Bay, Jan. 12, 1768, signed by the Speaker, was circulated in broadside (copy in Mass. Hist. Soc. library). Warren was writing in the public prints at this time (Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, 53). Samuel Cooper was corresponding with William Livingston (Sedgwick's Livingston, pp. 136-138). Bernard was writing to Hillsborough, Nov. 30, 1768, that "Bowdoin had all along taken the lead in the Council in their late extraordinary proceedings" (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 86). The Boston merchants printed Observations on several acts of parliament passed in the 4th, 6th, 7th years of [the] reign of [George III.]: also on the conduct of the officers of the customs since those acts were passed, and the board of commissioners appointed to reside in America (Boston, 1769),—Sabin, xiii. 56,501; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,690. Cf. Hutchinson's character of Bowdoin (Massachusetts, iii. 293).

There is among the Chalmers Papers in the Sparks MSS. (no. x. vol. ii.) a paper dated June, 1768, without signature, which begins, "Being in the gallery a few days before the Assembly was dissolved, I heard Mr. Otis make a long speech, part of the substance of which was, as near as I can remember, couched in the following terms", etc.; and (Ibid., vol. iii.) there is the affidavit of Richard Sylvester, a Boston innholder, sworn to before Hutchinson, and describing the speeches of the Boston leaders.

For the spirit of the hour, see the lives of the chief Boston patriots, like Sam. Adams, and a summary of the progress of opinion in Amory's James Sullivan (Boston, 1859). Admiral Hood was so far deceived that in 1769 he wrote from Boston that the spirit of sedition had fallen (Grenville Papers, iii.).

[209] Not to name the newspapers, see the address of Georgia to the king (Sparks MSS., xlix. ii.); that of New Jersey (N. J. Archives, x. 18); that of Virginia, May 16,1769 (Hutchinson's Mass. Bay, iii. App. p. 494). On these royal petitions, see Ryerson's Loyalists, i. ch. 14.

A collection of papers of which William Livingston, as is supposed, was one of the writers, and which were printed in the New York Gazette and in other newspapers, were published separately as A Collection of Tracts from the late newspapers (Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 244; Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,617; Brinley, iv. no. 6,135). The correspondence of the Philadelphia merchants is in the Sparks MSS., lxii.

[210] Hutchinson's view of the matter is in his vol. iii. p. 227. These and other letters and papers were included in several publications, published about the same time:—

Letters to the Earl of Hillsborough from Gov. Bernard, General Gage, and the Honorable his Majesty's Council for the province of Mass. Bay, with an appendix containing divers proceedings referred to in said letters (Boston, folio, 1769; Salem, quarto, 1769; London, n. d.,—Sabin, ii. 4,924; Carter-Brown, iii. 1683).

Letters to the Ministry from Gov. Bernard, General Gage, and Commodore Hood; and also memorials to the lords of the treasury from the commissioners of the customs, with sundry letters and papers annexed to said memorials (Boston, 1769; London, n. d.,—Sabin, ii. 4,923; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,684).

A third extraordinary Budget of Epistles and Memorials between Sir Francis Bernard, some natives of Boston, and the present ministry, against North America and the true interests of the British Empire and the rights of mankind (no imprint,—Sabin, ii. 4,927; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 600).

Copies of letters from Sir Francis Bernard to the Earl of Hillsborough (two editions, without place, and one, Boston, 1769,—Sabin, ii. 4,921).

There had already been efforts made by the Boston authorities to get at the contents of these letters by a request to Bernard for a statement respecting his transmissions to England (Mass. State Papers, ed. Bradford, 115, 120; Papers pub. by the Seventy-Six Soc.; Lee MSS. in Harvard College library, i. nos. 42-45). Bernard ascribed all his tribulations to his enforcement of the laws of trade (Bernard Papers in Sparks MSS., iii. 150). For Bernard's character, see John Adams, iv. 21, Mahon, v. 235, and Palfrey in his review of Mahon. Bernard left Boston Aug. 2, 1769.

[211] The general belief is that the author of this defence was Samuel Adams (Wells, i. 282; Bancroft, vi. 312), though it has been ascribed to William Cooper, to James Otis, and to Otis and Adams combined. Cf. Barry's Mass., ii. 399; Franklin, viii. 459; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., i. 485; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. p.28; Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,643, 1,644, 1,716. See Report as spread on the Town Records, in Rec. Com. Rept., xvi. p. 303.

[212] A letter to the right honourable the earl of Hillsborough, on the present situation of affairs in America. Also an appendix in answer to a pamphlet intitled, The constitutional right of Great-Britain to tax the colonies (London, 1769; Boston, 1769,—Sabin, viii. p. 297; Carter-Brown, iii. 1,681).

This also has been attributed to S. Adams; but Hutchinson (iii. 228, 237) believed that James Bowdoin was the writer.

[213] The notes include comments on the Protest of the Lords against the repeal of the Stamp Act (Franklin, iv. 206); on A letter from a merchant in London (iv. 211); on Good Humour, or a way with the Colonies (iv. 215); on An inquiry into the nature and causes of the present disputes (iv. 281); on The true constitutional means of putting an end to the disputes (iv. 298). On Franklin in London at this time, see Sparks's Franklin, vii. 338, 350, 354, etc. The tracts above noted are said by Sparks to be in the Philadelphia Athenæum, but some of these titles appear, as having Franklin's notes, in the Brinley Catal. ii. nos. 3,218-22. Israel Mauduit's Short View of the Hist. of the Colony of Mass. Bay (Lond., 1769) is noted in Brinley, and not by Sparks.

[214] Sparks's Franklin, iv. 258. Some letters of Strahan (1767-8, etc.) are in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., x. 322. The letters of Wm. Samuel Johnson are also of importance (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xlix.). He describes Barré and others in debate. Barré, in March, 1769, predicted the loss of the colonies (Smyth, Lectures, ii. 384), and in April Johnson is writing, "It seems pretty probable that we shall go on contending, and fretting each other, till we become separate and independent empires" (Beardsley's Life of W. S. Johnson, p. 65; also see pp. 38, 42).

A few of the other more significant pamphlets of 1769 may be mentioned: The rights of the Colonies and the extent of the legislative authority of Great Britain (London, 1769), by Phelps, the under-secretary to Lord Sandwich. Allan Ramsay's Thoughts on the origin and nature of government (London, 1769). Alexander Cluny's American Traveller, or Observations on the British Colonies in America by an old and experienced trader (London, 1769), said to have been instigated by Chatham. The present state of liberty in Great Britain and her Colonies (London, 1769). The present state of the Nation (London, 1768), by Robert Tickle, and the reply to it, called Considerations on the dependencies of Great Britain (London, 1769), and Burke's Observations on it in his Works (Boston, 1865, i. p. 269). The Case of Great Britain and America, addressed to the King and both houses of parliament (London, 1769; Philad., 1769). Richard Bland's Enquiry into the rights of the British Colonies, intended as an answer to The Regulations lately made concerning the Colonies (Williamsburg, 1769; London, 1769). Cf. Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,646, 1,652, 1,660, 1,661; Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. 510; Sabin, xvi. nos. 61,401, 67,679.

[215] Hutchinson's History, vol. iii. John Adams's Works, ii. 224; ix. 317; x. 204.

[216] Barry's Mass., ii. 407 and references.

[217] Reprinted in London in three editions the same year. Brinley, i. no. 1,655, etc.; Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,719, etc.; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 608.

[218] Not the historian, but his uncle. Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xi. 240.

[219] The letter of the Boston committee, covering the copy sent to the Massachusetts agent in London, is among the Lee Papers in the Univ. of Virginia. There is a fac-simile of its signatures in the Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 39. Some copies of the Narrative have a list of the persons in England to whom copies were sent.

The Letter from the Town of Boston to C. Lucas, Esq., one of the Representatives of the City of Dublin, in Parliament, inclosing a Short Narrative, etc., was printed in Dublin, 1770 (Cooke Catal., iii. no. 256; Sabin, x. no. 40,348). The other contemporary American accounts are in the Boston Gazette, March 12th (bordered with black lines); Jos. Belknap's in Belknap Papers (MS., i. 69); letter of William Palfrey to John Wilkes, and one of Governor Hutchinson in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vol. vi. 480 (March, 1863).

The accounts in Gordon (vol. i.) and Hutchinson (vol. iii. 270) are also those of contemporaries. Cf. documents in Hist. Mag., June, 1861, and in Niles's Principles and Acts of the Rev. Dickinson, on March 31st wrote of it to Arthur Lee, from Philadelphia. Lee's Life of A. Lee, ii. 299.

Crispus Attucks, one of the slain, usually called a mulatto, is held by J. B. Fisher, in the Amer. Hist. Record (i. 531), to have been a half-breed Indian. Cf. Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 32; George Livermore's Historical Research.

[220] Separately, Boston, 1770 (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,721; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 608).

[221] There are other later accounts in J. S. Loring's Hundred Boston Orators; Frothingham's "Sam. Adams's Regiments" (Atlantic Monthly, June and Aug., 1862, and Nov., 1863), which is epitomized in his Life of Warren (ch. 6); Wells's Samuel Adams; Tudor's Otis; Bancroft's United States (orig. ed., vi. ch. 43, with references); histories of Boston by Snow and Drake, and the Mem. History of Boston, iii. 38, 135; Barry's Mass., ii. 409; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. ch. 14.

[222] John Adams's Works, x. 201. The brief used by John Adams is in the Boston Public Library, and a fac-simile of the opening paragraph is in the Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 38. It is printed by Kidder (p. 10). A portrait of Lynde, the presiding judge, is given in the Memorial Hist. of Boston (ii. 558), and in the Diaries of Benj. Lynde and Benj. Lynde, Jr. (Bost., privately printed, 1880), where will be found all that remains of his charge. Sam. Adams's "Vindex" criticised the arguments for the defence in the Mass. Gazette. Cf. Buckingham's Reminiscences, i. 168.

[223] He was a Scotch bookbinder in Boston. Thomas's Hist. of Printing (1874), ii. 228.

[224] Brinley, i. 1659; Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,722; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 608.

[225] This volume was reprinted in Boston in 1807 and 1824, and in Kidder's monograph (1870). Other contemporary accounts of the trial are in Hutchinson (iii. 328); by S. Cooper in Franklin's Works (vii. 499); and reminiscences are in John Adams's Works, x. 162, 201, 249. Cf. Life of Josiah Quincy, Jr. (ch. 2), and P. W. Chandler's American Criminal Trials (vol. i.).

[226] Brinley, i. no. 1,658.

[227] Cf. Proc. of his Majesty's Council, relative to the deposition of Andrew Oliver, Esq. (Boston, 1770, Carter-Brown, iii. no. 1,752).

[228] The principal later English accounts are in Stedman, Mahon (v. 268), Grahame (iv. 310), Ryerson's Loyalists (i. ch. 16). Lecky (England in the Eighteenth Century, iii. 369, 401) thinks Bancroft shows violent partisanship, and says that "few things contributed more to the American Revolution than this unfortunate affray. Skilful agitators perceived the advantage it gave them, and the most fantastic exaggerations were dexterously diffused."

[229] A fac-simile of the Mass. Spy, March 7, 1771, with its blackened columns, is given in the Mem. Hist. of Boston (iii. 135). On the same day Revere showed illuminated pictures of the scene from his house in North Square. The orations were gathered and published collectively by Peter Edes in 1785, and this book appeared in a second edition in 1807. The successive speakers were Thomas Young, James Lovell, Benjamin Church (third ed. was corrected by the author), John Hancock, Joseph Warren (two editions), Peter Thacher, Benj. Hichborn, Jonathan W. Austin, William Tudor, Jonathan Mason, Thomas Dawes, Geo. R. Minot, and Thomas Welsh. These orations were published separately, and Hancock's is said by Wells (ii. 138) to have been largely written by Samuel Adams. Hancock's was reprinted in New Haven. Some of them are in Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 17; and Loring (Hundred Boston Orators) particularly commemorates them.

When Warren's oration in 1772 was published, a poem by James Allen (1739-1808) was to have accompanied it, but some of the committee, having doubts of Allen's sentiments, suppressed it, when the poet's friends later published it separately as The poem which the town of Boston had voted unanimously to be published with the late oration; with observations relating thereto; together with some very pertinent extracts from an ingenious composition never yet published [Anon.] (Boston, 1772). Cf. Brinley Catal., iv. no. 6,771; J. C. Stockbridge's Harris Coll. of Amer. Poetry (Providence, 1886), p. 8.

The oration of Thacher, delivered at Watertown during the siege of Boston, is said to be rarest of all the separate issues (Cooke, no. 2,428).

A sermon on the massacre, by the Rev. John Lathrop, of the Second Church in Boston, "preached the lord's day following", was first printed in London, 1770, and reprinted in Boston, 1771 (Carter-Brown, iii. 1,792; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 610).

[230] These documents are Hutchinson's address, Apr. 26th (p. 505); the instructions of Boston to its representatives, May 15th (p. 508; cf. John Adams's Works, ix. 616); and various other documents interchanged between them which largely concern Hutchinson's removing the Assembly to Cambridge (pp. 515-542).

In June, 1770, it would seem that Hutchinson's life was threatened because of the passions aroused by the massacre, and there is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library (Misc. MSS., 1632-1795) a brief note of his written on being advised to protect himself, dated June 22, 1770, at Milton. It is printed in the Society's Proceedings, Jan., 1862, p. 361.

[231] Arthur Lee's Political detection (London, 1770), being letters addressed to Hillsborough, Bernard, and others (Carter-Brown, iii. 1,760).

Edmund Burke's Thoughts on the Cause of the present discontents (3d ed., London, 1770,—in Works, Boston ed., 1865, i. p. 433).

Catharine Macaulay's Observations on a pamphlet entitled Thoughts on the Cause of the present discontents (London, 1770).

Extract of a letter from the House of Representatives of the Mass. Bay to their agent, Dennys de Berdt, with some remarks (London, 1770).

There is a portrait of De Berdt in the State House, Boston.

[232] Beardsley's Life of W. S. Johnson, p. 84.

[233] Instructions of the House of Representatives to Franklin, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet.

[234] Works, vii. 486, 488, 493, 501.

[235] Ibid., vii. 508.

[236] P. O. Hutchinson, ii. 79. Some interesting letters of Hutchinson (1771-1772) are in the English Public Record Office, and are printed in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xix. 129-140.

[237] One of an indicative English stamp is Allan Ramsay's Hist. Essay on the English Constitution, wherein the right of Parliament to tax our different provinces is explained and justified (Sabin, xvi. 67,675).

[238] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 9.

[239] A duplicate of the original document is in the Lee Papers in the University of Virginia library. Cf. Franklin's account of his conversation with Dartmouth, Works, viii. 25, 28; and of his presentation of the petition and one forwarded the next year (viii. 47). For duplicates of originals, see Calendar of Lee Papers, p. 5 (vol. ii. nos. 5-7).

[240] John Adams's Works, iv. 34; Frothingham's Warren, 200, Wells's Sam. Adams, i. 509, ii. 62; Grahame's United States, iv. 328; Barry's Mass., ii. 448; Goodell's Provincial Laws, v. index. Something of the sort seems to have been suggested in Rhode Island, Oct. 8, 1764, in a letter to Franklin (Works, vii. 264). Dawson (Sons of Liberty in N. Y., 61-64) finds the earliest movement in the New York Assembly, Oct. 18, 1764. Thornton (Pulpit of the Rev., 45, 191) notes the suggestion in a letter of Jonathan Mayhew, June 8, 1766, to James Otis, that there might be a communion of colonies, as there was a communion of churches.

[241] Prefiguring, as John Adams said, the Declaration of Rights in 1774, and the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Wells's Adams, i. 501, where it is printed; John Adams's Works, ii. 514; Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 622. Franklin's preface to the English edition of the Rights is in his Works, iv. 381. Cf. Francis Maseres's Occasional Essays (London, 1809). The proceedings of Boston, Oct. 28th and Nov. 20th, were also printed. The letters of John Andrew from Boston begin at this time (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 316-412).

[242] Wirt's Patrick Henry, 3d ed., p. 87, Life of R. H. Lee, i. 89; No. Amer. Rev., March, 1818; Randall's Jefferson, i. 80; Tucker's Jefferson, i. 52; Franklin's Works, viii. 49. Frothingham (Rise of the Republic, 284, 312, 327) traces the growth of the committee, and determines the time of appointing such a committee by each colony. The correspondence of the Rhode Island Committee is in the R. I. Col. Rec., vii. On the committee in New York, see Dawson's Westchester County, 10. Philadelphia appointed one May 20, 1774 (4 Force, i. 340). Sparks points out the distinction between the Committees of Correspondence, Inspection, and Safety (Gouverneur Morris, i. 31).

[243] Mr. Bartlett was born Oct. 23, 1805, and died in May, 1886. His life was so largely devoted to advancing the study of American history that this record needs to be made, and reference given to Professor William Gammell's Life and Services of the Hon. John Russell Bartlett, a paper read before the Rhode Island Historical Society (Providence, 1886), and the tribute by Charles Deane in the Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1886.

[244] Mr. Wm. R. Staples had earlier published the Documentary Hist. of the destruction of the Gaspee (Providence, 1845). An account by Ephraim Bowen is given in S. G. Arnold's Rhode Island (vol. ii. ch. 19, 20). For local accounts, see Providence Plantations (Providence, 1886), pp. 58, 359; O. P. Fuller's Warwick, R. I. (p. 101); Foster's Stephen Hopkins (ii. 83, 245); E. M. Stone's John Howland (p. 35). For the political bearings to the country at large, see Frothingham's Rise of the Republic (p. 278); Parton's Jefferson (ch. 14, 15); Life of R. H. Lee (i. 85); Lossing's Field-Book (ii. 60). There are in the Sparks MSS. (xliii. vol. i. p. 140, etc.) the letters of the British Admiral Montague, and depositions copied from papers in the English Archives. G. C. Mason, in the R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll., vii. 301, etc., traces the presence of different English war vessels in the bay between 1765, and 1776. Cf. New Jersey Archives, x. 375, 395.

[245] Sam. Adams seems to have drafted this reply, with aid on law-points from John Adams, the latter being almost the exclusive author of the reply of the House to the second speech of the governor. Wells thinks Hawley may have had a hand in these papers. Cf. Quincy's Quincy, p. 113; Life, etc., of John Adams, i. 118-133, ii. 310; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 29, 31, 41; Tudor's Otis, p. 410; Bradford's Mass. State Papers, 336, 399; Bancroft, orig. ed., vi. 446-453; Niles's Principles (1876 ed., pp. 79, 87); Speeches of his Excellency, with the answers of his Majesty's Council and the House of Representatives (Boston, 1773). A meeting of the town of Boston was held in Faneuil Hall, March 8, 1773, "to vindicate the town from the gross misrepresentations of his Excellency's message to both Houses", and its proceedings were circulated in broadside.

One of the most violent of the tracts of this year was The American Alarm, or the Bostonian Plea, by a British Bostonian (Boston, 1773,—Stevens's Nuggets, no. 3,257). Joseph Reed was writing to Dartmouth on the condition of affairs (Reed's Reed, i. ch. 2); and as respects the feelings farther south, see Gov. Wright's letters from Georgia to Dartmouth, in the Georgia Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. iii.

[246] Pownall (b. 1722; d. 1805), who knew America well from residence and official station, proved a man of great forecast, and a prudent, conciliatory friend of both countries. We have his speech in Parliament in 1769 (Haven in Thomas, ii. 604, 649), and know how impatient Parliament was of his wisdom (Smyth, Lectures on Mod. Hist., Bohn's ed., ii. 384-85). We see his admirable spirit in his correspondence (1772) with James Bowdoin (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., v. 238).

Pownall had first published his Administration of the Colonies (London, 1764) at the very outset of the dispute, and it was enlarged in 1765. In an appendix to the edition of 1766 he made a strong statement of his views in opposition to the right of Parliament to tax America, and he reprinted this in a fourth ed. (1768), and also issued it separately. In the fifth edition (1774) he added a second part, giving his plan of pacification. The last edition was in 1777 (Sabin, xv. nos. 64,841, etc.; Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,425, 1,470, 1,537, 1,636). In 1780 Pownall published a tract that has acquired some fame, as a forecast of the future republic (Harper's Cyclo. of U. S. Hist., ii. 1,151), entitled A Memorial to the Sovereigns of Europe on the present state of affairs between the old and new world (London, 1780). Somebody undertook what was rather fancifully called A Translation of this tract into plainer language (London, 1781,—Brinley Catal., no. 4,109), but it did not meet with Pownall's approval. In 1783 he published a Memorial addressed to the sovereigns of America (Lond., 1783,—Sabin, xv. nos. 64,824, etc.). On his tracts, see Shea's Hamilton, p. 261. There is a portrait of Pownall at Earl Orford's in Norfolk (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1875), and an engraving of it published in 1777, of which there is a reproduction in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1886, with an account of the governor by Robert Ludlow Fowler. The painting in the gallery of the Mass. Hist. Soc. is said to have been painted from this engraving. Cf. Mem. Hist. Boston, ii. 63.

[247] First in a Philadelphia paper, Sept. 29, in a letter dated London, Aug. 4.

[248] We have full reports of the Boston meetings. The newspapers give us the accounts of the earlier irregular conferences, and the town printed the reports of the first regular town meetings in The votes and proceedings of the freeholders and other inhabitants of the town of Boston, in town meeting assembled, according to law, the 5th and 18th days of Nov., 1773 (Boston, 1773). It was reprinted in London by Franklin, with a preface. The call of the committee for the later meetings exists in Mr. Bancroft's collection, in the handwriting of Joseph Warren (Frothingham's Warren, 255), and was circulated in broadside. The reports of the meetings of Nov. 29th and 30th exist in the original minutes in the handwriting of William Cooper among the papers in the Charity Building in Boston, and have been printed by Dr. Green in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (xx. 10, etc.). The prepared record was printed in a broadside dated Dec. 1, 1773, and a copy is preserved in the Boston Public Library. It represents the meeting as called "for consulting, advising, and determining upon the most proper and effectual method to prevent the unloading, receiving, or vending the detestable tea sent out by the East India Company, part of which has just arrived in this harbor." Hutchinson wrote from Milton, Nov. 30, to his son, one of the consignees of the tea, who had taken refuge in the Castle, that the proclamation, warning the meeting to dissolve, which he had just sent into Boston, might "possibly cause [him] to take [his] lodging at the Castle also" (P. O. Hutchinson, i. 94). The full report of these meetings was also printed in the Boston newspapers, and particularly in the Boston Gazette of Dec. 6th, whose report was reprinted in one of Poole's Mass. Registers, and in the Boston Journal, Dec. 15, 1849.

Of the meeting of Dec. 16, 1773, and the raid of the "Mohawks" upon the tea-ships, an account was printed in the Boston Gazette of Dec. 20th (Buckingham's Reminiscences, i. 169), and in the Boston Evening Post of Dec. 20th (Bay State Monthly, April, 1884, p. 261), and the spread of these accounts as they were copied through the country can be followed in the postscript of the Penna. Gazette of Dec. 24th. The speech of Josiah Quincy, Jr., at the meeting, as reported by himself and sent back to his wife after he had reached England, is the only harangue of this critical stage of the controversy in Boston of which we have any detailed account (Life of Quincy, 2d ed., 124; Frothingham's Warren, 39; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec. 16, 1873). The conclave which planned the raid was held in Court Street (Drake's Old Landmarks of Boston, 81; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1871, for an account of the punch-bowl around which the conclave was held). There are a number of contemporary journals and statements respecting these riotous proceedings. The letter of the Mass. Ho. of Rep. to Franklin, Dec. 21, is preserved in the Lee MSS. (Harvard College library, vol. ii. no. 14), and is printed in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (xxxiv. 377). There are details in the Andrews letters (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 325), in Newell's diary (Ibid., Oct., 1877), in the Jolley narrative (Ibid., Feb., 1878, p. 69), in John Adams's diary (Ibid., Dec., 1873, and his letter, Dec. 17, to James Warren, in Works, ix. 333). A copy of the testimony of Dr. Hugh Williamson before the Privy Council, Feb. 19, 1774, copied from his own draft, and relating the destruction of the tea, was transcribed from the original in 1827, while in the possession of Dr. Hosack, and is included in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. iii.). Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xxxiv. 373, etc.

All this and other documentary evidence can be found in Force; in Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 96; in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec. 16, 1873; and in Francis S. Drake's Tea Leaves: being a collection of letters and documents relating to the shipment of tea to the American colonies in the year 1773, by the East India tea company. Now first printed from the original manuscript. With an introduction, notes, and biographical notices of the Boston tea party (Boston, 1884). The only considerable narrative of an actor in the "Mohawk" raid is G. R. T. Hewes's Traits of the Tea Party (N. Y., 1835), which was written out for him by B. B. Thacher. Cf. also Retrospect of the Boston Tea Party, with a memoir of Hewes (N. Y., 1834); Loring's Hundred Boston Orators (p. 554). The last survivor was Capt. Henry Purkitt, who died March 3, 1846. A picture of David Kinnison, also called the last survivor, is in Lossing's Field-Book of the Revolution (i. 499). Of Samuel Phillips Savage, the moderator of the meeting of Dec. 16th, there is a portrait owned by Mr. G. H. Emery, engraved in Drake's Tea-leaves.

Hutchinson gives his view of the transactions in the third volume (pp. 422-441) of his Massachusetts. (Cf. Ryerson's Loyalists, i. 383.) There is among the Bernard Papers (vol. viii. p. 229), in the Sparks MSS., a paper giving the story as those in authority transmitted it to the home government.

Among the later American sources, see Frothingham's Warren (ch. 9), his Rise of The Republic (ch. 8), and his paper in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (Dec. 16, 1873): Tudor's Otis (ch. 21); Wells's Adams (ii. ch. 28), Ramsay's Amer. Rev. (i. 373); Holmes's Annals (ii. 181); Palfrey's New England (iv. 427); Barry's Mass. (ii. ch. 15); Bancroft's United States (orig. ed., vi. ch. 50); Lossing's Field-Book (i. 496); and his paper in Harper's Monthly (iv. 1); Snow's Boston; the Mem. Hist. of Boston (iii. 46-51); Essex Inst. Hist. Coll. (xii. 197); Niles's Register (1827), from Flint's Western Monthly Rev. (July, 1827).

The first accounts of the destruction of the tea which reached London (Jan. 19, 1774) were printed in the London newspapers of Jan. 21st and in the Gentleman's Mag. (1774, p. 26), copied in Carlyle's Frederick the Great (vi. p.524). Cf. Mahon (v. 319); May's Const. Hist. Eng. (ii. 521); Massey's England (ii. ch. 18); McKnight's Burke (ii. ch. 20); Fitzmaurice's Shelburne (ii. ch. 8). Lecky, in his Eng. in the Eighteenth Century (iii. p. 371), speaks of the speech of George Grenville, reported by Cavendish, as particularly worthy of attention. Cf. Parliamentary History and Force's Amer. Archives (4th ser., i. 133).

For the commotions in the other colonies, see, for New Hampshire, beside the histories, the N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 408, 413, and the letter of July 26, 1774, in the Chas. Lovell Papers (Mass. Hist. Soc.). For Connecticut, the general histories of the State, Peters's Connecticut, and McCormick's reprint, to be corrected by J. L. Kingsley's Hist. Address (1838), New Englander (1871, p. 248), and Scribner's Mag., June, 1878. Cf. also J. H. Trumbull's Blue Laws true and false. Dawson (Westchester County, p. 7) claims that the refusal of the New York authorities to allow the tea ship Nancy to enter the harbor was more significant than the riot in Boston, and he cites various authorities. Cf. Lossing's Schuyler (i. ch. 16) and Leake's Lamb (ch. 6). For Pennsylvania, see the histories of Philadelphia; Niles's Principles and Acts (1876, p. 201); Reed's Life of Joseph Reed (i. ch. 2) for his letters to Dartmouth; Madison's Works (i. 10). For North Carolina, see Hist. Mag. (xv. 118).

[249] For a portrait of Cushing, see Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. 34.

[250] Journals of the House, 1773; Boston Gazette; Alden Bradford's ed. of Mass. State Papers; Gent. Mag., July, 1773. The letters were first published June 16, 1773 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1877, p. 339).

Copy of letters sent to Great Britain by Thomas Hutchinson and Andrew Oliver, and several other persons born and educated among us; which original letters have been returned to America (Boston, 1773; reprinted in Salem, 1773). The letters of Gov. Hutchinson and Lieut.-Gov. Oliver, 1st and 2d ed. (edited by Israel Mauduit) (London, 1774). The representations of Gov. Hutchinson and others contained in certain letters transmitted to England, and afterwards returned from thence (Boston, 1773). These letters are reprinted in Franklin before the Privy Council (Philad., 1859). Cf. Works relating to Franklin in the Boston Public Library, pp. 21, 22; Sabin, vi. p. 344, Haven in Thomas, ii. 632, 633; Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. p. 166.

[251] Mahon (v. 323) thinks it strange that any American of high standing should care to justify or palliate the conduct of Franklin. Goldwin Smith (Study of History, N. Y., 1866, p. 213) says: "Franklin alone, perhaps, of the leading Americans, by the dishonorable publication of an exasperating correspondence, which he had improperly obtained, shared with Grenville, Townshend, and Lord North the guilt of bringing this great disaster on the English race." Lecky (England in the Eighteenth Century, iii. 380, 416) alleges rather hastily that Hutchinson had once been concerned in using Franklin's letters with a certain disregard of rights. (Cf. Sparks's Franklin, iv. 450.) Some memoranda of Chalmers are in the Sparks MSS. (x. vol. iv.) Cf. Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors (vi. 105); Massey's England (vol. ii.); Adolphus's England (vol. ii. 34); Walpole's Last Journals, i. 255, 289.

[252] It is included in Sparks's edition, iv. 405, and embraces Franklin's letters to Cushing and his replies. Cf. also Sparks's Franklin, i. 356, viii. (his letters), 72, 79, 81, 85, 98, 100, 116, 117; Bigelow's Life of Franklin, ii. 130, 141, 158, 187, 206; Parton's Franklin, i. 560, 564, 582.

[253] A faithful account of the transaction relating to a late affair of honour between J. Temple and W. Whateley, containing a particular history of that unhappy quarrel (London, 1774). On Temple's connection with the Hutchinson letters, see the citations of the contemporary correspondence in Temple Prime's Some account of the Temple Family (N. Y., 1887), pp. 61-85.

[254] Franklin's Works, iv. 435.

[255] Ibid., iv. 441.

[256] Cf. Boston Daily Advertiser, April 3 and 5, 1856.

[257] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 43; R. C. Winthrop's Speeches, 1878-1886, p. 1.

[258] Cf. Bancroft's United States, orig. ed., vi. 435; Almon's Biog., lit., and polit. anecdotes (Lond., 1797); Wells's Sam. Adams (ii. 74); Barry's Mass., ii. 462. Hutchinson's own account of the transactions is given in his third volume (pp. 400-418), which may be supplemented by sundry references in P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson (pp. 82-93, 577; ii. 79), part of which refer to that editor's own views. C. F. Adams (Adams's Works, ii. 319) thinks the evidence nearly conclusive that John Temple was the person who gave the letters to Franklin. (Cf. P. O. Hutchinson, pp. 205, 210, 221, 222, 232, 353.) Cf. statement in Mass. Archives, "Miscellaneous", i. 386.

[259] Sparks's Franklin, iv. 426; Sparks MSS., xlviii.

[260] Sparks's Franklin, iv. 430. Cf. Ibid., viii. 93, 103, 110. Cf. Bigelow's Life of Franklin, ii. 189.

[261] An account of it is given in Israel Mauduit's edition of The letters of Gov. Hutchinson, etc. (London, 1774), with an abstract of Wedderburn's speech. There is a description of this scene in Bowring's Memoir of Jeremy Bentham (p. 59; cf. Monthly Mag., Nov. 10, 1802, and Sparks's Franklin, iv. 451). Gage wrote from London to Hutchinson, Feb. 2, 1774, that no man's conduct was ever so abused for so vile a transaction as Franklin's. There is a letter of Burke on the hearing (Sparks MSS., xlix. ii.). There is a contemporary double-folio print, Proceedings of his majesty's Privy Council on the address of the Assembly of Mass. Bay to remove the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, with the substance of Mr. Wedderburn's speech (Mass. Hist. Soc.). The whole proceedings are given in Franklin before the Privy Council in behalf of the Province of Mass. Bay, to advocate the removal of Hutchinson and Oliver (Philad., privately printed, 1859). Arthur Lee has a word to say on the scene (Life of A. Lee, i. 240, 273). Franklin is said to have worn a suit of Manchester velvet during this castigation from Wedderburn, which he did not put on again till he signed the treaty of alliance with France in 1778 (Mahon, v. 328).

[262] In 1772 the town of Boston had sent a printed circular to the neighboring towns, asking their advice as to the course best to be pursued in consequence of the crown's assuming to regulate the judges' salaries. Hutchinson (History, iii. 545, 546) gives the report of the committee of the Assembly on the grant of the governor's salary from the crown, and the governor's answer (July, 1772). For John Adams's controversy with Brattle on this point, see Adams's Works, iii. 513. On Oliver's impeachment, see Hutchinson (iii. 443, 445), and P. O. Hutchinson (i. 133, 142), and papers in the MS. collection of Letters and Papers, 1761-1776, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet.

A portrait of Chief Justice Peter Oliver, by Copley, painted in England in 1772 (Perkins, p. 89), belongs to Dr. F. E. Oliver of Boston. Cf. photograph in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1886, with a memoir which was issued separately as Peter Oliver, the last chief-justice of the Superior Court of Judicature of the Province of Mass. Bay. A sketch by Thomas Weston, Jr. (Boston, 1886).

Something of the Boston spirit appears in various letters from her patriots which are printed in Leake's Lamb. The Familiar Letters of John and Abigail Adams begin at this time. Cf. summary in Sargent's Andre, ch. 4. Lecky finds (Eighteenth Century, iii. 379) in the talk of the hour the "exaggerated and declamatory rhetoric peculiarly popular at Boston." Isaac Royal's letter to Dartmouth, Jan. 18, 1774, is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1873. There is a letter to the British officers at Boston attributed to General Prescott (Sabin, x. 40,316).

[263] The action of Parliament can be readily traced in Force, 4th ser., i. 35. The bill was immediately sent in print to this country, and it can be found in Force, in the N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 402, and elsewhere.

[264] There are in the Boston Archives sundry record-books of this time: list of donations; records of Donation Committee; list of persons aided; cash-book of the Donation Committee. The House of Representatives at Salem, June 18, 1774, passed resolutions commending Boston to the aid of all, and sent these resolutions through the country in broadsides. The provincial congress at Cambridge, Dec. 6, 1774, recorded their vote and similarly scattered it. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiii. 182.) For the gifts which came to Boston, and the attendant records and correspondence, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xix. 158, and vol. xxxiv.; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 382; Col. A. H. Hoyt's paper in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1876. For the help from Virginia, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., iii. 259.

For notes on the condition of Boston during the operation of the act, see the Andrews letters in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., July, 1865, p. 330; Timothy Newell's diary, Ibid., Feb., 1859; Thomas Newell's, Ibid., Oct., 1877, p. 335; M. H. Soc. Coll., xxxi.; Bowdoin's letter to Franklin in Franklin's Works, viii. 127; letter of Ellis Gray in M. H. Soc. Proc., xiv. 315; Charles Chauncy's Letter to a friend ... on the sufferings of the town of Boston (Boston, 1774); Review of the rise, progress, services, and sufferings of New England, humbly submitted to the consideration of both houses of Parliament (London, 1774); A very short and candid appeal to free born Britons, by an American, i. e. Carolinian (London, 1774). For a general treatment of the effect of the Port Bill, see, among modern writers, Bancroft; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 319, and Life of Warren, ch. 10; Tudor's Otis; Wells's S. Adams (ii. 170); Reed's Joseph Reed (i. ch. 3); lives of John Adams, Josiah Quincy, Jr.; A. C. Goodell's Address at Salem in Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., xiii. p. 1; Pitkin's United States (i. App. 15); Grahame (iv. 358); Sargent's Dealings with the Dead (i. 152); and the histories of Boston. On the British side, see Parliamentary History, xvii. 1163; Annual Register, xvii. 1159; Donne's Corresp. of Geo. III. and North, i. 174; Protests of the lords, ed. by Rogers, ii. 141; Adolphus, ii. 59; Massey, ii.; Pict. Hist. Eng. Geo. III., i. 159; Smyth's Lectures; Mahon (vi. 3); Ryerson's Loyalists (i. 358); Russell's Life and Times of Fox, ch. 5; Life of Shelburne, ii. 302; Chatham Corresp., iv. 342; Rockingham Memoirs, ii. 238; Macknight's Burke, ii. 50. The London limners made several caricatures out of the hungry Bostonians.

[265] Cf. letter from Portsmouth, N. H., in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 2d ser., ii. 481; Hollister's Connecticut, ii. ch. 6; lives of Jay by Jay and by Flanders, and documents in Force, for the effect in New York; Minutes of the Prov. Congress of New Jersey, p. 3; New Jersey Archives, x. 457, etc. A paper by Joseph Reed on the action in Pennsylvania (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1878, p. 269) was controverted by Thomson (Ibid., p. 274), who held that Reed had no intimate knowledge in the matter. Cf. Chas. Thomson's letter to Wm. H. Drayton in the Penna. Mag. of Hist. (ii. 411), from the Sparks MSS., and his letter in the N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc. (1878, p. 218); Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 203; Dickinson's Polit. Works, i. 285-416. The resolutions of Delaware are in the Life of George Read, pp. 88, 101. For the Maryland action, see Niles (p.258) and McSherry's Maryland. For Virginia, see Rives's Madison (i. 60); Niles (p. 272); Life of R. H. Lee (i. 97); Randall's Jefferson (i. 85); Parton's Jefferson (p. 130). For North Carolina, McRee's Iredell.

[266] The covenant was printed in the Mass. Gazette, June 23, 1774, and is reprinted in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (xii. 45), where is also (Ibid., xi. 392; also see xii. 46) the protest against the covenant, and the loyalist signers of the protest (given in Mass. Gazette, July 7, 1774). This drew out a proclamation from Gage, pointing out the error of illegal combinations (Mass. Gazette, June 30, 1774, and Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 47). It was turned into verse in ridicule (Moore's Songs and Ballads of the Rev., p. 65). Dr. Belknap gave his reasons for not entering such a combination (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 2nd ser., ii. 484). Cf. Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 336. Timothy Ruggles soon organized a counter-association of loyalists.

[267] An account of this interview by Hutchinson himself was first published at length in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xv. p. 326, Oct., 1877. Cf. Ibid., April, 1884, p. 164; P. O. Hutchinson, i. 158, and ii. preface; Donne's Corresp. of Geo. III. and North, i. 194.

[268] There are in the Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet two early, apparently official copies of the act for regulating the government. Cf. Ramsay's Revolution in South Carolina (i. 204); Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, p.347, where are various references. Hutchinson wrote from London that he was opposed to these acts (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Jan., 1862, p. 301). A letter from Jos. Wood, in London, April 18, 1774, makes note of the efforts of the Americans in London to prevent Parliament committing itself so hastily to the Regulating Act (Penna. Mag. of Hist., x. 265). Something of the spirit of these protests can be seen in Bishop Shipley's Speech intended to have been spoken on the bill for altering the charters of the colony of Massachusetts Bay (London, 1774). Cf. in reply A speech never intended to be spoken in answer to a speech intended, etc. (London, 1774). Cf., on Shipley, Franklin's Works, viii. 40. The bishop's views are also expressed in his Sermon before the Soc. for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts (London, 1773; Norwich, Conn., 1773). There is a portrait of Shipley in the European Mag., April, 1788.

For the debate in Parliament, see Force, 4th series, i. 65; Niles's Principles, etc. (1876 ed.), pp. 414, 419.

[269] Westchester County, N. Y., during the Amer. Rev. (Morrisania, 1886), pp. 84, 87.

[270] J. C. Hamilton's Repub. of the U. S., i. 55; Shea's Hamilton, ch. 7; Lossing's Schuyler, vol. i.; Life of Peter Van Schaack; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 477, 490, etc. John Adams (Works, ix. 407, 411) believed that New York held back. Dawson (Westchester, 9) thinks that ignorance or neglect is at the bottom of the usual view of the New York sluggishness, held to by writers, but he admits that Gouverneur Morris was doubtful for a while (p. 12; cf. Sparks's Life of Morris); he sets forth the great ability of the Tory organ, Rivington's Gazetteer (p. 127); he gives a fuller account than Hinman or Beardsley of the arrest of Samuel Seabury, the "Westchester Farmer", by Isaac Sears (pp. 127, 136; and on Sears, Jones, ii. 337, 622). Much can be gleaned from Tryon and Colden's letters to Dartmouth in N. Y. Col. Docs., viii.

[271] Beside the general histories, see, for Pennsylvania, the resolutions of Northampton County in Hist. Mag., ix. 49 (also see Penna. Archives, iii. 543); for Virginia, Jefferson's resolutions, a Summary view of the rights of British America (Williamsburg, London, and Philadelphia, 1774); the Fairfax County resolutions (Sparks's Washington, ii. 488), and Irving's Washington (vol. i. ch. 1); for North Carolina, E. F. Rockwell on Rowan County, in Hist. Mag. (xv. 118), and letters in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (xiii. 329); for South Carolina, Hist. Mag., ix. 341, and xxii. 90; and Southern Quarterly, xi. 468; xiv. 37. In a more general way, for movements in the South, see, for South Carolina, Ramsay, Moultrie, Drayton, R. W. Gibbs; for North Carolina, Cooke, Jones, Foote, Martin, Caruthers's Caldwell; for Virginia, C. Campbell's Bland Papers, Wirt's P. Henry, Randall's Jefferson, Parton's Jefferson, Rives's Madison; and for Maryland, Purviance's Baltimore. For Southern sentiment of a Tory cast, see Jonathan Boucher's Views of the Amer. Revolution.

[272] Force's Amer. Archives, 4th ser., i. 333; Dawson's Westchester County, 18; Arnold's Rhode Island, ii. 334; W. E. Foster's Stephen Hopkins, ii. p. 232.

[273] Sparks's Franklin, i. 350. It is claimed that Sam. Adams was earlier. Cf. Wells, ii. p. 84.

[274] Bancroft, orig. ed., vi. 508.

[275] Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 40. To New York the precedence is also given by Gordon, Ramsay, Hildreth, and Dawson (Westchester County, p. 19).

[276] Dawson, pp. 18, 19.

[277] Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 221. Silas Deane's letters home are in Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii.

[278] Works, ix. 339. Cf. E. D. Neill in Penna. Mag. of Hist., ii. 58; Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia, i. 291.

[279] John Adams's Works, ix. 617, x. 78, 173; Life of Geo. Read, 93. The Congress met in Carpenter's Hall. (Cf. Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia, i. 290; Egle's Penna., 141; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 262.)

[280] Works, viii. 131, 142. The Congress had been variously constituted. New York and Pennsylvania had acted outside their legislatures. John Adams, in going through those States on his way to Philadelphia, had remarked "that some in them wanted a little animation." The spirit in New York is shown on the loyal side in Jones's New York during the Rev., i. 449. Cf. J. A. Stevens on "New York in the Continental Congress" in The Galaxy, xxii. 149. The credentials of the Delaware members are in the Life of Geo. Read, 91. The Virginia delegates were at variance. Patrick Henry was eager for a fight. R. H. Lee thought Great Britain would revoke her obnoxious legislature. Washington was undecided. The instructions of the Virginia delegates are in Jefferson's Writings, i. 122. Gadsden was for forcing the conflict by attacking Gage in Boston; and a rumor reaching Philadelphia that Boston was undergoing bombardment fanned the flame, and Samuel Adams wrote home that America would stand by the devoted town. In Georgia the royal governor had prevented the choice of delegates, and that province was not represented. The opposing feelings, North and South, can be gathered from some of the tracts Which the Congress elicited:—

A few remarks upon some of the resolutions and votes of the Continental Congress at Philad. in Sept., and the Provincial Congress at Cambridge in November, by a friend to Peace and Good order (Boston, 1775; same, no date,—Sabin, iv. 15,529). The two Congresses cut up (Boston and New York,—Sabin, iv. 15,597). Thomas Jefferson's Summary View of the rights of British America, set forth in some resolutions, intended for the inspection of the delegates now in convention (Williamsburg, 1774; Philad., 1774). A letter from a Virginian to the members of the Congress to be held at Philadelphia, Sept., 1774 (without place, 1774; Boston, 1774, in three editions; London, 1774),—in opposition to the non-importation combination. Address to the deputies in General Congress (Aug. 10, 1774, Charlestown, S. C.,—Sabin, v. 15,511). Letter from a freeman of South Carolina to the deputies of North America, assembled in High Court of Congress at Philadelphia (Charlestown, S. C., 1774,—Sabin, x. 40,277).

The relations of the colonies to the Congress appear in the lives of the leading members. For New England, of which there was not a little jealousy, and whose members refused to attend Sunday sessions (Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 237; Life of George Read, 97), see C. F. Adams's John Adams; Wells's Sam. Adams, vol. ii. 218; Frothingham's Joseph Warren, ch. 12; Quincy's Josiah Quincy; Austin's Elbridge Gerry, ch. 5. For the Middle States, see Sedgwick's William Livingston; Lossing's Schuyler, i. ch. 17; Shea's (p. 234) and other lives of Hamilton; Read's Geo. Read, 93; Jay's John Jay, and the life of Jay in Flanders's Chief Justices. For Virginia, the lives of Washington (Marshall; Sparks, ii. 505; Irving, i. 365); Rives's Madison, i. 51; Lee's lives of Arthur and R. H. Lee; Wirt's Patrick Henry, 105; lives of Jefferson (Tucker, i. ch. 3; Parton, ch. 17). For South Carolina, the life of Rutledge in Flanders.

The legal aspects are particularly touched in Towle's Constitution, 311; Cocke's Constitutional Hist., i. 29; Scott's Development of Constitutional Liberty, 166; Oscar S. Strauss's Origin of Republican Form of Government, (N. Y.) 1885. Cf. Daniel Webster's Address before the N. Y. Hist. Society, Feb. 23, 1852, pp. 36, 40; and H. A. Brown's Oration on the Centennial of the Congress, 1874.

The general works to be consulted are Grahame, iv. 373; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 127; Hildreth, vol. iii.; Pitkin, i. ch. 8; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 335, 359; Greene's Hist. View of the Amer. Rev., 79; Dunlap's New York, i. ch. 29, 31, and Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 468; Gordon's Pennsylvania, ch. 20; Mulford's New Jersey, 389.

[281] Mag. of Amer. Hist., i. 438.

[282] Sabin, iv. 15,542. A MS. copy of the journal, attested by C. Thomson, and evidently brought home by Thos. Cushing, a Massachusetts member, is in the library of the Mass. Hist. Soc. (Proc., i. 271). Later editions are The whole proceedings of the American Continental Congress held at Philadelphia (New York, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,598); Extracts from the journal and from the votes and proceedings of Congress, published in Philad., reprinted in Boston and London (Ibid., iv. 15,526-28; Brinley, ii. 3,990; Stevens, Nuggets, no. 3,264). There were other editions in Providence, Newport, New London, Hartford. There were two editions published in London by Almon in 1775 (Sabin, iv. 15,544; Brinley, ii. 3,989). The journal appears also in the several authenticated series of the Journals of Congress, 1777, 1801, 1823, etc.

The correspondence of Congress with Gage (Oct. 10th and 20th) is contained in the Journal, i. 18, 46.

The documents of the Congress are given by Force.

[283] Works, i. 150, ii. 340, 366, 370, 382, 387, 393, ix. 339, 343; his correspondence with Mercy Warren is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 348.

[284] Vol. ii. p. 535. It was printed separately at the time in Philad., Watertown (Mass.), and Newport. It will also be found in the Journals of Congress, i. p. 19; in Ryerson's Loyalists, i. p. 411; in Marshall's Hist. of the Colonies, App. ix. p. 481. Cf. Story's Constitution, i. 179; Curtis's Constitution, i. 22; Pitkin's United States, i. 283; Hildreth's United States, iii. 43; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 341; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, p. 371; Greene's Hist. View, p. 83; Ramsay's South Carolina, i. p. 233.

[285] Cf. note on the authorship of it, in N. Jersey Archives, x. 529.

[286] It is printed from this copy, with fac-similes of the signatures, in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (May, 1883, p. 377), together with the letter transmitting it (Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. 167; Bibl. Hist., 1870, no. 1,026). Franklin printed it at once in Almon's edition of the Journal of the Congress (Works relating to Franklin in the Bost. Pub. Lib., p. 24; U. S. 47th Cong., 1st Sess. Misc. Doc., no. 21, p. 20). It is also in the Philad. ed. of the Journal, i. 46; and was separately printed at Boston in 1774 and 1775, and at New York in 1776, with other documents (Sabin, iv. nos. 15,581-83; Haven in Thomas, ii. pp. 642-43). It has since been given in Force, 4th ser., i. 934; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 437-41; N. Jersey Archives, x. 522; Spencer's United States, i. 348, 381; Griffeth's Historical Notes, 136. Cf. Ramsay's So. Carolina, i. 242; John Adams's Works, i. 159, x. 273; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 377; Amer. Quart. Review, i. 413.

[287] Cf. Journals of Congress, i. 26; Pitkin's United States, i. App. 17; Spencer's United States, i. 338; Lee's Life of R. H. Lee, i. 119; Jay's Life of John Jay, i. App.; Ramsay's South Carolina, 263. There was published in London A letter to the people of Great Britain in answer to that published by the American Congress (London, 1775,—Sabin, x. no. 40,509).

[288] Given in Ramsay's Rev. in So. Carolina, i. 279; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 426, etc.

[289] Given in the Appendix of Frothingham's Joseph Warren, and in Journal Cont. Cong., i. p. 9. Cf. Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 59; Life of George Read, 95.

[290] New York during the Rev., i. 34, 36.

[291] P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, i. 272.

[292] Cf. a letter of A. Lee on the effect of the Congress on the ministry, in Life of A. Lee, i. 213.

[293] The plan was published in Philadelphia at the time, and was included the next year in Galloway's Candid examination of the mutual claims of Great Britain and the colonies, with a plan of accommodation on Constitutional principles (New York, 1775, and again in 1780). This drew out An Address to the Author of a pamphlet entitled, etc., to which Galloway responded in A Reply (N. Y., 1775). It was later included in Galloway's Historical and political Reflections on the Rise and Progress of the Amer. Rebellion (London, 1780). Cf. Force, 4th ser., i. p. 1; Sparks's Franklin, vii. 276, viii. 145; Bigelow's Franklin, ii. 249; Gordon, i. 409; John Adams's Works, ii. 387, iv. 141; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., ii. 109, 430; Bancroft, United States, orig. ed., vii. 140; Pitkin's United States, i. 299; Hildreth's United States, iii. 46; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 367, 399; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 218; Dawson's Westchester County, 34; Graydon's Memoirs, 117; lives of Washington by Marshall and Sparks; lives of John Jay by Jay and by Flanders; and of Patrick Henry by Wirt.

Jones, in his New York during the Rev., i. ch. 2, with notes on pp. 438, 449, 477, 490, explains the relations of the loyalists to this Congress. Governor Franklin sent the Galloway plan to Dartmouth with comments (N. J. Archives, x. 503).

Galloway explains his relations to this Congress, and divulged more than the agreement of secrecy was held to warrant, in his Examination before the House of Commons in a committee on the American Papers (London, 1779; 2d ed., with explanatory notes, 1780; ed. by Thomas Balch, Philad., for the Seventy-Six Society, 1855). There is a Dutch version, 1781 (Muller, 1877, no. 1,200). Respecting this examination, Lecky (ii. pp. 443, 481, etc.) says: "As a loyalist, Galloway's mind was no doubt biased; but he was a very able and honest man, and he had much more than common means of forming a correct judgment."

It has been supposed that Galloway conveyed to Governor Franklin the information which through that official reached Dartmouth (N. Jersey Archives, x. 473). Galloway is said also to have prepared the pamphlet Arguments on both sides in the dispute, etc., which is also reprinted in the N. J. Archives, x. 478. On Galloway, see Sabine's Loyalists, i. 453.

Haven ascribes to Thomas B. Chandler, and Sabin (no. 16,591) to Dr. Myles Cooper, a tract, What think ye of Congress now? Or an Enquiry how far the Americans are bound to abide by and execute the decisions of the late Continental Congress, with a plan by Samuel [sic] Galloway, Esq., for a proposed union between Great Britain and her Colonies (N. Y., 1775; Lond., 1775). This pamphlet accuses the New England republicans of urging the Congress beyond the purpose for which its members were elected.

[294] The articles were printed in all newspapers, and in those of Boston, Nov. 7th. They are also in the Journals of Congress, i. 23; in Ramsay's Rev. in South Carolina, i. 252; in H. W. Preston's Docs. illus. Amer. Hist. (N. Y., 1886), p. 199; in Force, 4th ser., i. 915, with fac-simile of signatures; in the Charleston Year Book (1883), p. 216, with fac-similes; in Jos. Johnson's Traditions and Reminiscences of the Amer. Rev. (Charleston, 1851), p. 51, with fac-similes. The signatures, somewhat reduced, are given herewith from Smith's Hist. and Lit. Curiosities, 2d ser., p. liii. Maryland's copy of the original printed broadside, with written signatures, is in the Penna. Hist. Soc. library. Frothingham gives the best account of the genesis of the document and the effect it had (Rise of the Republic, 373, 396). In Massachusetts, a broadside Resolution of the Provincial Congress, signed by Hancock, Dec. 6th, was sent to all the ministers, urging them to give their influence to secure a general compliance (in Boston Pub. Lib., H. 90 a, 3). This plan of association was opposed by Galloway, Duane, and all the South Carolina delegates except Gadsden. Jones (N. Y. during the Rev., i. 438) gives the loyalist view. The association of the delegates, etc., by Bob Jinger, is a burlesque on the association (Harris Collection of Amer. Poetry, p. 13).

[295] Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 161.

[296] Cavendish Debates, ed. by Wright, viz., Debates of the House of Commons in 1774 on the bill for making more effectual provision for the government of the Province of Quebec, with Mitchell's map of Canada (Lond., 1839). See also the proceedings and the bill in Amer. Archives, 4th ser., i. 170-219, 1823-1838. The bill is also in the Regents of the University of New York's Report on the boundaries of the State of N. Y., i. 90. Cf. Burke's letter on the Quebec Bill and the bounds of New York in N. Y. Hist. Coll., 2d ser., ii. 215, 219; Mill's Boundaries of Ontario, p. 50; Gordon's Sermon in Thornton's Pulpit of the Rev., 217, Shea's Hamilton, 324; and Works of Alex. Hamilton.

The satirical print "Virtual Representation", given herewith, follows an original print in a volume of Proclamations in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society. Cf. Lossing's Field-Book of the Rev., i. 158.

[297] Cf. Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century, iii. 400, 433, on the effect of the act. Cf. also The Singular and Diverting Behaviour of Doctor Marriot, His Majesty's Advocate-General; Who was Examined concerning the Religion and Laws of Quebec; And found means from his incomparable Wit and Subtility To defeat the Purposes for which he was brought to the Bar of Parliament On the 3d of June, 1774 (Phila., 1774). Samuel Johnson's Hypocrisy unmasked, or a short inquiry into the religious Complaints of our Amer. Colonies (Lond., 1776, 3 editions), defends the bill, and says it extends no more rights to Catholics than some of the colonies do (Sabin, ix. no. 36,297). A Letter to Lord Chatham on the Quebec Bill reached five editions (London, 1774; reprinted, Boston, 1774), and was corrected in the second edition. Sabin (x. 40,468) says it was attributed to Lord Lyttelton, and more probably to Sir William Meredith. The New York reprint (1774) gave it as A letter from Lord Thomas Lyttelton to Wm. Pitt, Earl of Chatham (Stevens, Hist. Coll., ii. no. 433). Wilkie published The justice and policy of the late Act of Parliament, for making more effectual provision for the government of Quebec, asserted and proved; and the conduct of the administration respecting that province stated and vindicated (London, 1774, two editions), which is attributed to William Knox. Francis Masères published An account of the proceedings of the British and other Protestants, inhabitants of the province of Quebec, with Additional papers concerning the province of Quebec (Lond., 1776), and The Canadian Freeholder ... shewing the sentiments of the bulk of the freeholders of Canada, concerning the late Quebeck act (Lond., 1777, in three vols.). An Appeal to the public, stating and considering the objections to the Quebec bill (London, 1774), was dedicated to the patriotic society of the Bill of Rights.

[298] A letter to the inhabitants of the Province of Quebec (Philad., 1774). Lettre addressée aux habitans de la Province de Quebec (Philad., 1774). A clear idea of the genuine and uncorrupted British Constitution in an address to the inhabitants of the province of Quebec from the forty-nine delegates in the Continental Congress at Philadelphia, Sept. 5-Oct. 10, 1774 (London, 1774). Cf. Sabin, iv. 15,516, ix. p. 293, x. 40,664; Journals of Congress, i. 39.

[299] P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, i. 296.

[300] Aspinwall Papers (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll.), ii. 706.

[301] Cf. Reed's Life of Reed, i. 76, 78, 82, and George Bancroft's Jos. Reed, p. 10. Governor Franklin's letters to Dartmouth are in the New Jersey Archives (x. 473, 503), where the anxiety of the king is disclosed (Ibid. x. 496, 534-5). Chatham's opinion is cited in Quincy's Life of Josiah Quincy, Jr., 268. Later English views are given in Mahon, vi. 13, and Lecky, iii. 408, 443.

[302] Dawson's Westchester County, pp. 36, 37.

[303] On the Tory side were Doctors Cooper, Inglis, Seabury, and Chandler; on the Whig side, William Livingston, John Jay, and Alex. Hamilton. Cf. Lossing's Schuyler, i. ch. 17.

[304] Dawson, Westchester County, p. 137 (see also Hist. Mag., 1868, p. 9), contends for Wilkins, and doubts what is put forward as Seabury's own evidence in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Feb., 1882, p. 117. Cf. Amer. Quart. Church Rev., April, 1881; Shea's Hamilton, ch. 7; Manual of N. Y. City, 1868, p. 813.

[305] The Seabury-Wilkins tracts are:

Free thoughts on the proceedings of the Continental congress, held at Philadelphia, Sept. 5, 1774: wherein their errors are exhibited, their reasonings confuted and the fatal tendency of their non-importation, non-exportation, and non-consumption measures, are laid open to the plainest understanding [etc.]; in a letter to the farmers, and other inhabitants of North America in general, and to those of the province of New York in particular. By a farmer. [Signed A. W. farmer.] (Without place, 1774.)

The congress canvassed: or, an examination into the conduct of the delegates, at their grand convention, held in Philadelphia, Sept. 1, 1774. Addressed to the merchants of New York. By A. W., Farmer (Philad., 1774).

There was a reply to the Farmer in Holt's New York Journal, Dec. 22, 1774 (Dawson, p. 40); but the most extraordinary rejoinder was that of the youthful Alexander Hamilton, then eighteen years old, in A full vindication of the measures of the congress, from the calumnies of their enemies; in answer to a letter, tender the signature of A. W., Farmer. Whereby his sophistry is exposed [etc.]; in a general address to the inhabitants of America, and a particular address to the farmers of the province of New York. [Signed, A friend to America.] (New York, 1774.) Cf. P. L. Ford's Bibliotheca Hamiltoniana (N. Y., 1886), no. 1.

The "Farmer" replied in A view of the controversy between Great Britain and her colonies. In a letter to the author of A full vindication of the measures of congress, from the calumnies of their enemies. By A. W., Farmer? (New York, 1774.)

Hamilton's final rejoinder is The farmer refuted; or, a more comprehensive and impartial view of the disputes between Great Britain and the colonies. Intended as a further Vindication of the congress, in answer to a Letter from a Westchester farmer, entitled a View of the controversy between Great Britain and her colonies. By a sincere friend to America (1775). Cf. Ford, no. 3.

These productions of the young Whig are contained in the various editions of Hamilton's Works. Cf. J. Hamilton's Repub. of the U. S., i. 65; Shea's Hamilton, p. 330.

[306] A friendly address to all reasonable Americans on our political confusions (New York, 1774; America, 1774; Lond., 1774; Dublin, 1775; abridged, New York, 1774. Sabin, iv. 16,587-8). A copy with the author's MS. corrections was sold at Bangs's, N. Y., Feb., 1854, no. 178. The resulting tracts are: The other side of the question, or a defence of the liberties of No. America, in answer to a late Friendly Address (N. Y., 1774; Boston, 1775). By Philip Livingston. Strictures on a pamphlet entitled a Friendly Address (N. Y., 1774; Philad., 1774; Boston, 1775). This is by Charles Lee, and is reprinted in the Charles Lee Papers, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871, p. 151. The strictures on the Friendly Address examined and a refutation of its principles attempted (Philad., 1775, two editions). This is sometimes ascribed to Thomas B. Chandler, and sometimes to Lieut. Henry Barry. Cooper also printed The American querist, or some questions proposed relative to the present disputes between Great Britain and her American colonies (N. Y., 1774; Boston, 1774; London, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 16,586).

[307] It is printed in Almon's Prior Documents (1777), with Franklin's name, and Sparks includes it in his edition of Franklin (iv. 466). Lee is also said to have had a main hand, aided by Franklin, in An appeal to the justice and interests of the people of Great Britain in the present dispute with America (London, 1774). Cf. Sparks's Franklin, iv. 409. Another tract ascribed at the time to Franklin was really written by James Wilson, namely, Considerations on the nature and extent of the legislative authority of the British parliament Philad., 1774. Cf, Sparks's Franklin, iv. 409.

[308] Philad. and London, 1774; included in Political Writings of Dickinson (Wilmington, 1801, vol. i.), and in Penna. Archives, 2d ser., iii. 560. Cf. Hist. Mag., x. 288. Governor Bernard briefly set forth his view of The Causes of the present distractions in America (1774), and also gathered certain letters written from Boston in 1763-68, and published them as Select letters on the trade and government of America (London, 1774,—Sabin, ii. 4,920, 4,925). The government printed a Report of the Lords' Committee, appointed to inquire into the several proceedings in the colony of Mass. Bay, in opposition to the sovereignty of his Majesty (London, 1774). Granville Sharp's Declaration of the people's natural right to a share in the legislature, issued in London (1774), was reprinted in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia (Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 650).

[309] Cf., for instance, the letters of the king to Dartmouth, in the Dartmouth Papers (Hist. MSS. Com. Rept., ii.); proceedings in Parliament given in Force, 4th ser., i. 5, and in Niles's Principles, etc.; Hutchinson's diary, including his interview with the king (P. O. Hutchinson, i. p. 157) and talks with Pownall (p. 251); the picture of Fox and Barré in debates in Smyth's Lectures (ii. 386), and such more general accounts as those in Frothingham's Rise, etc. (p. 344), Bancroft's United States (vii. 173, 186, 194), Parton's Franklin (ii. 5), and papers by T. H. Pattison in the New Englander (xl. 571), and Winthrop Sargent in the No. Amer. Rev., lxxx. p. 236. The letters of Franklin (Works, iv.) add much, and the influence and speeches of Chatham bring him into prominence.

[310] Dawson's Westchester, 48, 50, 60, where the authorities of the diverse views are cited. Its sessions closed April 3d, and it was the last Assembly under the royal order. Its proceedings are in Jones's New York during the Rev., i. 506. Within a month a general association was signed (April 29th) in New York of the opposers of government (Jones, i. 505). The proceedings of the New York and Elizabethtown committee of observation, relating to infractions of the non-importation agreements, are in the N. Jersey Archives, x. 561. The records of the provincial congress (which followed) are at Albany, and are partly printed in Force. The Sparks MSS. (no. xxxvii.) show extracts, 1775-78. (Cf. Dawson, 91. Cf. Hamilton's Repub. of the U. S., i. ch. 3; Reed's Jos. Reed, i.93.) As soon as Governor Tryon discovered the temper of the Continental Congress he sought safety on board a man-of-war in the harbor (Ibid., 118), and later in the year (Dec. 4th) he addressed a letter to the people of the province, urging the adoption of plans of reconciliation (Ibid., 141).

[311] Henry was a character of which, as time goes on, there is an appreciating estimate. His grandson, William Wirt Henry, is preparing an extended memoir, having already sketched his career in the Hist. Mag., xii. 90, 368, xxii. 272, 346; Penna. Mag. of Hist., p. 78. Professor Moses Coit Tyler has embodied new material in his Patrick Henry of the "American Statesmen Series." Cf. Frothingham's Rise, etc., 179; Mahon, v. 89; and references in Poole's Index. For contemporary judgments, see John Adams's Works, i. 208, x. 277; and Jefferson's letter in Hist. Mag., Aug., 1867, and comments in Ibid., Dec., 1867. Alexander Johnston, in his Representative American Orations (vol. i.), selects Henry's speech in the House of Delegates, March 28, 1775, as the leading specimen of Revolutionary oratory. The usual portrait of Patrick Henry is the one by Sully, representing him with his spectacles raised upon his forehead. It was engraved by W. S. Leney in 1817. There is a woodcut in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 439. His is one of the portraits in Independence Hall. On the class rank of the leading agitators in Virginia, compare Rives's Madison, i. 71; Grigsby on The Virginia Convention of 1776; and John Tyler's Address at Jamestown, May, 1857.

[312] Journals of Congress, i. 40.

[313] Cf. verses "Loyal York" from Rivington's Gazetteer, in Moore's Songs and Ballads, 74.

[314] Sparks's Washington, iii. 37. For Hancock's character, see Wells's Sam. Adams, an unfavorable view. Cf. also Sanderson's Signers of the Decl. of Ind.; Loring's Hundred Boston Orators; C. W. Upham's speech in the Mass. Legislature, March 17, 1859, on the bill for preserving the Hancock House. Hancock's correspondence as president of Congress is in Force, 4th ser., v.; 5th ser., i., ii., iii.

[315] Cf. ed. in 13 vols. Also see List of delegates, with journal of their proceedings from May 10 to July 31, 1775 (Philad., 1775,—Sabin, x. 41,447). Extracts from the votes, etc., were printed in New York; and their Journal in Philad. and New York (Haven in Thomas, ii. 656). There are notes on the debates in John Adams's Works, ii. 445. Cf. Elliot's Debates, i. 45. A fac-simile of the minutes for Dec. 26, 1775, signed by Chas. Thomson, is given in J. J. Smith's Hist. and Lit. Curios., 2d ser., p. xiii. The several publications of the Congress (included also in their Journals) are as follows:—Declaration by the representatives of the United Colonies ... setting forth the causes and necessity of taking up arms (Philad., Watertown, Newport, 1775; London, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,522). Cf. L. H. Porter's Outlines of the Const. Hist. of the U. S., p. 38.

The twelve United Colonies by their delegates in Congress to the inhabitants of Great Britain, July 8, 1775 (Philad., 1775; Newport, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,596). It was drafted by R. H. Lee. Cf. his Life, i. 143. Cf. Ramsay's Rev. in S. Carolina, p. 362.

Address of the twelve United Colonies ... to the people of Ireland (Philad. and New York, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,512).

Address from the delegates of the twelve United Colonies to the people of New England (Newport, 1775; reprinted in the R. I. Hist. Mag., 1885).

A petition to the king was adopted July 8th. It is said to have been moulded, in part at least, upon an appeal of Richard Stockton, of New Jersey, dated Dec. 12, 1774 (Orderly-book of Sir John Johnson, p. 176-78). Cf. Force, 4th ser., iv. 607; Ramsay, i. 355; Sparks's Franklin, i. 372, x. 435; Bancroft, vii. 186; Barry's Mass., ii. 60, 61, with references; Lee's Arthur Lee, i. 47; ii. 312. The London agents were instructed to print and circulate it (Journals, i. 112). Mahon (vol. vi.) says that the king was influenced by a mere punctilio in not replying to it, and Dartmouth writes to Carleton that it found no favor in or out of Parliament.

On the choice by Congress of Washington as commander-in-chief, see John Adams's Works, ii. 417; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. ch. 37; Hildreth's United States; Hamilton's Hamilton, i. 110; Frothingham's Rise of the Repub., 430, and his paper in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., March, 1876, and C. F. Adams in Ibid., June, 1858.

On the proposed articles of confederation (May 10th) and the debate thereon, see Sparks's Franklin, v. 91; N. Jersey Archives, x. 692; Secret Journals of Congress (July and Aug., 1775); and a contemporary draft of the articles in Letters and Papers, 1761-1776 (MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc. library).

In June, 1775, the Congress was called upon to approve the form of autonomy into which the progress of events had forced the people of Massachusetts Bay. Mr. A. C. Goodell, Jr., has traced the legal bearings of successive steps in a paper in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., May, 1884, p. 192. The word "province" was renounced, as the dependence upon the royal governor had ceased; and the word "colony" accepted, as indicating the modified dependence which still held applicable to the relations of the people to the throne. Up to April, 1776, the regnal year was used in acts, but upon the Declaration of Independence being received, all legislative acts run in the name of the "State." For the change of government in New Hampshire, see Belknap's Hist. of N. Hampshire, and papers in the Belknap MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., x. 324). An Historical Sketch of the Hillsborough County Congresses held at Amherst, N. H., 1774 and 1775, with other Revolutionary Records, by Edw. D. Boylston, was published at Amherst in 1884.

On May 10th Congress adopted Rules and articles for the better government of the troops raised and to be raised by the twelve United English Colonies (Philad., Watertown, Mass., New York, 1775). Also in Force, 4th ser., ii., 1855; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 538; R. I. Col. Rec., vii. 340; N. J. Prov. Cong., etc. (1879), p. 264. The Massachusetts articles of war were much the same. The Rules arranged by Timothy Pickering were published in 1775, and a presentation copy from Pickering to Gen. John Thomas, with a letter annexed, belongs to W. A. Thomas, of Kingston, Mass.

The plan of Congress for organizing the militia is given in their Journals, i. 118. They also caused to be printed W. Sewall's Method of making saltpetre (Philad., 1775). A paper by C. C. Smith on the making of gunpowder during the Revolution is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., March, 1876. As to the manufacture of other munitions of war, see Bishop's Hist. Amer. Manuf., i. ch. 17 and 18, and index, under cannon and firearms; and J. F. Tuttle on the Hibernia furnace, in the N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., 2d ser., vi. 148.

An agreement of the members (Nov. 9th) to keep the proceedings secret is given in fac-simile in Force, 4th ser., iii. 1,918. A Committee of Secret Correspondence, for preserving relations with sympathizers in Europe, was established Nov. 29th. (Cf. C. W. F. Dumas's letters in Diplom. Corresp., ix.; and Force, 5th ser., ii. and iii.)

For the Congress in general, see the histories of Gordon, Pitkin (i. ch. 9), Bancroft (vii. 353, viii. 25, 51), Grahame (iv. 407), Hildreth (iii. ch. 31); Greene's Hist. View, 89; Frothingham's Rise, etc., 419; Thaddeus Allen's Origination of the Amer. Union; Lecky (iii. 465); Ryerson (i. ch. 23); and the histories of the original States. Also, see lives of the members, etc.,—Franklin (by Sparks, Bigelow, Parton), Washington (by Marshall, Sparks, Irving), Sam. Adams (by Wells, ii. ch. 37), John Adams (by Adams, i. 212, ii. 408, x. 163, 171, 396, and his Familiar Letters, 83), R. H. Lee (i. 140), Schuyler (by Lossing, i. 316), Jefferson (by Randall, i. ch. 4, by Parton, ch. 19), Jay (by Jay), Madison (by Rives, i. 105), Geo. Read (by Read, 110), Gouverneur Morris (by Sparks, i. 46), Rutledge (by Flanders, ch. 8); lives of John Alsop and Philip Livingston (Mag. of Amer. Hist., i. 226, 303); Silas Deane's letters in Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii.; diary of Christopher Marshall; Mag. of Amer. Hist., by John Ward, ii. 193; Poole's Index, p. 295. A memorial of the inhabitants of Newport to the Congress is in the R. I. Hist. Mag., July, 1855. Sam. Adams wrote, Nov. 16th, from Philadelphia to Bowdoin: "The petition of Congress has been treated with evident contempt. I cannot conceive that there is any room to hope for the virtuous efforts of the people of Britain" (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii., 227). Walpole (Last Journal, i. 439) describes the effects of the action of this Congress in England.

The most significant controversial reply in England to the action of Congress came from a man of whom William S. Johnson (Beardsley, p. 71) was reporting to his American friends that he "was not much above an idiot" in appearance, but could repay one for his unfavorable appearance when he spoke,—Dr. Samuel Johnson, who published in 1775 his Taxation no tyranny, an answer to the resolutions and address of the American Congress, passing through four editions in that year. Macaulay says of it: "The arguments were such as boys use in debating societies. The pleasantry was as awkward as the gambols of a hippopotamus." Cf. Johnson's works, all editions; Boswell's Johnson; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 257-8; Smyth's Lectures, ii. 399; Fonblanque's Burgoyne, 110; Sabin, ix. 36,303, where (36,304-9) are various tracts which appeared in answer. Cf. Cooke Catal., no. 1,315. One of the most prominent of these replies was an anonymous Defence of the resolutions and address of the American congress, in reply to Taxation no tyranny. By the author of Regulus. To which are added, general remarks on the leading principles of that work, as published in the London Evening Post of the 2d and 4th of May; and a short chain of deductions from one clear position of common sense and experience (London, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,523). The next year the same writer published A letter to the Rev. Dr. [Richard] Price. Moore's Sheridan (ch. 3) gives an outline of an intended answer to Johnson.

A sort of semi-official response to the Declaration, made on the part of the government, appeared in the Rights of Great Britain asserted against the claims of America, which is usually ascribed to Sir John Dalrymple, though by some to James Macpherson. It appeared in seven or eight editions at London in 1776, and also the same year at Edinburgh and Philadelphia, and was translated into French (Sabin, v. 18,347). Dalrymple is said also to have been the writer of an Address of the people of Great Britain to the inhabitants of America, published anonymously by Cadell, at London, in 1775. This was a conciliatory effort at coöperation with certain placating measures, which the government sought to promote, and copies of the tract in large numbers are said to have been sent to America for distribution (Sabin, v. 18,346; Sparks Catal., no. 709; Stevens, Nugget, no. 3,106).

A Portuguese Jew, Isaac Pinto, living in Holland, took up the line of argument used in the Rights of Great Britain, and "employed a venal pen", as Franklin expressed it, "in the most insolent manner, against the Americans" (Sparks Catal., no. 2,075; Diplom. Corresp. of the Rev., ix. 265). Pinto's tracts were addressed to Samuel Barretts of Jamaica, and were called Lettre ... au sujet des troubles qui agitent actuellement toute l'Amérique Septentrionale, and a Seconde Lettre (both La Haye, 1776,—Sabin, xv. 62,988-89). The English translation, Letters on the American Troubles, appeared the same year in London (Sabin, xv. 62,990). Pinto was answered in Nouvelles observations, and a Réponse followed, also La Haye, 1776 (Sabin, xiii. 56,095, xv. 62,991).

Almon published in 1775 an Appeal to the justice and interests of the people on the measures respecting America, and the same year a Second appeal; and later, by the same author, A speech intended to have been delivered in the House of the Commons in support of the petition from the general Congress at Philad. There has been much difference of opinion as to the writers of these tracts, the names of Arthur Lee, C. Glover, Lord Chatham, and Franklin having been mentioned. (Cf. Cooke Catal., iii. no. 1,033; R. H. Lee's Life of A. Lee, i. 19.)

[316] "Massachusettensis", a Tory writer, brought out his first letter in the Mass. Gazette, Dec. 12, 1774, and continued them at intervals till April 3, 1775. The evidence that their writer was Leonard is presented in Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 231; by Lucius Manlius Sargent in the N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., July, Oct., 1864, or vol. xviii. 291, 353 (from the Boston Transcript). The letters were separately published in New York, 1775, as The present political state of the province of Mass. Bay in general and the town of Boston in particular, and again as The origin of the Amer. Contest with Great Britain, or the present political state, etc.,—both giving the writer as "a native of New England" (Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 660). What is called a second and third edition (London, 1776) purports to follow a Boston imprint, and is called Massachusettensis, or a series of letters containing a faithful state of many facts, which laid the foundation of the present troubles, ... by a person of honor upon the spot. (Cf. Sabin, x. p. 219.) There was also an edition in Dublin, 1776 (Hist. Mag., i. 249). Lecky (iii. 419) speaks of these letters as showing "remarkable eloquence and touching and manifest earnestness." Trumbull, in the first canto of his M'Fingal, had early assumed that Leonard was the author. See, on Leonard, Sabine's Amer. Loyalists and Ellis Ames in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 52.

John Adams, on the patriot side, began Jan. 23, 1775, a series of letters in the Boston Gazette, to counteract the effect of those of "Massachusettensis", and used the signature "Novanglus." The fight at Lexington broke off further publication for either disputant. Almon printed an abridgment of these papers in the Remembrancer, and they were later (London, 1783, 1784) published as A history of the Dispute with America, and were included finally in C. F. Adams's ed. of John Adams's Works (vol. iv.,—see also ii. 405, x. 178-79).

Both series were reprinted together in Boston in 1819, with a preface by Adams, who then still considered Sewall his adversary. Cf. Edmund Quincy's Life of Quincy, p. 381; Frothingham's Rise of the Repub., 393.

Of the Boston newspapers, Fleet's Evening Post was used indiscriminately as the organ of the patriots and their opponents, and expired April 24, 1775; the Boston Newsletter passed under governmental control, and alone continued to be published during the siege of Boston; the Massachusetts Gazette was the chief organ of the government; the Boston Gazette, devoted to the patriots, and more temperate than the Massachusetts Spy, which was later removed to Worcester. The most important Massachusetts journal outside of Boston was the Essex Gazette. (Cf. B. F. Thomas's Memoir of Isaiah Thomas, prefixed to the Amer. Antiq. Society's ed. of Thomas's Hist. of Printing [also see ii. 294]; J. T. Buckingham's Specimens of newspaper literature; F. Hudson's American Journalism; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 130.)

Rivington published in New York the principal paper in the Tory interests, known as the Gazetteer, 1773-1775, and later as the Loyal and then Royal Gazette. The footnotes in Moore's Diary of the American Revolution and Thomas's Hist. of Printing will show the newspapers of the other colonies.

The tracts of 1775-76 are too numerous to enumerate. Grahame characterizes the chief writers (United States, iv. 320). The monthly lists of the Gent. Mag. and Monthly Rev. will show most of their titles for England. Cf. Adolphus's England, ii. 331; Morgann's Life of Richard Price; Fitzmaurice's Shelburne, iii. 95. Haven's list for America ends with 1775; but the Brinley, Sparks, and other catalogues give many of them, and they can be found in Sabin by their authors' names. Many of these tracts embody plans of reconciliation.

[317] Sabin, xv. nos. 65,444, etc.; P. O. Hutchinson, ii. 38. John Wilkes, who had been Lord Mayor of London since 1774, brought the influence of its government against the ministry, and Price was offered the freedom of the city. Wilkes's speech of Feb. 6, 1775, is in Niles (ed. 1776, p. 425). In April, 1775, Wilkes and the aldermen had appealed to the king against the ministry (Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 282), and there is a broadside copy of an appeal, July 5, 1775, by the city to the king, in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library. In Aug., 1775, when the king issued his proclamation for the suppression of the rebellion, Wilkes paid it studied affront.

[318] Varying views of the current of British feeling will be found in Frothingham's Rise of the Repub., p. 412, etc.; in Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 219, 241, 257, etc., and in the final revision, iv. ch. 22 and 23. Lecky (iii. 573) thinks the majority of the people were with the king, and Hutchinson reported like views (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 255). Galloway was still communicating to the ministry secret intelligence through Gov. Franklin, of New Jersey (N. J. Archives, x. 570), and was causing it to be known that the people in the colonies who were for war were the violent ones, while the Quakers and the Dutch, the Baptists, Mennonists, and Dumplers, were for moderation (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 340).

A letter of John Wesley, June 14, 1775, to the Earl of Dartmouth, protesting against the war, is among the Dartmouth Papers, noted in the Hist. MSS. Com. Rept., ii., and is printed in Macmillan's Mag., Dec., 1870. Dartmouth, July 5th, wrote to Governor Franklin, of N. Jersey, that the king was determined to crush the revolt (N. J. Archives, x. 513, 645), and the king issued his proclamation "for suppressing rebellion and sedition" Aug. 23, 1775. It was sent over in broadside (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 186), and is printed in Force's Amer. Archives. In September Arthur Lee was writing of the violent temper of the ministry (Calendar of A. Lee Papers, p. 7, no. 62). The Diary of Governor Hutchinson helps us much, and throws light on the talk of compromise (ii. 25, 27), the temporary forgetfulness of the American question in the trial of the Duchess of Kingston (ii. 34), and Pownall's talk (ii. 127). The military resources of the colonies were not overlooked, and A letter to Lord Geo. Germain (London, 1776) warned that minister of what this meant, while the decision to pardon criminals in order to enlist them in the service of suppressing the rebellion did not a little to widen the breach (Lecky, iii. 585).

Abstracts of various papers in the Public Record Office for 1775 are given in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 340, etc.

[319] Cf. the indexes under the names of the leading debaters.

[320] The subject gets some enlivenment in the Toryism of Walpole's George the Third, edited by Le Marchant, and his Last Journals, edited by Dr. Doran.

Edmund Burke's conspicuousness makes his character and the record of it of first importance, and we need for successive estimates of his influence to consult the lives of him by Bisset, Prior, P. Burke, and Macknight. For his bearing as a speaker, see Wraxall's Hist. Memoirs (ii. 35). For an estimate of his arguments, see Smyth's Lectures (Bohn's ed., ii. 403, 408). His speeches on American Taxation (April 19, 1774) and conciliation (March 22, 1775) are in the various collected editions of his Works,—among the best of such being the Boston edition (1865, etc., Little, Brown & Co.) and the edition published by Nimmo (1885),—all of them following in the main Rivington's first octavo edition in 16 vols., London, 1801-27. Henry Morley has edited, with an introduction, Burke's Two speeches on Conciliation with America (London, 1886). His speech of March 22, 1775, is in Niles's Principles, etc. (1876 ed., p. 429). Lecky (iii. 426) sketches his policy. For conversations of Burke and North, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1881, p. 358.

The lives and speeches of Chatham are quite as necessary. Franklin was introduced into the Lords in Jan., 1775, by Chatham himself, when Chatham brought forward his motion for conciliation with America, and Franklin considered as much the best the notes which Josiah Quincy, Jr., made (Jan. 20, 1775) of the speeches of Chatham and Camden (Life of J. Quincy, Jr., 226, 264, 272, 318, 335, 403, 418; Sparks's Franklin, v. 43). Among the Cathcart MSS. is a contemporary copy of Chatham's plan which the Lords rejected (Hist. MSS. Com. Rept., ii. p. 28). The later speech of Dec. 20, 1775, for removing the troops from Boston, is also in Niles (1876 ed., p. 455). Cf. Gordon, i. 298; Force, 4th ser., i. 1,494; Smyth's Lectures, ii.; Parton's Franklin, ii. Mahon says that the whole spirit evaporates from the reports of Chatham's speeches in Almon. In March, 1775, Camden made a speech which Hutchinson (P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, 408, 410) describes and imagines Camden to have made in order that Franklin might take the speech to America. Hutchinson also in the same month describes Franklin in the Commons gallery, "staring with his spectacles", and listening to the speeches against America. Two speeches of Mansfield against America were criticised in The Plea of the Colonies on the Charges brought against them by Lord M——d and others (London, 1775, 1776; Philad., 1777,—Sabin, xv. 63,401-2).

Charles James Fox had been dismissed from the Tory government in 1774, and was now on the opposition side, a young and vehement debater of twenty-five (Lecky, iii. 571; Russell's Mem. and Corresp. of Fox, and his Life and Times of Fox; numerous references in Poole's Index, p. 472). On the relations of English parties to the American question, see Lecky (iii. 586); Campbell's Life of Loughborough, in his Lord Chancellors; Rockingham and his Contemporaries; Geo. W. Cooke's Hist. of Party (London, 1786-87; 1837, vol. iii.,—Sabin, iv. 16,309).

[321] Cf. Franklin's letters in his Works, and the letters to him from Quincy, Winthrop, Cooper, and Warren in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vii. 118, etc.

[322] Parton, ii. 26.

[323] Cf. Parton's Franklin, ii. 41, 44; Mahon, v. 24; Niles (1876 ed.), 476, Gent. Mag., xlvii. Franklin left London in March, 1775, and on his voyage home he wrote out an account of his recent negotiations, which is printed in Sparks (vol. i.) and in Bigelow (ii. 256). There are different copies of this paper (Parton, ii. 71); and Stevens (Hist. Coll., i. p. 160 D) has an account of one given to Jefferson (Bigelow, ii. 253).

Just before leaving London, Franklin wrote some articles for the Public Advertiser on The Rise and Progress of the Difference between Great Britain and her American Colonies, which are reprinted in Sparks, iv. 526. (Cf. Ibid., v. 2, 97, and Parton, ii. 72.)

[324] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 85.

[325] P. O. Hutchinson's Gov. Hutchinson, i. 115, 116. Percy, writing (April 17, 1774) just before he left England, said: "I fancy severity is intended. Surely the people of Boston are not mad enough to think of opposing us. Steadiness and temper will, I hope, set things in that quarter right, and Gen. Gage is the proper man to do it." Letter to Dr. Percy (Bishop of Dromore), among the Percy MSS. in Boston Public Library.

[326] Address of the Merchants of Boston in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 45. A broadside list of the addressers, as taken from the London Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser of Sept. 24, 1774, was printed in Boston. There is a copy in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society.

[327] Where he had occupied the Hooper house. Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 6; Evelyns in America, p. 267. There is a view of it in The Century, xxviii. p. 864. "King Hooper", as he was called, was born in 1710 and died in 1790. Cf. Perkins' Copley, p. 74, for a picture of him.

There is a portrait of Gage, now in the State House at Boston, which came to Gen. William H. Sumner through his marriage with Gage's niece, and which is engraved in Sumner's Hist. of East Boston. A contemporary engraving of Gage is reproduced in Shannon's N. Y. Manual, 1869, p. 766, and in Wheildon's Siege of Boston.

[328] Lee, in Sept., 1774, was writing of Gage: "He is now actually shut up at Boston ... and has perhaps the most able and determined men of the whole world to deal with." Chas. Lee Papers, N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871, p. 136. Various letters of this period written from Boston are in the Evelyns in America (Oxford, 1881).

[329] This is the house still standing, belonging to James Russell Lowell. Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 114.

[330] Loring's Hundred Orators, p. 89; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 62; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vi. 261.

[331]

For an account of Preble, see N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., 1868, pp. 404, 421. He, as well as Ward and Pomeroy, had been in the French wars.

[332] P. O. Hutchinson, 293, 297. Percy was writing, October 27, 1774, from the camp in Boston: "Our affairs here are in the most critical situation imaginable. Nothing less than the total loss or conquest of the colonies must be the end of it.... We have got together a clever little army here." Percy MSS. in Boston Public Library.

[333] Percy MSS., Nov. 25, 1774: "I really begin now to think that it will come to blows at last, for they are most amazingly encouraged by our having done nothing as yet. The people here are the most artful, designing villains in the world."

[334] Mem. of Quincy, p. 216.

[335] Letters, Dec. 12 and 28, 1774. The census or estimate by congress in 1775 gave New England 800,000 souls.

[336] N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1868, p. 337; letters of Gov. Wentworth in Ibid., 1869, p. 274; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 450; Force's Am. Archives; Belknap's New Hampshire; T. C. Amory's General Sullivan, 295; N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. 31; N. H. Provincial Papers, vii. 420-423, 478; Mary P. Thompson's Mem. of Judge Eben. Thompson (Concord, N. H., 1886).

[337] E. S. Riley, Jr., in Southern Monthly, xiv, 537.

[338] Sept. 30, 1774.

[339] Gibbes' Doc. Hist. of the Amer. Rev.

[340] Thornton's Pulpit of the Rev., p. 218.

[341]

The paper which excited Patrick Henry was the "Broken Hints" of Joseph Hawley, which was first printed in Niles's Principles and Acts of the Revolution; and since in John Adams' Works, ix. p. 641.

[342] See documents in Amer. Archives; Frank Moore's Diary of the Revolution, i. 15.

[343] Frothingham's Warren, p. 416.

[344] Ibid., p. 413.

[345] P. O. Hutchinson, p. 371.

[346] Frothingham's Warren, p. 418.

[347] Gage seems to have reported to the War Office that the information was erroneous which induced him to send out this expedition. P. O. Hutchinson's Gov. Hutchinson, 432. Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 348.

[348] They started April 5th. Howe's record appears in A Journal kept by Mr. John Howe, while he was employed as a British Spy during the Revolutionary War; also while he was engaged in the smuggling business during the late war. (Concord, N. H., 1827.) The only copy known is in the library of the New Hampshire Hist. Soc. Extracts from it are printed in the Boston Daily Advertiser, Apr. 20, 1886.

[349] Their reports to Gage are in Force's Amer. Archives.

[350] P. O. Hutchinson, p. 397.

[351] Ibid., p. 529; Joshua Green's diary in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 101.

[352] Rivington's N. Y. Gazetteer, Mar. 16, 1775, cited in Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, 60; also Moore's Diary of the Amer. Rev., i. 34.

[353] The manuscript of Warren's address is preserved in the hands of Dr. John C. Warren, and a page of it is in fac-simile in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, 143. Frothingham enumerates the editions of the printed pamphlet in his Warren, p. 436.

[354] It was printed as given "at the request of a number of the inhabitants of the town of Boston." Haven in Thomas, ii. 654.

[355] Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 64.

[356] Niles's Principles and Acts of the Revolution (ed. of 1876), p. 277.

[357] "Much art and pains have been employed to dismay us", wrote Samuel Cooper to Franklin, Apr. 1, 1775, "or provoke us to some rash action, but hitherto the people have behaved with astonishing calmness and resolution." Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 124.

[358] Moore's Diary of Amer. Rev., i. 57.

[359] On this same day, Percy, in Boston, was writing "Things now every day begin to grow more and more serious. The [rebels] are every day in great numbers evacuating this town, and have proposed in congress either to set it on fire and attack the troops before a reinforcement comes, or to endeavor to starve us. Which they mean to adopt time only can show." Percy MSS. in Boston Public Library.

[360] P. O. Hutchinson, pp. 428, 433.

[361] Ibid., 434, 475.

[362] Thomas's letter in the Worcester Centennial Anniversary, p. 116.

[363] They lodged in the house of the Rev. Jonas Clark, half a mile away from Lexington Common. Loring's Orators, 81. The house was built in 1698. See Hudson's Lexington. A painting of the house was owned by the late H. G. Clark, of Boston.

[364] As early as Jan. 28, instructions to Gage to apprehend the leaders of Congress had been signed. P. O. Hutchinson, p. 416.

[365] Gage had married her in 1758. She died in 1824, aged 90.

[366] Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 70.

[367] Gen. Wm. H. Sumner (New Eng. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., viii. 188) records some recollections of the opening of the fight as narrated to him by Dorothy Quincy, later Mrs. John Hancock, who saw it begin.

[368] Hudson's Lexington, 200.

[369] The night had been chilly; but the day grew rapidly warm. The season was a month early. Cf. Geo. Dexter's note in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xix. 377.

[370] John Howe was sent towards Lexington to meet and hurry Percy along. Journal of John Howe.

[371] Cf. Everett's Orations, i. p. 102.

[372] These were under the command of Col. Timothy Pickering, who was then and has been since charged with dilatoriness in coming up. Bancroft (United States) and W. V. Wells (Sam. Adams) so assert. Bancroft was controverted by Samuel Swett in a pamphlet in 1859, and Octavius Pickering, in his Life of T. Pickering (ch. 5 and App.), makes a full defence of his father.

[373] Andrews' letters (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., July, 1865) show the rumors which reached Gage in Boston during the day. There were some among the provincials who thought the news, when received in England, would stir up civil war (Proceedings, vol. v. p. 3); but Washington records, respecting its influence there, that it was "far from making the impression generally expected here." Sparks' Washington, iii. 43.

[374] Minutes in Mass. Archives, vol. cxv.

[375] Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 311.

[376] Frothingham's Warren, 467.

[377] It was before long known what a reception these delegates had had in New York, and how the crowd were with difficulty prevented from taking the horses from Hancock's carriage and drawing it. N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1865, p. 135. The journey of the delegates to Philadelphia in May, 1775, is described in the Deane Correspondence (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 222, etc.), and Jones (N. Y. during the Rev., i. 45) describes their reception.

[378] The papers of Quincy include a long message to the patriots, practically a report on his English mission, which he was too weak to write himself, but dictated to a sailor on the voyage. The only poetrait of Quincy is one painted after his death. This is engraved in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. iii.

[379] The trouble was in part whether "effects" included merchandise as well as furniture. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiii. 58. Cf. Frothingham's Warren, p. 483. James Bowdoin, as representative of the Boston people, tried to make an arrangement on the basis of a surrender of arms, and the draft of an order in Bowdoin's handwriting, in the name of Gage, is given, with references, in Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 76. Cf. Evacuation Memorial, p. 115. A part of the agreement with Gage was that the country Tories should be allowed to move into Boston. Among those who soon found their way into Boston, but under difficulties, were Lady Frankland and Benjamin Thompson, afterwards Count Rumford. (Evacuation Mem., 125-130. Cf. Barry's Mass., iii. 5, and references.)

[380] Whittier's "Great Ipswich Fright", in his Prose Works, ii. 112; Ipswich Antiq. Papers, iv. no. 46; Crowell's Essex (Mass.), 205.

[381] See Alexander Scammell's letter in Amory's General Sullivan, 299. New Hampshire was already sending forward her men. Hist. Mag., vii. 21.

[382] Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 141.

[383] Force's Am. Archives, ii. 433-39; Beardsley's Life of W. S. Johnson, 110, 210. The Massachusetts delegates meanwhile had tarried long enough in Connecticut, on their way to Philadelphia, to confirm the patriots there, and force the halting to take a decided stand. Cf. Journals Prov. Cong., 179, 194, 196.

[384] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 227.

[385] Cf. account of Warner in Hist. Mag., iv. 200, and by Gen. Walter Harriman in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1880, p. 363.

[386] De Costa's Lake George, p. 11; Jones, N. Y. during the Rev., i. p. 550. There is an account of Bernard Romans in F. M. Ruttenber's Obstructions to the Navigation of Hudson's River, (Albany, 1860), p. 9.

[387] Various papers respecting the capture of Ticonderoga and Crown Point in the spring of 1775, and movements thereabouts, are in the Mass. Archives, including letters of John Brown, Arnold, Allen, Easton, and some of these are copied in the Sparks MSS., vol. lx. Sparks indorses on a copy of the letter of the Mass. committee at Crown Point, June 23, 1776: "By the journal of the Mass. assembly it appears that Arnold, on his way to Ticonderoga, had engaged a company of men in Stockbridge, who marched on the 10th of May, under Captain Abraham Brown, but how far is uncertain."

On the trouble between Allen and Arnold at Crown Point (May, 1775), see the Deane Correspondence. (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 247.)

[388] Frothingham's Siege, 106.

[389] Circulated in broadside. There is one in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Cabinet, among the Elton broadsides.

[390] Heath Papers (MS.), vol. i.

[391] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 352.

[392] Grape Island, May 21: Moore's Diary of the Am. Rev., i. 84, 85; Adams' Familiar Letters, 56; Frothingham's Warren, 492, 496; New Jersey Archives, x. 606.

Noddle's Island, May 27: Frothingham's Siege, 109; Dawson's Battle, i. 47; Force's Am. Archives, ii. 719; Gordon, ii. 24; Humphrey's Putnam, 69; Tarbox's Putnam; Sumner's East Boston; N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., April, 1857, p. 137.

[393] Frothingham's Warren, 490 (May 16).

[394] P. O. Hutchinson's Gov. Hutchinson, 457.

[395] Thornton's Pulpit of the Revolution, p. 277.

[396] Life of Gerry, i. 79.

[397] Familiar Letters, p. 60.

[398] P. O. Hutchinson, p. 468.

[399] Issued in pursuance of Dartmouth's instructions of April 15. Sparks' Washington, iii. 510. There are copies of the broadside in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library, and in the Bostonian Society's rooms.

[400] Fonblanque's Burgoyne, 136, with the document in the Appendix. It is also in Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 122. Moore, in his Diary of the Amer. Rev., i. 93, gives a sample of the fun made of it in rhyme. Cf. Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 310.

[401] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 352.

[402] E. E. Hale, One Hundred Years Ago.

[403] Cf. John Adams's account of this choice, Works, ii. 417; Familiar Letters, 65; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., iv. 68. Also see Sparks' Washington, i. 138, etc.; iii. 1; Barry's Mass., iii. 18, and references; Irving's Washington, i. 411. His commission and instructions are in Sparks' Washington, iii. 479.

[404] Frothingham's Warren, 512; Evacuation Memorial, p. 731; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 13, 17.

[405] It was torn down in the summer of 1884. See cut and note in Mem. Hist. Boston, ii. p. 108.

[406] Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 83.

[407] The first boat to approach was struck by a three-pound shot from the redoubt. Life of Josiah Quincy, by Edmund Quincy, p. 372.

[408] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 69.

[409] This is Stedman's statement, but it seems at variance with the official report, which states that they took sixty-six rounds with their guns, and did not use over half. Denman's Royal Artillery, 3d ed., ii. 303.

[410] Washington, on his arrival in Cambridge, recognized the services of Col. Joseph Ward, who at this time had borne an order from General Ward across Charlestown Neck amid the cross-fire of the British batteries, by giving him a brace of pistols, now preserved; and perhaps the only written order of the battlefield now remaining is a requisition by Jos. Ward for ammunition, which is given in fac-simile in Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 86, where are also other notes on Jos. Ward. Cf. also J. V. Cheney in Scribner's Monthly, xi. 424. Some memoranda respecting Joseph Ward are in the Sparks MSS. (LII. vol. iii.)

[411] Only one or two hundred people, out of a population of from two to three thousand, were now remaining in the town.

[412] Belknap (Papers, ii. 164) says the wind was southwest all day, and incommoded the British but not the intrenchment. There are some verses on the burning of Charlestown, attributed to Barlow. (Moore's Songs and Ballads of the Amer. Rev., 95.) For a supposed painting, see Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 86.

[413] Fonblanque's Burgoyne, 154; C. Hudson, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Jan., 1880. He was killed by a negro. (Livermore's Historical Research, etc., p. 119.) His body was taken to Boston and buried under Christ Church. There is said to have been a blunder subsequently in taking the wrong body to England. Sargent's Dealings with the Dead, i. 54; Drake's Landmarks of Boston, 207.

[414] When Elisha Hutchinson, in London, heard of the battle, he said: "If every small hill or rising ground about Boston is to be recovered in the same way, I see no prospect of an end to the war." (P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, p. 506.) Belknap (Papers, published by Mass. Hist. Soc., ii. 159) says the criticism on Howe for attacking in front was general. The royalist Jones, in his New York during the Revolutionary War (i. 52), charges the British general with obstinacy in this respect. Lee (Memoirs of the War in the Southern Department, 2d ed., p. 33) traces Howe's subsequent timidity in his conduct of campaigns to the lesson this battle taught him.

[415] Their loss was 150 killed, 270 wounded, and 30 taken prisoners,—450 in all.

[416] Their loss was 224 killed and 830 wounded,—1,054 in all, of which 157 were officers.

[417] Jones (N. Y. during the Rev., i. 55, 555) is characteristic upon the double-faced spirit of New York at this time.

[418] The news of Bunker Hill reached Philadelphia in a vague way, June 22. The cannonade at Boston Neck during the battle had been magnified into a second fight going on at the same time at Dorchester Point. (Adams, Familiar Letters, 70.)

[419] Sparks, iii. 11.

[420] The provincial congress of New York assembled on the 22d of May, and it soon became evident that some violent wrenching would be necessary to unloose the grasp which the loyalists had upon it. The Johnsons, with their Indian affiliations, were strong royalists, and the leadership of the family, by the death of Sir William in July, 1774, fell to his son-in-law and nephew, Guy Johnson. The motives which actuated the one remained with the other.

[421] This elm, now going to decay, has been often pictured: Amer. Mag. (1837), iii. 432; Harper's Monthly, xxiv. 729; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 410; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 110, etc.; Von Hellwald's Amerika in Wort und Bild, i. 73.

On the 22d. of June, 1775, Hancock had written to Ward, transmitting his commission as first major-general, and next in command after Washington. He says of the new commander-in-chief, that "he takes his departure to-morrow morning from this city [Philadelphia] in order to enter upon his command. I the rather (he adds) mention the circumstance of his departure, that you may direct your movements for his reception." (Ward MSS., in Mass. Hist. Society.)

The assumption of command by Washington under this tree rests, so far as the writer knows, on tradition only, and he knows of no detail of the ceremonies given by contemporary evidence, though writers have much exercised their ingenuity in giving various attendant circumstances.

[422] Cf. Sparks's Washington, iii. 486.

[423] He held subsequent councils during the siege, at Cambridge, Aug. 3, Sept. 11, Oct. 8, Oct. 18, Jan. 16, 1776, Jan. 18, Feb. 16, and at Roxbury, Mar. 13. Copies of their proceedings are in the Sparks MSS. Minutes of Gates's speech at the council of war in Cambridge, Dec., 1775, in which he advised against an assault on Boston, are among the Gates papers (copied in Sparks MSS., xxii., and xxxix. 446).

[424] Washington complained that vessels cleared at New York with fresh provisions for the West Indies, and, when free of the harbor, steered for Boston. (N. Y. Arch., in Sparks MSS., no. xxix.)

[425] Cf. John Adams' Works, i. 245; ix. 358. See, on the Southern view of the North at this time, Life of Chief Justice Parsons, p. 40.

[426] Bancroft, orig. ed., viii. 26. Cf. John Adams's opinion, Works, ix. 362.

[427] Lee had his headquarters at one time at the Royall house, in Medford. Cf. Drake's Landmarks of Middlesex, ch. vi.; Lamb's Homes of America; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xi. 334. A paper on Lee, Gates, Stephen, and Darke as generals from the Shenandoah Valley, by J. E. Cooke, is in Harper's Mag., 1858, p. 500.

[428] Cf., for the letters and comment, Niles's Principles and Acts, 1876, p. 118; Sparks's Washington, iii. 498; Moore's Diary, 108; Boston Evacuation Memorial, p. 146; Fonblanque's Burgoyne, 172. The correspondence was soon printed, as Letter from General Lee to General Burgoyne, with General Lee's answer, and the letter declining an interview (Boston, 1775). Cf. Haven, in Thomas, ii. p. 659. The letters are given in the Lee Papers (N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1871, pp. 180, 188, 222), and were translated into German and published at Braunschweig, 1777. (Sabin, iii. no. 5,259.) When Burgoyne sailed for England, Lee says, in a letter written from the camp at Winter Hill, Dec. 15, 1775: "I have written a parting letter to Burgoyne. It is in my opinion the most tolerable of my performances." Sparks MSS., xxvi.

It was Burgoyne's opinion at this time that no force which Great Britain and Ireland could supply would bring the war to a speedy conclusion; while he thought that hiring foreign troops, levying Canadians, and arming blacks and Indians, might do it. (Fonblanque, 153.) By July 3, Dartmouth had become aware that almost every colony had caught the flame, and he had deduced from Gage's letters that twenty thousand men would be required to reduce New England alone. Burgoyne soon began to chafe under Gage's inaction, and urged him to transfer the army to New York. (Fonblanque, p. 190.) He writes to the ministry about "being invested on one side and asleep on the other" (Ibid., p. 198), and says Gage is "amiable for his virtues, but not equal to the situation."

There is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library (Misc. MSS., 1632-1795) a printed burlesque of a supposed battle of "Roxborough, July 19, 1775", which shows the drift of public satire.

[429] W. B. Reed thinks these letters on Washington's part the production of Colonel Reed. Life of Jos. Reed, i. 111.

[430] Sparks' Corresp. of the Rev., i. 12.

[431] Sullivan writes to Schuyler from Winter Hill, Aug. 5, 1775: "Our enemies fear to come out, though we endeavor in every way to aggravate them."

[432] Of the attack at Stonington, Aug. 30, 1775, see Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 298 and references.

[433] Draper's Gazette, of Sept. 21, had intimated that there was to be some faithlessness in the patriot party. Barry's Mass., ii. 48.

[434] Being carried to Connecticut, he sunk under his confinement, and was allowed to embark for the West Indies, but the vessel on which he sailed was never heard of. For the sources and their examination, see Sparks' Washington, iii. 115, 502; John Adams's Works, ii. 414; ix. 402; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 51, 333; Greene's Life of Greene, i. 120; Cowell's Spirit of Seventy-Six in Rhode Island; Bancroft, vi. 409; Chandler's Criminal Trials, i. 417; Frothingham's Siege of Boston, 258; Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, 37, 40; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 111, 145; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., June, 1884, p. 15; Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. i.; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 622; New Jersey Archives, x. 671. An exculpatory letter of Church, dated American Hospital, Sept. 14, 1775, is among the Sullivan papers (Sparks MSS., xx.)

[435] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 353.

[436] Sparks MSS. xlv. There is a list of his addressers (Oct. 6) in Curwen's Journal, p. 474.

[437] A letter from H. Jackson to John Langdon, describing the preparations (Sept. 3, 1775) is in the Sparks MSS., xlix., vol. 2.

[438] Mahon, vi. 74.

[439] Sparks's Washington, iii. 129, 145, 520; Correspondence of the Rev., i. 70, 71; Genl. Mag., 1775; Bailey's letter, in Me. Hist. So. Coll., v. 437. Washington, Oct. 24, 1775, transmits a statement (Oct 16) of Pearson Jones. (N. Y. Archives in Sparks MSS. xxix.). A letter of William Whipple, Nov. 12, 1775, to Langdon, describing the burning, is among the Langdon Papers, and a copy in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.). There is a rude copperplate engraving of the burning town, by Norman, in the Boston ed. of the Impartial Hist. of the War (1781), vol. ii. Cf. Williamson's Maine, ii. 422; William Goold's Portland in the Past (1886), ch. 10; Willis's Portland, with plans and views; Smith and Deane's Journal of Portland; Jos. Williamson's Belfast; Barry's Mass., ii. 56; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1873, p. 256; Hist. Mag., Mar., 1869 (xv. 202); Old Times, vi. 823; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 633, 635. Hutchinson records (Life and Diaries, i. 583) that when the news reached London, Lord George Germain told him that "Graves had been put in mind of his remissness, and he imagined he would run to the other extreme." Cf. Mahon's England, vi. 75.

[440] Lynch, Franklin, and Harrison.

[441] Heath MSS., p. 3.

[442] Sparks's Washington, iii. 288, 297; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1877, p. 390; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 147 and references.

[443] Fac-simile of handbill printed to send among the royal troops to induce desertion. It follows an original in a volume of Proclamations in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society. Cf. Evacuation Memorial.

[444] P. O. Hutchinson, 123.

[445] Sparks's Washington, iii. 141; Corresp. of the Rev., i. 73; Quincy's Life of J. Quincy, Jr., 412.

[446] Sparks's Washington, iii. 113. Gage had, as early as July 14, 1775, pronounced Boston a "disadvantageous place for all operations", and expressed a preference for New York as a base of operations. The government had advised (Sept. 5, 1775) Howe to abandon the town. Before Howe, perhaps, got this, Gage wrote to Dartmouth that "the possession of Boston occasions a considerable diversion of the enemy's force; but it is open to attacks on many sides, and requires a large body to defend it." In November Howe had made up his mind that he must winter, at least, in Boston. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 353, 354, 356.) The Secretary of War, as early as Nov. 12, 1774, had urged that Boston was a place where the royal troops could do little good, and might do much harm. (Life of Barrington, 140.)

[447] Dr. Peter Oliver wrote (Nov. 27) from Boston: "The pirates, or, as the rebels term them, the privateers, have taken a Cork vessel, Captain Robbins, of this town, with provisions, and carried her into Marblehead; and a number of wood vessels from the eastward are carried into the worthless town of Plymouth." P. O. Hutchinson, i. p. 571. Again, Dec. 7, he writes: "We have eight or ten pirate vessels out between the capes; and yet our men-of-war are chiefly in the harbor." Ibid., p. 581. Admiral Graves was as inactive as Gage, and, on Dec. 30, Admiral Shuldham arrived with orders to relieve him. Percy, writing from Boston of the new admiral, says: "We wanted a more active man than the last, for really the service suffered materially during his stay." (Percy Letters, in Boston Pub. Library.) Curwen records how matters at this time were regarded in London: "Their [the rebels'] activity and success is astonishing."

[448] She reached Cambridge Dec. 11.

[449] Adams's Works, ix. 270, 369. Burgoyne was soon too distant for the implied blow. He sailed for England Dec. 5.

[450] See the rolls in the State House in Boston, and N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. 240. Cf. N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 675-681.

[451] There is in a volume of Misc. MSS., 1632-1795, in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library, an agreement to release Andrew Richman, who had joined the regiment after the suppression of the rebellion,—signed by John Small, major of brigade.

[452] Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 77.

[453] It will be recollected that independence had not yet been declared.

[454] Percy wrote from Boston, January 7, 1776: "I take it for granted that the next campaign will be so active and, I hope, so decisive a one, that the rebels will be glad to sue for mercy. All, however, will depend on our having a sufficient force sent us out very early in the spring.... Brig. Gen. Grant directs our commander-in-chief and all his operations. Mr. Howe is, I think, the only one here in his army who does not perceive it. I wish from my soul that we may not feel the consequences." (Percy Letters.) Hutchinson was writing in January, 1776, from London: "I count the days, and absurd as it is so near the close of life, I can hardly help wishing to sleep away the time between this and spring, that I may escape the succession of unfortunate events which I am always in fear of." (P. O. Hutchinson, vol. ii.)

[455] Sparks's Washington, iii. 223.

[456] Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. 193, 199.

[457] Sparks's Washington, iii. 230; Corresp. of the Rev., i. 106, 112; John Adams's Works, ix. 370.

[458] Lee's instructions in Sparks's Washington, iii. 230. Cf. Duer's Stirling, p. 123; Johnston's Campaign of 1776, p. 49; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 570, 593.

[459] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 124, 135, 139; Life of Gouverneur Morris, i. 74-88. Already, on Jan. 6, 1776, the provincial congress of New York had organized a company of artillery to defend the colony and guard its records; and March 14, 1776, a student in King's College was made its captain. That organization still exists as Battery F, Fourth Regiment U. S. Artillery. (Asa Bird Gardner, in Mag. of Amer. Hist., 1881, P. 416.)

[460] Letters to and from Lee during his movements from Connecticut to Charleston (S. C.) are in the Lee Papers. (Sparks MSS., xxv., January, 1776-July, 1776, for copies, and N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1871 and 1872, for the print. There are letters from Lee during Jan.-March, 1776, from Connecticut and New York, in the Sparks MSS. xxix.) Cf. Sparks's Gouv. Morris, i. ch. 5.

[461] Works, ii. 431.

[462] Knox's instructions are in Sparks's Washington, iii. p. 160; Knox's letters from the Lake, in the Corresp. of the Rev., i. 86, 94.

Knox's diary is in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1876, p. 321; and an inventory of the cannon, made Dec. 10, 1775, is in Drake's Soc. of Cincinnati, p. 544. Cf. Drake's Knox, pp. 22, 128, 129. A roll of men whom Knox enlisted in his artillery, 1775, is in Mass. Archives; Rev. Rolls, vol. xlix.

[463] N. Y. Archives in Sparks MSS., no. xxix. Curiously enough, Franklin was at this time urging a resort to bows and arrows. (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871, p. 285.)

[464] His headquarters here were in the Roxbury parsonage, a house still standing, and delineated in the Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 115. On the 2d of March Washington gave notice to Ward, then commanding in Roxbury, of his intention. His letter in fac-simile is given in the Boston Daily Advertiser, March 17, 1876.

[465] Burgoyne had suggested the occupation of these heights by the British very soon after the battle of Bunker Hill. Fonblanque, p. 150. Clinton says (Notes on Stedman) that he had told Gage and Howe, in June, 1775, that if ever the royal army was forced to evacuate Boston, it would be owing to the rebels getting possession of Dorchester Heights. What is given in T. C. Simond's South Boston, p. 31, as "a plan of Dorchester Neck for the use of the British army", seems to be but an extract from Pelham's Map.

[466] Heath's Papers (MSS.), i. 180.

[467] See Washington's letters on the occupation of Dorchester Heights and its effect, in Sparks, iii. 302, 311. Cf. N. H. State Papers, viii. 86; Mary Cone's Life of Rufus Putnam (Cleveland, 1886) p. 45.

[468] Hutchinson says the list which reached England showed 938 souls. (P. O. Hutchinson, ii. 61.) On Nov. 20, 1775, Lieut.-Gov. Oliver wrote that there were 2,000 loyalists in Boston, men, women, and children, and that Boston had then 3,500 inhabitants, instead of the 15,000 properly belonging to it.

[469] Mem. of Josiah Quincy, Jr., 416.

[470] These before long were gone. Jones (N. Y. during the Rev., i. 54), referring to the captures after the British left Boston harbor, says: "One or two frigates stationed in the bay would have prevented all this mischief. But a fatality, a kind of absurdity, or rather stupidity, marked every action of the British commanders-in-chief during the whole of the American war."

[471] Nearly eighty armed vessels and transports were necessary to carry the army and its followers, but a large number of other vessels loaded with merchandise accompanied the fleet. Abigail Adams counted 170 sail in all, from her home in Braintree. Washington had supposed they would steer for New York, and so had warned the New York authorities as early as March 9. (N. Y. Archives, in Sparks MSS., no. xxix.) Cf. his letter to Stirling of March 14. (Duer's Stirling, p. 143.)

[472] A small number of General Ward's papers, given by Mrs. Barrell, a granddaughter, are in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Society. Ward resigned April 12, 1776, and Hancock's reply to him of April 26 is among these, as are also sundry papers pertaining to his retention of the command of the Eastern department after Washington went to New York. Cf. a paper on Ward in Scribner's Monthly, xi. p. 712. A letter of Ward's, April 16, 1776, describing the army's condition, is in the Mass. Archives, and is copied in the Sparks MSS., vol. lx. There is an engraving of Ward, after an original picture in Irving's Washington, illus. ed., ii. Cf. also picture in A. H. Ward's Hist. of Shrewsbury, Mass.; and Memorial Hist. of Boston, vol. iii.

[473] Mem. of Josiah Quincy, Jr., p. 417.

[474] Edmund Quincy's letter in N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., 1859, p. 233.

[475] For the Mugford affair, see Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 204; Moore's Diary, i. 244.

[476] Secret Journals of Congress, i. 19.

[477] John Adams understood these sectional difficulties. Works, ix. 367. Cf., on the New England distrust of Schuyler, Sparks's Washington, iii. 535. Bancroft says of Schuyler that he was "choleric and querulous, and was ill suited to control undisciplined levies of turbulent freemen." Schuyler, who was honest and uncompromisingly zealous, is defended in Lossing's Life of Schuyler, where (vol. ii. 27) Bancroft's assertion (original ed., viii. 423) that Schuyler "refused to go into Canada" is controverted on the ground that Congress declined to accept Schuyler's resignation, when ill-health prevented his leading the army. Bancroft, in his final revision (iv. 377), says of Schuyler that he owned himself unable to manage the men of Connecticut, and proposed to resign. The differences between Schuyler and Wooster have led to much championing of the two by writers of New York and Connecticut. Wooster, a man now of sixty-five years, austere in habit, could hardly be expected to commend himself to one of Schuyler's temperament. Cf. Hollister's Connecticut.

[478] Hinman's Conn. in the Rev., p. 571; Guy Johnson's despatch to Dartmouth, Oct. 12, 1775, in Canadian Antiquarian, iv. 25, 135.

[479] Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. 153, 158; Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 471; Allen's own Narrative; Lossing in Harper's Monthly, xvii. 721. Cf. Warner's letter of Sept. 27, in the Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. 2.

[480] On November 3, the colors taken at Chamblée were hung up in Mrs. Hancock's chamber at Philadelphia.

[481] Silas Deane seems to have comprehended something of the intractable quality of Wooster (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 288.)

[482] Parton's Burr, i. 68.

[483] Niles's Principles and Acts (1876), p. 461; Sparks's Washington, iii. 92; Henry's Journal (1877), p. 5.

[484] This rear division was under Colonel Enos.

[485] Parton's Burr, i. 71. Cf. "Burr as a Soldier", in Hist. Mag., xix. 385 (June, 1871).

[486] Burr was near by. Parton's Burr, i. 75. See the denial of the statement that Burr endeavored to carry off the body of Montgomery, in Hist. Mag., ii. 264. Cf. Lossing in Ibid., xiv. 272; and General Cullum's note in Mag. of Amer. Hist., April, 1884, p. 294. Trumbull, in his picture of the death of Montgomery (Hinton's United States, i. 233, and other places), represents Burr supporting the falling hero. Catal. of Paintings by Colonel Trumbull (N. Y., 1838), p. 14. The attack was premature. N. H. State Papers, viii. 351.

[487] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 134.

[488] They were accompanied by the Rev. John Carroll, a Catholic priest and brother of Charles, of whom there is a Biographical Sketch by Brent.

[489] Percy got the news at Halifax in this fashion (June 1, 1776): "So precipitate was their retreat that whole companies flung away even their arms. Nay, they left their pots boiling, so that the king's troops sat down and ate their dinners from them." (Letters in Boston Public Library.)

[490] There is a likeness of Thomas, owned by Mrs. Williams, of New York, a descendant. This portrait was engraved for the illustrated edition of Irving's Washington, and is reproduced in Jones's Campaign for the Conquest of Canada, p. 52. There is a brief memoir, Life and Services of Maj.-Gen. John Thomas, compiled by Chas. Coffin (New York, 1844). In July, 1775, Thomas had been justly irritated at the irresponsible action of Congress in ranking the general officers of its appointment, and had only been prevented from resigning by Washington's urging him to pause. W. B. Reed, in his Life of Joseph Reed (i. 109), prints this appeal of Washington from the draft in Reed's handwriting.

[491] Greaton writes to Heath, July 31, 1776, from Ticonderoga: "We have got out of Canada very well considering the situation we were in; but happy would it have been for us if we had retreated three weeks sooner. We are fortifying as fast as we can; the men in very low spirits." (Heath MSS., i. 306. Cf. Adams, Familiar Letters, p. 195.)

[492] They are traced in Bancroft, orig. ed., viii. 373.

[493] Rives's Madison, i. 102.

[494] Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. p. 160; Niles, Principles and Acts (1876), p. 286; Force's Archives, iii. 1385; Geo. Livermore's Historical Research, p. 134; Rives's Madison, i. 117.

[495] Moore's Diary, i. 179. Dawson, Battles, gives contemporary reports (i. 121, 125); Maxwell's Virginia Register, vol. vi. p. 1.

[496] Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. 189. There are in the Sparks MSS., no. xxxviii., various letters in 1775 and 1776 respecting Lord Dunmore's proceeding in Norfolk, and, after Aug., 1776, in New York. A letter in Nov., 1775, shows that he had given orders to raise a regiment of savages, to be called "Lord Dunmore's own regiment of Indians." On the other hand, Arthur Lee was making interest with Vergennes in Paris, to secure ammunition for Virginia. Calendar Lee MSS., p. 7, no. 65. An Orderly book of that portion of the American Army near Williamsburg, Va., under Gen. Andrew Lewis, Mar. 18 to Aug. 28, 1776 (Richmond, 1860), with notes by C. Campbell, covers some of the patriots' movements at this time.

[497] Husband of Flora Macdonald. Cf. The Autobiography of Flora Macdonald, being the home life of a heroine, edited by her granddaughter, Edinburgh, 1870; London,1875; Bentley's Mag., xix. 325; Amer. Hist. Record, i. 109, etc.; Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Rev., ii. 142.

[498] David L. Swain published a paper on "the British invasion of North Carolina in 1776" in the University Magazine (Chapel Hill, N. C.), which was afterwards included in W. D. Cooke's Rev. Hist. of North Carolina (1853). Cf. Dawson's Battles, i. 128, with the official documents; Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., ii. App.; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 502; Harper's Mag., lx. 682; Gay, Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 465; Mrs. Ellet's Women, etc., i. 316; the Tory account in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 95; and an Address on the battle of Moore's Creek bridge, Feb. 27, 1857, by Joshua G. Wright (Wilmington, N. C., 1857).

[499] Corresp. of the Rev., i. 161; N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1871, p. 343. It seems to have been the determination in March to send him north. Adams, Familiar Letters, p. 135.

[500] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 485, etc.

[501] Corresp. of the Rev., ii. 501. Cf. Lee Papers in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1872, and Sparks MSS., no. xxv.

[502] Letter of W. A. Hyrne in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., April, 1870, p. 254; and one of Jacob Morris, June 10, noting preparations, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1875, p. 435. Lee had at first wished to abandon the fort. Ibid., 1872, p. 221.

[503] It was the favorable report of a reconnoitering vessel sent from Cape Fear to Charleston that induced Clinton to attack Charleston instead of joining Howe at once. P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, ii. 96.

[504] See an account of the effects of the fort's fire given by some Americans who had been captured at sea, and escaped. (N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1872, p. 111.)

[505] Jones (N. Y. during the Rev., i. 100), without recognizing the conditions, is very severe on Clinton for his failure to coöperate. Cf. Johnston's Observations on Jones, p. 67.

[506] McCall's Georgia, p. 393.

[507] Celebration of the Centennial Anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, edited by James M. Bugbee (Boston, 1875).

[508] This was first printed in the Essex Institute Hist. Coll., i. p. 2. Cf. Ibid., xviii. 190. Gage's account to Dartmouth is in Mass. Hist. Society Proc., xiv. 348. Cf. further, Memorial Services at the Centennial Anniversary of Leslie's Expedition to Salem (Salem, 1875), including addresses by G. B. Loring and others; O. Pickering's Life of Timothy Pickering, i. ch. 4; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 379; F. Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. 27, etc.

[509] On Cliff Street, between Fulton Street and Maiden Lane, where several of the British troops were beaten and disarmed, but none killed, Jan. 19-20, 1770. Cf. H. B. Dawson in Historical Mag., iv. 202, 233, and (best account) xv. p. 1; Leake's Gen. Lamb, p. 57.

[510] Cf. the histories of Vermont; Hist. Mag., iii. 133; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 271. See further on these preliminary acts of violence, Potter's Amer. Monthly, April, 1875; Seba Smith in Godey's Mag., xxii. 257; Moore's Diary of the Amer. Rev., i. 50.

[511] General Carrington has recast his narrative in his Boston and New York, 1775 and 1776, historical papers from the Bay State Monthly (Boston, 1884).

[512] Gay, Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. ch. 16; Barry, Mass., iii. ch. 2, with notes; Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii., where the chapter on the siege is written by Edward E. Hale (cf. also his Hundred Years Ago); Paige, Hist. of Cambridge; Drake, Hist. of Roxbury; Clapp, Hist. of Dorchester; Symonds, Hist. of South Boston; Lossing, Field-Book of the Revolution, i.; A. B. Muzzey, Reminiscences and Memorials of Men of the Revolution (Boston, 1883); H. E. Scudder in Atlantic Monthly, April, 1876.

[513] By Marshall and Irving, in particular. Something may be added by the memoirs of Putnam, Heath (with also his diary as printed in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., May, 1859), Greene, Wilkinson, Knox, John Sullivan, John Thomas, Wm. Hull, Col. John Trumbull, with lives of such civilians as Dr. John Warren and Elbridge Gerry.

[514] Reed's letters from the camp during the summer of 1775 are in the Life of Joseph Reed, i. 116, etc., as well as those of Washington (p. 125, etc.) to Reed during the autumn and winter, after the departure of the latter. Sparks thought these letters of Washington the most imperfect he had seen, being written in great haste and confidence. Sparks printed them in part. Reed gives them at length. Washington's letters to Reed from the Cambridge camp make 20 of the 51 letters constituting the lot of his correspondence with Reed, which, having passed from Mr. William B. Reed to Mr. Menzies, was sold at the latter's sale (no. 2,051), and was again sold in the J. J. Cooke sale ($2,250) in Dec., 1883, when they passed into the Carter-Brown library. The Cooke Catalogue (pp. 340-349) describes them mainly as Mr. Reed prepared the statement, and they are commented on in the No. Am. Rev., July, 1852, p. 203, and in Irving's Washington, ii. 178. The original draft of Washington's letter to his officers, Sept. 8, 1775, asking their views respecting a boat attack on Boston, is among them (Cooke Catal., p. 342), while a fair copy in Washington's hand, as addressed to Ward, is among the Ward MSS. in the Mass. Hist. Society's library. It is printed in Sparks, iii. 80.

[515] There is necessarily much in the Mass. Archives. Cf. Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 118.

[516] Lossing's Field-Book, vol. i.; Lossing's Schuyler, i. ch. 26; Stone's introd. to Thayer's Journal, and the references given by that editor, p. v.

[517] On the "Canada Campaign."

[518] The manuscript is in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Society. Cf. Worcester Mag., i. 202.

[519] The tower upon which the lanterns were hung is a matter of dispute, Revere's "North Church" being considered by some to have been the church in North Square, Boston, pulled down by the British during the siege, and by others the present Christ Church, and it is upon the latter that the tourist to-day is shown an inscription identifying that building with the event. Richard Frothingham, in a letter to the mayor of Boston, called The alarm on the night of April 18, 1775 (Boston, 1876, 2nd ed., 1877) protested against this act, and wrote in favor of the church in North Square. The other alternative was upheld by the Rev. John Lee Watson in a letter to the Boston Daily Advertiser, July 20, 1876, and this was printed separately in 1877 as Paul Revere's Signal, with remarks by Charles Deane, and in a second edition with an additional letter in 1880. (Cf. Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., Nov., 1876.) This second letter was mainly in answer to William W. Wheildon's History of Paul Revere's Signal Lanterns (Concord, 1878), in which, while accepting the Christ Church theory, it was claimed that Robert Newman was the person who showed the lanterns, and not John Pulling, as averred by Mr. Watson (cf. note in Everett's Orations, i. p. 101). Mr. Deane had shown that, both before and after the destruction of the church in North Square, Christ Church had been called the North Church; while the earliest use of that designation for the latter building seems to have been in one of Dr. Stiles's almanacs in 1754, where he speaks of "Dr. Cutler's alias North, alias Christ Church." (Atlantic Monthly, Aug., 1884, p. 256.) E. G. Porter's Rambles in Old Boston, N. E., favors Christ Church.

Among the more general histories, the fullest account of this ride can be found in S. A. Drake's Middlesex County, i. ch. 16.

Mr. E. H. Goss printed a paper on Revere in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Jan., 1886, p. 3, giving, among other cuts, a view of his birthplace(?) in North Square, in Boston. There is a portrait of him, with a note on other likenesses, in Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 69. Cf. also T. W. Higginson in Harper's Monthly, Oct., 1883, and his Larger Hist. of the U. S.

[520] Boston, 1878,—one hundred copies privately printed.

[521] The entire series (twenty in number) is printed in Force's American Archives, 4th ser., ii. 490, et seq.; Shattuck's History of Concord, pp. 342, et seq.; Journal of second continental congress, pp. 79, et seq.; and portions of it are given in Frothingham's Siege of Boston, pp. 367, et seq.; Remembrancer, 1775, i. 35, et seq.; London Chronicle, June 1, 1775; also in various Boston newspapers of the time. They were also printed in a tract without imprint, Affidavits and depositions relative to the commencement of hostilities at Concord and Lexington, April 19, 1775. They were again issued by Isaiah Thomas, at Worcester, in a Narrative of the incursions and ravages of the King's troops on the nineteenth of April (Haven, in Thomas, ii. p. 661); again at Boston, in 1779 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xiv. 204). Dawson (i. 23) prints some of the depositions, and so does Hinman in his Connecticut during the Revolution, App. Governor Franklin, of New Jersey, transmitted copies to Dartmouth (N. Jersey Archives, x. 612). Lieut. E. T. Gould, of the King's Own, captured by the provincials, testified that he "could not exactly say which fired first."

[522] Sparks says (Sparks MSS., no. xxxii., vol. ii.): "In the public offices in London, I saw several papers respecting [Lexington], and particularly about the arrival of Captain Derby and the intelligence he brought. He was examined by order of the ministers, and he seems to have acted a bold part in circulating the intelligence.... In the first dispatch to General Gage he was censured for not sending the particulars immediately, and ordered to keep a packet in constant readiness."

[523] P. O. Hutchinson, 436.

[524] These depositions of the combatants, thus falling among Arthur Lee's papers, were finally separated in a strange division, by the younger R. H. Lee, who gave a part to Harvard College and a part to the University of Virginia. Cf. Calendar of the Lee MSS. in Harvard University Library, p. 6; Sparks's Washington, iii. 35.

[525] Mag. of Amer. Hist., May, 1883, vol. ix; Mahon, vi., App. p. xxvii.

[526] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 343, 349; Hudson's Lexington, 249; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1857, p. 165.

[527] Sabin, viii 33,030. This money was later paid to Dr. Franklin, and by him, in October, to a committee of the Mass. assembly. Sparks's Franklin, iii. 134.

[528] Frothingham's Siege of Boston, 86; Sparks's Washington, iii 512. In the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., May, 1876 (vol. xiv, p. 349), is Percy's report to Gage, April 20, 1775, and Smith's, of April 22 (p. 350),—both from the Public Record Office. Cf. Sparks MSS., xxxii., vol. i., and the Appendix to Lord Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. vi. The government's bulletin, dated Whitehall, June 10, 1775, as printed in the London Gazette, is given in Dawson, i. 26. For the effect of the news in England, see Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 342.

[529] One of these despatches, dated Watertown, April 19, endorsed by the officers of the towns through which it had passed, is printed in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Oct., 1873, p. 434. It is pointed out in Greene's Life of Nathanael Greene (i. 77), how the news affected Rhode Island. The confused statements which reached Connecticut can be seen in the Deane Correspondence in the Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 218, and in the broadside Letter of James Lockwood and Isaac Bears, dated Wallingford, April 24, 1775, respecting the Battle near Winter Hill, in which Lord Percy was killed. The news reached New York, Sunday, April 23, and the response was sudden. Vessels loaded for Boston were seized; arsenals were taken in charge, and cannon planted at Kingsbridge (Dawson's Battles, i. 130, and his Westchester County during the Amer. Rev., Morrisania, 1886, p. 75; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 328; Leake's Lamb, 101; Mag. of Amer. Hist., Apr., 1882, p. 283). Governor Colden describes the effects in his despatch to Dartmouth (N. Y. Col. Docs., viii. 571). Jones, in his New York during the Rev. War (i. 39, 497), gives a curiously perverted story, saying, among other things, that the British muskets were unloaded when the Americans attacked them at Lexington, and describes the stormy meeting of the governor's council in the afternoon. From New Jersey, Governor Franklin wrote to Dartmouth May 6, and June 5 and 7. (New Jersey Archives, x. 590, 601, 642.) The tidings reached Philadelphia April 24, and the original endorsed despatch is in the Pennsylvania Hist. Soc. library. (N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1864, p. 23; Hazard's Reg. of Penna., iii. 175, Christopher Marshall's Diary, p. 18.) In the second week in May the news reached Western Pennsylvania, and the resolutions which were passed at Hannastown were drawn by St. Clair (St. Clair Papers, i. 363). It reached Williamsburg, Va., April 29 (Moore's Diary, i. 75.) It came to Kentucky just as the settlers were founding a town, and they named it Lexington. (Winthrop's Speeches, 1878, etc., p 106.) A despatch which was written at Wallingford, Conn., April 24, embodying the reports which had reached that point, and representing that both the American commander and Lord Percy had been killed, was sent South, receiving endorsements as it passed along, and reached Charleston, S. C., May 10 6.30 p.m. It is given in R. W. Gibbs's Doc. Hist. of the Amer. Rev., pp. 82-91. (See broadside mentioned above.) A military company, the Fusiliers, was at once formed, and its roll and career are registered in the Charleston Year Book, 1885, p. 342.

For the effect of Lexington and Concord upon the other colonies, see, beside Bancroft and the other general histories, Stuart's Jonathan Trumbull; Moore's Diary, i. 77; John Dickinson's Letter in Lee's Arthur Lee, ii. 307; Lossing's Philip Schuyler, i. 307.

[530] This was reprinted in Nathaniel Low's Astronomical Diary or Almanac (Boston), 1776; in George's Cambridge Almanac, 1776 and in Stearns's North Amer. Almanac (Boston), 1776. It is substantially included with additions and abridgments in Gordon's History of the Amer. Revolution, and can be found in Force's Amer. Archives.

[531] Cf. Dawson's Battles of the United States, i.; Frank Moore's Diary of the Amer. Revolution, i. 63; Niles's Principles and Acts of the Revolution; L. Lyons's Mil. Journals of two private soldiers, 1758-1775 (Poughkeepsie, 1855), with notes by Lossing, and an App. of "official papers" (Field, Indian Bibliog., 963; Sabin, x. 42,860); a letter by John Andrews in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., July, 1865, p. 403; one by Dr. Foster (?) of Charleston, in Ibid. (April, 1870), xi. 306; and others by D. Greene in xiii. 57, and by Jos. Greene in xiii. 59. Cf. also letter of Jos. Thaxter in Hist. Mag., xv. 206; and one by Alex. Scammell in Ibid., xviii. 141. A significant handbill was issued at the time, with a row of coffins at the head, called Bloody Butchery by the British Troops. The narrative had before appeared in the Salem Gazette for April 21, 25, and May 5, which, with an elegy and a list of the killed and wounded, constituted this broadside as printed at Salem. It was reproduced a few years since in fac-simile. The Essex Gazette and the Worcester Spy (May 3) also contained accounts. Thaddeus Blood, of Concord, jotted down at some later period his recollections which, found among his papers, were printed in the Boston Daily Advertiser, April 20, 1886.

[532] Clark's is appended to a discourse which he delivered on the first anniversary in 1776, and this was reprinted in 1875. It was also reprinted in the Massachusetts Mag., 1794. Emerson's, which makes three pages of an interleaved almanac (which was in the possession of his grandson, Ralph Waldo Emerson, when the fac-simile was made, which is here followed, so far as the first page goes), was first printed by R. W. Emerson in his Historical Discourse in 1835 (republished in 1875), and again in the American Historical Magazine and Literary Record, New Haven, 1836. Other early anniversary sermons add little or nothing to our knowledge; such are Samuel Cooke's The violent destroyed and oppressed delivered (Lexington, 1777, but printed in Boston, 1777), and Philip Payson's sermon, also at Lexington, in 1782. Sermons were preached at Concord from 1776 to 1783; the series is in the Mass. Hist. Society's library. A sermon preached by John Langdon, at Watertown, May 31, 1775, refers to the fight. This is reprinted in J. W. Thornton's Pulpit of the Amer. Revolution.

[533] Memoirs of Maj.-Gen. William Heath, containing anecdotes, details of skirmishes, battles, and other military events during the American War, written by Himself (Boston, 1798). Accounts by those who knew the actors intimately are in Mercy Warren's Hist. of the Amer. Revolution (1805), and in James Thacher's Military Journal (1823).

[534] Works, ii. p. 406.

[535] We have brief records of other observers of the after-appearances in Dr. McClure's diary and in Madam Winthrop's letter. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1875, vol. xiv. p. 28; 1878, vol. xvi. p. 157.)

[536] This letter is in the Trumbull MSS., iv. p. 77.

[537] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 351. There are two or three copies of this broadside in the library of this society, and it is reproduced somewhat smaller in the Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 73, and is reprinted in the Society's Collections, xii.; and in Wm. Lincoln's ed. of the Journals of the Provincial Congresses (Boston, 1838). There is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library a printed broadside containing Governor Trumbull's letter to Gage, dated at Hartford, April 28, 1775, sent by a committee of the Connecticut assembly, and also Gage's reply of May 3, 1775, in which he characterizes his Circumstantial Account in the language quoted in the text. He also tells Trumbull that the royal troops "disclaim with indignation the barbarous outrages of which they are accused, so contrary to their known humanity. I have taken the greatest pains (he adds) to discover if any were committed, and have found examples of their tenderness both to the young and the old, but no vestige of cruelty or barbarity."

[538] This name, probably by a typographical error, appears in some of the contemporary accounts as Bernicre, and this mistake has been followed by various later writers. The pamphlet is called Instructions of 22 Feb. 1775 to Capt. Brown and Ensign de Berniere ... and an account of their doings in consequence of further orders to proceed to Concord. Also an Account of the Transactions of the British troops from their march from Boston, April 18, till their retreat back, April 19, 1775, and a return of killed and wounded (Boston, 1779, 20 pp.). There is a copy in the Boston Pub. Library. Cf. Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 658.

[539] There is also a table of casualties at Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill, in the Hist. of the War in America (Dublin, 1779-1785). On the provincial side there is a list of casualties (forty-nine killed, thirty-nine wounded, and five missing,—ninety-three in all) of the 19th April given in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xviii.; Frothingham's Siege of Boston, 80; Dawson's Battles, etc.; Hudson's Lexington, p. 211; Everett's Orations, i. 562; Wm. Lincoln's ed. of the Journals of the Provincial Congresses (Boston, 1838). The names of the men who were on duty on that day are in what are called the Lexington alarm rolls in the State Archives (Revolutionary Rolls, vols. xi., xii., and xiii.). The histories of towns which sent companies usually print such lists, as the Hist. of Sutton, p. 783, etc. The losses of property sustained by Lexington during the day, as figured in 1780, is given in the Mass. Archives, cxxxviii. p. 410; and the Report of the Committee of the Provincial Congress on the losses along the line of march is given in Wm. Lincoln's ed. of the Journals of the Prov. Congresses (Boston, 1838). This report makes the damage done by the king's troops in Concord, £274 16s. 7d.; in Lexington, £1,716 1s.5d., and in Cambridge, £1,2O2 8s. 7d.; total, £3,193 6s. 7d. In Oct., 1775, a committee of Congress—Silas Deane, John Adams, and George Wyeth—were addressing letters to get information respecting extent of losses inflicted by the ministerial troops. One of these, addressed to Ezra Stiles, is in Letters and Papers, 1761-1776 (MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc.).

[540] Incidental British accounts are given in Donkin's Military Collections (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 74); in G. D. Scull's Memoir and letters of Capt. Evelyn of the King's Own, 1774-76, Oxford, 1779, privately printed, 200 copies (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 56), and the later Evelyns in America, pp. 161, 263, 277, 299, 303; in Detail and Conduct of the Amer. War, p. 9; in Force's Amer. Archives.

Capt. George Harris, of the fifth regiment, lost half his company in covering the retreat, and describes his perils in a letter in S. R. Lushington's Life and Services of General Lord Harris (London, 1840). A letter from Boston, July 5, 1775, is in A view of the Evidence relative to the Conduct of the American War, 1779. Cf. Duncan's Royal Artillery, 3d ed., ii. 302.

[541] Siege of Boston, 63.

[542] Hist. of Lexington, 225.

[543] Stedman, who was not present, and most British writers, say the Americans fired first, as did Pitcairn, whose representations, as reported by Stiles in his diary, are given by Frothingham (p. 62), and by Irving (Life of Washington, i. 393). One tory, on talking with the British soldiers afterwards, was satisfied that they were the aggressors. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiii. 60.) Hudson, in a paper on Pitcairn in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvii. 318, examines the question. (Cf. Frothingham's Warren, 488; Evelyns in America, 299, 303; Mahon's England, vi. 36.) A deposition of one Sylvanus Wood, taken in 1826, says that the stories in this country of the Americans firing first were started long after the event. Dawson (i. 22) prints this document.

[544] Reprinted in 1875 at Boston. The literary sources with interest centering in Lexington are Edward Everett's address in 1835 (Orations, i. 526), where he noted (p. 561) the survivors of Captain Parker's company taking part in the celebration; Everett's Mount Vernon Papers, no. 47; Hudson's Hist. of Lexington, ch. 6, and his Abstract (1876); Harper's Magazine, vol. xx.; R. H. Dana's Address in 1875; C. Hudson's and E. G. Porter's Proceedings at the Centennial Celebration, 1875; The Centennial Souvenir of 1775; Henry Westcott's Lexington Centennial Sermons (1875); A. B. Muzzey's Battle of Lexington (New Eng. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Oct., 1877, and separately, 1877); E. S. Thomas's Reminiscences of the last Sixty Years, commencing with the battle of Lexington (Hartford, 1840); William D. Howells's Three Villages; Poole's Index, under "Lexington." See Mr. R. C. Winthrop's remarks on Chas. Hudson in Mass. Hist. Proc., xviii. 418; cf. also N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1881, p. 395, and Worcester Soc. of Antiq. Proc., 1881, p. 46.

Geo. W. Curtis made the oration in 1875, and J. R. Lowell's ode is printed in Atlantic Monthly, June, 1875. The town of Concord printed in 1875 an account of its centennial celebration. Cf. Poole's Index, under "Concord."

The orations of 1875 at Concord and Lexington, with an account of the celebration, are given in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Oct., 1875; and there are additional particulars in the reports of the two towns for 1875-1876.

[545] This was reissued in 1832,—both editions at Concord, and the side of that town was again espoused by Lemuel Shattuck, in his History of Concord, whose views were, however, examined in the North American Review, vol. xlii. (Cf. notice of Shattuck in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Apr., 1860.)

Among the literary sources with their interest centering in Concord may be named Edward Everett's oration in 1825 (Orations, i. p. 73); Grindall Reynolds in Unitarian Review, April, 1875, and his chapter xvii. in Drake's Middlesex County; Frederic Hudson's illustrated paper in Harper's Mag. (May, 1875).

[546] For Acton,—the Centennial Address of Josiah Adams (1835), and his Letter to Shattuck (1850); James T. Woodbury's Speech in the Massachusetts Legislature (1851) for a bill to erect a monument to Capt. Davis, killed at the North Bridge. Cf. a pamphlet by Rufus Hosmer, of Stowe (1833).

For Danvers,—D. P. King's Address on the seven young men of Danvers slain at Lexington (Salem, 1835).

For West Cambridge,—J. A. Smith's West Cambridge on the 19th of April, 1775 (Boston, 1864).

For Cambridge,—Rev. Alexander Mackenzie's address in 1870, when the bodies of some "men of Cambridge", who fell Apr. 19, 1775, were reinterred in the old burying-ground, where a monument now marks the spot.

For Bedford,—notice of the flag borne by the company from this town in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1885, and Jan., 1886. This flag, which is still preserved, bore a device very like that made in England for the Massachusetts Three County Troop, an organization which existed from 1659 to 1690. It is probable that this flag had been used in earlier wars. (Cf. N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xxv. 138.)

Cf. also Perley's Hist. of Boxford, ch. x.; Hist. of Sutton, p. 783; S. A. Drake's Middlesex County; and Wheildon's New Chapter in the History of Concord Fight (for Groton). The Andover men did not arrive in time (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xv. 254).

In 1850 all the participating towns celebrated the anniversary at Concord, when an oration by Robert Rantoul, Jr., was given, and was later printed.

In the general histories, the best account is in Bancroft's United States (final revision), iv. ch. 10; but other accounts are in Lossing's Field-Book; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 389; Elliott's New England, ii.; Barry's Massachusetts; E. E. Hale's One Hundred Years Ago, etc.

Dawson's Battles of the United States, vol. i ch. 1, has some essential errors, as where he says Smith proceeded "up Charles River to Phipps's farm in West Cambridge."

[547] He has abundantly fortified his narrative with authorities, though it is only the chief ones that he enumerates in chronological order in an appendix of his Siege (p. 372; also see p. 121).

[548] The substance of this volume is also found in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. p. 53, etc. In the same year Mr. Frothingham condensed the story of the battle into a little volume,—The Centennial: Battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1875). Mr. Frothingham's enthusiasm for his subject may be easily misjudged by the unsympathetic reader. P. O. Hutchinson says of the Siege: "This would be a creditable book if it were not so overloaded with boast, tall talk, and self-glorification." (Life of Governor Hutchinson, p. 11.)

[549] This will be quoted in the following pages as "Dawson" simply; and it is a much ampler and more critical account than that in his Battles of the United States, vol. i.

[550] Bibliography of Charlestown, etc., p. 19. Taking precedence in time is that in the Boston Gazette of June 19, at this time printed at Watertown. The Massachusetts Spy (Worcester, June 21st) had the next account, and this is reprinted in Frothingham's Centennial. The Connecticut Journal printed an account the same day; and in New York a handbill was circulated, Fresh news just arrived, by an express from the provincial camp near Boston, giving an account by Capt. Elijah Hide, of Lebanon. See fac-simile in Mag. of American Hist., March, 1885, p. 282. Hide saw the battle from Winter Hill, and his account is printed by Ellis (1843), p. 142, and Dawson, p. 378. Frank Moore's Diary of the American Revolution (i. pp. 97, 102), which begins Jan. 1, 1775, gives most of these contemporary press articles, and so does Dawson. Several of these newspaper accounts were reproduced in fac-simile in 1875.

[551] This was first printed by Frothingham (Siege, etc., p. 395), and is also in Dawson, p. 390, and in his Battles, i. p. 70. A paper usually called The Prescott MS., said to have been prepared under Colonel Prescott's supervision, in part at least, abridged in Graydon's Memoirs (1846), is printed in Butler's Groton (p. 337) and in Dawson. A memoir prepared by Judge Prescott, son of the colonel, derived in part from his recollection of his father's accounts, is printed in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 68, and in Frothingham's Battle-Field, p. 18.

[552] The MS. of this account is in the Am. Antiq. Society's Collections at Worcester, and was printed in Dawson, p. 381. Cf. Belknap Papers, ii. 163, 166. Frothingham (Siege, p. 385) gives Thacher's indorsement of the MS. This narrative and that of Gordon, mainly following it, were the basis of some elaborate papers in the Analectic Magazine (Feb. and March, 1818), which, however, present some important differences of view, supported by documents.

[553] It is signed by J. Palmer, and dated July 25, 1775, and was transmitted to Arthur Lee. It is printed in the Journal of the Third Prov. Congress; Analectic Magazine, May, 1818, p. 261; Force's Archives, iv. 1,373; Ellis (1843), p. 131; Frothingham's Siege, 382; Dawson, 387, and his Battles, i. p. 68. The provincial congress had already (June 20) sent an account to the Continental Congress (Ellis, p. 140; Dawson, p. 371). There are other official accounts sent to Albany and New Hampshire (Dawson, 380; N. H. Hist. Coll., ii. 143.)

[554] These may be named in an approximate chronological order thus thus:—

June 17. Dr. Holyoke saw the smoke at Salem, and wrote to his wife the reports which reached him. (Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., xiii. 212.)

June 18. David Cheever wrote from Watertown to the provincial congress of New Hampshire (N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 521). Abigail Adams, at Braintree, wrote her impressions (having heard of Warren's death) to John Adams, in Philadelphia. She supposed the battle was then (3 P. M., June 18) still unended. She wrote farther June 25 and July 5 (Familiar Letters of John Adams and his Wife, pp. 67, 70, 72). Josiah Bartlett, at Kingston, N. H., learned the news by express, and B. Greenleaf repeated the news (N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 520). On this day Ezra Stiles, then at Newport, made his first entry in his diary as the news came in (Dawson, 391). Loammi Baldwin's letter (Frothingham's Battle-Field, P. 43). General Greene to Governor Cooke, of R. I. (copy in Sparks MSS., vol. xlviii.).

June 19. Andrew Eliot to Isaac Smith, then in England (Ellis, 151; Dawson, 369; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1878, p. 288). Col. John Stark, from Medford to the N. H. congress (Ellis, 145; Dawson, 370; N. H. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 144; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 322-23). Job Bradford, from Hingham to Col. B. Lincoln (Rivington's N. Y. Gazetteer, Dawson, 370; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 523). Bradford had come out of Boston on the 18th.

June 20. Colonel Stark to the Continental Congress (Ellis, Dawson, N. H. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii.). James Warren to John Adams (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 79). Letter from Providence (N. Y. Gazetteer, June 26; Dawson, 372). William Williams to the Connecticut delegates in Congress (Frothingham's Battlefield, 41).

June 21. Professor Winthrop to John Adams (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 292). John Bromfield (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Feb., 1870, p. 226). James Warren to Sam. Adams (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 80).

June 22. Isaac Lothrop to T. Burr (Rivington's Gazetteer, June 29; Ellis, 148; Dawson, 374). Capt. John Chester (Frothingham's Siege, 389). Samuel Paine (Dawson, 440). Letter from Philadelphia (Force, iv.; Dawson, 375). Gen. N. Folsom to the N. H. Committee of Safety, from Medford (N. H. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 146; Dawson, 373; N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 527).

June 23. William Tudor (Dawson, 376).

June 25. Peter Brown to his mother. Frothingham calls it the most noteworthy account by a common soldier (Frothingham's Siege, 392; Potter's Amer. Monthly, July, 1875, from the original). Dr. Geo. Brown to Maj.-Gen. Haldimand (Evelyns in America, p. 171).

June 27. Letter from camp (Force, iv.; Dawson, 379). Officer (Rivington's Gazetteer, July 6; Dawson, 380).

June 30. Isaac Smith, from Salem (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 291)

July 3. Letter from camp (Dawson, 384).

July 11. Samuel B. Webb to Silas Deane, from camp at Cambridge (original MS. in Brinley, i. 1,789; printed Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 83).

July 12. Samuel Gray to Dyer (Frothingham's Siege, 393; Dawson, 385).

August 31. Governor Trumbull (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 159. Cf. Stuart's Jonathan Trumbull, ch. vi.)

There is among the Charles Lowell MSS. in the Mass. Hist. Soc. a document found with the papers of Dr. Lowell's grandfather, Judge Russell, giving a list of the houses burned in Charlestown, June 17, 1775. Thaddeus Mason's account of his losses at Charlestown is in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1882, p. 397; papers on individual losses in the battle, and by the burning of Charlestown, are in Mass. Archives, cxxxviii. and cxxxix.

[555] Diaries.—Lt.-Col. Storrs, June 1-28 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 86; Frothingham's Battlefield, 34) Benj. Crufts, June 15, etc. (Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., April, 1861); Ezekiel Price, May 23, etc. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1863, p. 185); Dr. John Warren (Frothingham's Siege: Life of Dr. John Warren); Thomas Boynton (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xv. 254).

Orderly-Books.—Capt. Chester's, June 5-17 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 87; Frothingham's Battlefield, 37); Henshaw's, April-Sept. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1876); Fenno's (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1876).

[556] References in Poole's Index, p. 1328.

[557] Charles Coffin, at Saco in 1831 and at Portland in 1835, published a History of the Battle of Bunker Hill, which was compiled from the accounts by Heath, Wilkinson, Lee, and Dearborn. Of less importance are Dr. Belknap's note-book and letters (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 92, 96, etc.); Adventures of Israel R. Potter (Providence, 1824); Oliver Morsman's Hist. of Breed's, commonly called Bunker's Hill Battle (Sacketts Harbor, 1830); Col. E. Bancroft's narrative (J. B. Hill's Bicentennial of Old Dunstable, Nashua, 1878); Columbian Centinel (Dec., 1824; Jan., 1825); Needham Maynard (Boston newspaper, 1843); Timothy Dwight (Travels in New England, New Haven, 1821, vol. i. 468-476), who knew some of the actors, and who says that a member of the council of war held the day before told him that the representations of an old hunter, that it was better to fire a small number of shots well aimed than many carelessly, induced the council to order fifteen rounds to a man instead of sixty.

A large number of depositions of supposed survivors were made in 1818 and 1825, but they are held to be of no value by the critical student. There is a transcript in three folio volumes, made in William Sullivan's office, of some of the latter date, preserved in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Society. What purported to be some of the originals were offered for sale in New York in 1877, but were bid in. C. L. Woodward, of New York, advertised in May, 1883, nearly two hundred papers, which were called Col. Swett's Collection of Affidavits, priced at $200 (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 104).

[558] For instance, Rev. Wm. Gordon's Hist. of the Independence of the United States (London, 1788), vol. ii. 39, who followed closely the Committee of Safety's account; D. Ramsay's Amer. Revolution (1789), i. 201, who is criticised by Charles Thomson (N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1878, p. 216) for not allowing that military necessity justified Gage in firing Charlestown; Charles Smith's American War from 1775 to 1783 (N. Y., p. 97, also Monthly Repository, N. Y., 1796-97); Holmes' Amer. Annals (1805), ii. 231; Mercy Warren's American War (Boston, 1805), i. 217; Hubley's Amer. Revolution (1805); Lee's Mem. of the War in the Southern Department (Philad., 1812); Marshall's Washington, ii. 237. (See, for others, Hunnewell, p. 23.)

Colonel Scammans's court-martial is reported in the N. E. Chronicle, Feb. 29, 1776; Essex Gazette, Feb. 29, 1776; Dawson, p. 400.

[559] Charles Hudson availed himself of this in a pleasantry, Doubts concerning the battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1857), in which he paralleled Whately's famous argument for the non-existence of Napoleon. Cf. Christian Examiner, vol. xl.

[560] Hist. of the United States, orig. ed., vol. vii. ch. 38-40; and final revision, iv. ch. 14.

[561] He ceases, however, to speak of "the age and infirmities" of Ward, as Carrington indeed does, calling him "advanced in years and feeble in body", and as many of the writers have, misled perhaps by the somewhat elderly appearance of the usual portrait of him. He was in fact but forty-eight years old!

[562] Battles of the Amer. Revolution, N. Y. [copyrighted 1876], ch. 15.

[563] Gen. Carrington has contributed other papers on the battle to the Granite Monthly, vii. 290, and Bay State Monthly, May, 1884. Edward E. Hale has given accounts in his One Hundred Years Ago (ch. 4) and in a chapter in Memorial Hist. Boston, vol. iii. Dr. George E. Ellis was one of the earliest to collate carefully the sources in his Battle of Bunker Hill (1843). Barry (Massachusetts, iii. ch. 1) gives the story with care, and fortifies it by references. Irving's account (Washington, i. ch. 40, 41) is of course flowingly done.

[564] See Hollister's Connecticut, and other histories; Stuart's Life of Jonathan Trumbull; lives of Putnam; Hinman's Conn. in the Revolution; Memorial Hist. of Hartford County, ii. 473;, and H. P. Johnston on "Yale in the Revolution", in The Yale Book. The news of the battle as it reached Connecticut is remarked upon in the Silas Deane Correspondence (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 270, etc.).

[565] Stark's letter to the N. H. congress, of June 18, has already been mentioned. Cf. memoirs of Stark by Caleb Stark and Edward Everett; "Col. Jas. Reed at Bunker Hill", in N. H. Hist. Soc. Proc. (1876-84), p. 111; account in N. H. Adj.-General's Report, 1866, vol. ii.; the rosters of her regiments in the Adj.-General's office; N. H. Prov. Papers, vol. vii. pp. 516, 586; N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. 32-44; ii. 739; C. C. Coffin in Boston Globe, June 23, 1875; N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., xxvii. 377, and the account by E. H. Derby in the number for Jan., 1877. Evans' account of the service of New Hampshire troops, 1775-1782, is among the Meshech Weare papers (Letters and Papers, 1777-1824, vol. ii. p. 61, Mass. Hist. Soc.). For the part of New Hampshire towns: Hollis, N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 601, by S. T. Worcester; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xxvii. 377; xxx. 28; xxxi. 169; S. T. Worcester's Hist. of Hollis (1879), p. 146. Manchester, Potter's Hist. of Manchester.

[566] The connection of Putnam with the final stand at Prospect Hill naturally conveyed the impression of his commanding through the day, as he was known to have been by turns upon different parts of the field. Gen. Greene, who hurried up from Rhode Island that night, got this impression from the understanding of the case which he found prevailing in the Roxbury lines, when he wrote back the next day (June 18) to Gov. Cooke, of Rhode Island. "General Putnam", he says, "had taken post at Bunker's Hill, and flung up an entrenchment with a detachment of about three hundred" (Sparks MSS., no. xlviii. p. 67). This notion reached England, and on a print of Putnam published there Sept. 9, which is annexed, Putnam is called commander-in-chief (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1881, p. 102). An American engraving, by Roman, which appeared shortly afterwards, represents Putnam on horseback at the redoubt, as if commanding there. Col. Trumbull gave him similar prominence when he painted his well-known picture in 1786, though he is said to have regretted it at a later day. The earliest general narrative to give the command to Prescott was Gordon's, which followed closely the account of the Committee of Safety, and this was printed in 1788. The Life of Putnam by Humphreys was published in 1788, while Putnam was still living, and makes no mention of his having the command; but the Rev. Josiah Whitney, in 1790, in a note to a sermon preached upon the death of Putnam, took exception to this oversight (Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. no. 685). In 1809, Eliot, in his Biographical Dictionary, represents Prescott as commanding at the redoubt and Stark at the rail fence. When Gen. Wilkinson's Memoirs were published, in 1816 (reviewed in the N. Am. Rev., Nov., 1817), the conduct of Putnam on that day was represented in no favorable light; and Gen. Henry Dearborn, who was with Stark at the rail fence, asserted that Putnam remained inactive in the rear. It is also significant that Major Thompson Maxwell, who was with Reed's regiment at the rail fence, also asserted that Prescott commanded (Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., vol. vii.; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Jan., 1868, p. 57). Dearborn's statement was made in a paper in the Portfolio (March, 1818), which is reprinted in the Hist. Mag., August, 1864, and June, 1868 (Dawson, p. 402). It was printed also separately at the time in Philadelphia and Boston (1818) as An Account of the Battle of Bunker Hill with De Bernière's map corrected by General Dearborn (16 pp.). Col. Daniel Putnam replied in the Portfolio (May, 1818) with numerous depositions (all reprinted by Dawson, p. 407), which was issued separately as A letter to Maj. Gen. Dearborn, repelling his unprovoked attack on the character of the late Maj. General Putnam, and containing some anecdotes relating to the Battle of Bunker Hill, not generally known (Philadelphia, 1818). Both tracts were reprinted as an Account of the Battle of Bunker's Hill, by H. Dearborn, Major-General of the United States Army; with a letter to Maj. Gen. Dearborn, repelling his unprovoked attack on the character of the late Maj.-Gen. Israel Putnam, by Daniel Putnam, Esq. (Boston: Munroe & Francis, 1818). Each document is paged separately, and the last has a separate title. Dearborn replied in the Boston Patriot (June 13, 1818), with depositions, all of which are in Dawson, p. 414. See account of Gen. Dearborn by Daniel Goodwin, Jr., in the Chicago Hist. Soc. Proc. In July, 1818, Daniel Webster, in the North Amer. Rev., vindicated Putnam, but claimed for Prescott as much of a general command during the day as any one had, which claim he held to be established by Prescott's making his report to Ward at Cambridge when it was over. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., June, 1858.) John Lowell offered counter-depositions in the Columbian Centinel (July 4 and 15, 1818), again reprinted in Dawson, p. 423. In October, 1818, Col. Samuel Swett appended an Historical and Topographical Sketch of Bunker Hill Battle to a new edition of Humphrey's Life of Putnam. In the Boston Patriot, Nov. 17, 1818, D. L. Child claimed that Putnam was not in the battle, and he published separately An Enquiry into the Conduct of Gen. Putnam (Boston, 1819). In 1825, Swett enlarged his text, and published it as a History of the battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1825), followed by Notes to his Sketch in Dec., 1825. His history passed to a second edition as a History of the Bunker Hill Battle, with a plan. By S. Swett. Second Edition, much enlarged with new information derived from the surviving soldiers present at the celebration on the 17th June last, and notes (Boston, 1826). A third appeared in 1827. (Cf. Sparks in N. Am. Rev., vol. xxii.)

A new advocate for Putnam appeared in Alden Bradford's Particular Account of the Battle of Bunker or Breed's Hill, by a Citizen of Boston (two editions, Boston, 1825, and since reprinted); while Daniel Putnam during the same year recapitulated his views in a communication to the Bunker Hill Monument Association (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. i.). A summary of this Putnam-Dearborn controversy is given in G. W. Warren's Hist. of the Bunker Hill Monument Association.

The dispute now remained dormant till 1841, when George E. Ellis delivered an oration at Charlestown, and then, and in his Sketches of Bunker Hill Battle, with illustrative documents (Charlestown, 1843), he presented at fuller length than had been before done the claims of Prescott to be considered the commander. This led to a criticism and rejoinder by Swett and Ellis in the Boston Daily Advertiser. See Judge Prescott's letter to Dr. Ellis in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (iv. 76), and another to Col. Swett (xiv. 78. Cf. Memoir of Swett and a list of his publications in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1867, p. 374). In 1843, John Fellows, in The Veil Removed; or reflections an David Humphrey's essay on the life of Israel Putnam; also, notices of Oliver W. B. Peabody's life of the same; S. Swett's sketch of Bunker Hill, etc. (New York, 1843), ranged himself among the detractors of Putnam.

In 1849, the question was again elaborately examined in Frothingham's Siege of Boston (p. 159, etc.), favoring Prescott, which produced Swett's Who was the Commander at Bunker Hill? (Boston, 1850), and Frothingham's rejoinder, The Command in the battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1850). Cf. also the Report to the Massachusetts Legislature on a monument to Col. Prescott (1852). In 1853, Irving favored Prescott (Washington, vol. i.). In 1855, L. Grosvenor, in an address before the descendants of Putnam, reiterated that general's claims. In 1857, Barry (Hist. of Mass., iii. 39) gave to Prescott the command in the redoubt, and to Putnam a general direction outside the redoubt. In 1858, Bancroft in his History (vol. vii.) took the view substantially held by the present writer. In 1859, Mr. A. C. Griswold, as "Selah", of the Hartford Post, had a controversy with H. B. Dawson, who exceeded others in his denunciation of Putnam, and this correspondence was printed as parts 6 and 11 of Dawson's Gleanings from the Harvest-field of American History (Morrisania, 1860-63), with the distinctive title Major General Putnam. In 1860, the Hon. H. C. Deming published an address on the occasion of the presentation of Putnam's sword to the Conn. Hist. Society.

The question of the command was again discussed at the season of the Centennial of 1875. The chief papers in favor of Putnam were by I. N. Tarbox in the N. Y. Herald (June 12 and 14), in the New Englander (April, 1876), and in his Life of Putnam; by S. A. Drake in his General Israel Putnam the Commander at Bunker Hill; by W. W. Wheildon in his letters to the N. Y. Herald (June 16 and 17) and in his New History of the battle of Bunker Hill. Gen. Charles Devens' oration in The Celebration of the Centennial Anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1875) did not extend Prescott's command beyond the redoubt, as was done, however, in Francis J. Parker's Colonel Wm. Prescott the Commander in the Battle of Bunker's Hill (Boston, 1875), and his paper "Could General Putnam command at Bunker's Hill?" in New Eng. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (Oct., 1877, p. 403). During this same year, Dr. George E. Ellis recast the material of his earlier book in his History of the Battle of Bunker's (Breed's) Hill (Boston, 1875, in 16mo and 8vo, the last revised).

The Centennial period produced, also, various magazine articles, the most important of which are one by H. E. Scudder in the Atlantic Monthly, July, 1875; one by Launce Poyntz in the Galaxy, July, 1875; one by Dr. Samuel Osgood in Harper's Monthly, July, 1875; and those which later constituted a brochure, One Hundred Years Ago, by Edward E. Hale.

[567] As in the accounts of Ward and Knowlton in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1851, and Jan., 1861; the Journals of Samuel Shaw (Boston, 1847); The Female Review, being a life of Deborah Sampson, by Herman Mann (1797; also edited by J. A. Vinton in 1866); and C. W. Clarence's Biographical Sketch of the late Ralph Farnham, of Acton, Me., now in the one hundred and fifth year of his age, and the sole survivor of the glorious battle of Bunker Hill (Boston, 1860). There are other accounts of this man in the Historical Magazine, iv. 3, 12; and in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xvi. 183.

There is a portrait of Artemas Ward, with a memoir, in A. H. Ward's Genealogy of the Ward family, and another in the same writer's Hist. of Shrewsbury (Boston, 1847). Cf. also N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., v. 271; and Mem. Hist. Boston, iii.

[568] Accounts of the present obelisk on Bunker Hill can be found in G. W. Warren's Hist. of the Bunker Hill Monument Association; Wheildon's Life of Solomon Willard; Ellis's Battle of Bunker Hill (1843); Frothingham's Siege; and in other places noted in Hunnewell's Bibliog. of Charlestown, p. 28.

[569] Winthrop's Speeches, 1878-1886, p. 253, and separately. The statue was erected by anonymous subscribers, acting through the Rev. Dr. Ellis.

[570] For anniversary memorials, see Hunnewell's Bibliog., 25, 26.

[571] See extracts and fac-simile from Waller's orderly-book in Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 83, 84.

[572] The earliest English accounts which we have are two dated June 18, a letter of John Randon, a soldier (Lamb's Journal of Occurrences, 33; Dawson, 358), and that of an officer of rank from Boston (Force, iv.; Dawson, 357; Ellis, 115). Written on June 19, is a short letter from Brig.-Gen. Jones, colonel of the fifty-second regiment (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 91; Frothingham's Battle-Field, 45). Henry Hulton, commissioner of his majesty's customs at Boston, wrote a long letter on June 20 (Emmons's Sketches of Bunker Hill Battle, 123; Dawson, 359; Ellis, 123). On the 22d, Adjutant Waller, of the Royal Marines, wrote a letter which is given in S. A. Drake's Bunker Hill, the Story told in Letters from the Battlefield. (Cf. P. H. Nicholas's Historical Record of the Royal Marine Forces, London, 1845, i. 84-89.) On the 23d we have the account of an officer on one of the king's ships (Force, iv.; Dawson, 360; Ellis, 117), and a brief letter by Dr. Grant, one of the surgeons (Dawson, 361; Ellis, 114). On the 24th, a merchant in Boston writes to his brother in Scotland (Ellis, 119).

The 25th of June must have been a letter day in Boston, in anticipation of the sailing of the despatch ship "Cerberus", for we have several letters of that date. Gage wrote then his official despatch to Lord Dartmouth, which reached London July 25, but a vessel had arrived at Waterford a week earlier (July 18), bringing rumors of the fight (P. O. Hutchinson's Governor Hutchinson, 489). The news was at once published from Whitehall (Almon's Remembrancer, 1775, p. 132; Analectic Mag., 1818, p. 260; Force, iv.; Dawson, 361, and his Battles, 65; Ellis, 94; Frothingham's Siege, 385; Moore's Ballad History, 86, etc.). Gage wrote at the same time a private letter to Dartmouth. "The number", he says, "of killed and wounded is greater than we could afford to lose, and some extraordinary good officers have been lost. The trials we have had show that the rebels are not the despicable rabble too many have supposed them to be" (London Gazette, July 25; Force, iv.; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 353; Dawson, 363). Burgoyne wrote the same day (June 25) a "letter to a noble lord" (Stanley). He saw the action from Copp's Hill. We have the letter in two forms; the first in Burgoyne's letter-book, where he calls it the "substance" of the letter, and in this form it is printed by E. D. de Fonblanque in his Political and Military Episodes derived from the life and correspondence of the Right Hon. John Burgoyne, General, Statesman, Dramatist (London, 1876), p. 153. In this draft he says that the fight "establishes the ascendency of the king's troops, though opposed by more than treble numbers, assisted by every circumstance that nature and art could supply to make a situation strong." This and other paragraphs, as well as other forms of expression, do not appear in the letter as historians print it, as by Mahon (vol. vi.), for instance, who, as Fonblanque supposes, had access to the letter actually received by Stanley. In this latter form the letter appeared in London in the public prints (Sept.), and in a broadside with a plan of the battle. It came back to Boston in this shape, and was printed in Hall's New England Chronicle (Cambridge, Nov. 24), and in Edes's Boston Gazette (Watertown), and is now frequently met with (Analectic Mag., 1815, p. 264; Ellis, p. 106, with comments from a London opposition journal; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xi. 125; Dawson, p. 363, and his Battles, p. 66; and in the Centennial publications of David Pulsifer and Samuel A. Drake). Fonblanque adds something more of Burgoyne's view in letters (pp. 147, 193) which he wrote to Lord Rochfort, without date, and to Lord George Germain (Aug. 20). In the former he said: "The defence was well conceived and obstinately maintained; the retreat was no flight; it was even covered with bravery and military skill."

Beside the Stanley letter of Burgoyne, we find also, written on June 25, two others: the first from Boston to a gentleman in Scotland (Force, iv.; Dawson, 364); the second from an officer in Boston (Force, iv.; Dawson, 365).

On the 26th, Gage wrote to the Earl of Dunmore in Virginia (Force, iv.; Dawson, 366).

On July 5th, there is a letter from an officer in Boston (Detail and Conduct of the American War, 3d ed., 1780, p. 12; Dawson, p. 367; Frothingham's Siege, 373).

A letter of Captain Harris, describing his receiving a wound and being taken from the field, is given without date in Lushington's Lord Harris (p. 54; also Dawson, 366; Drake, 37). The Bunker Hill letter is lacking in G. D. Scull's Capt. Evelyn of the King's Own (Oxford, 1879), but there is new matter in his Evelyns in America (pp. 166-171, 278).

[573] The book passed to a second edition the same year. It was privately printed in New York in 1868, and is included by S. A. Drake in his Bunker Hill, published in 1875 (Brinley, no. 1,786; Stevens, Americana, 1885, £3 3s).

[574] Particular reference may be made to the more extended accounts in Moorsom's Fifty-Second Regiment (with a plate of uniforms); Lamb's Journal of Occurrences with the Welsh Fusiliers; E. Duncan's Royal Artillery (London, 1872, i. 302); R. G. A. Levinge's Fifty-third Regiment Monmouthshire light infantry (Lond., 1868, pp. 61-64); The Case of Edward Drewe, late Major Thirty-fifth Regiment (Exeter, 1782,—see Dawson, 368).

[575] In 1793, when Stedman used the plate in his American War, he only altered the title, as Frothingham says. In 1797 it was again reëngraved, but also with changes in the title, as A plan of the action at Breed's Hill, etc., and, as then reduced by D. Martin, it constitutes the earliest American engraved plan. It appeared in C. Smith's American War from 1775 to 1783 (New York, 1797), and Hunnewell (p. 18) gives a heliotype of it. Nathaniel Dearborn, in his Boston Notions, engraved it, on a very small scale, in 1848; and the next year (1849) Frothingham reproduced it in its original state in his Siege, and pointed out that the correspondence of Montresor's survey to a recent survey of Felton and Parker inspired one with confidence in its accuracy (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv.). It is the basis of the best plans of the action, and is reproduced also in Irving's Washington, illus. ed., ii. 467.

[576] Dearborn was at the time a captain in Stark's regiment, at the rail fence. Winthrop was on the field unattached. Dr. Dexter looked on from the Malden shore of the Mystick. Kettell was a common soldier, at first in the redoubt; then at the rail fence. Miller was at the rail fence.

[577] N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1858. There is a portrait of Brooks, by Stuart, owned by Mr. Francis Brooks, of Boston. It has been engraved by A. B. Durand. Cf. Usher's ed. of Brooks' Medford (Boston, 1886.)

[578] The figures in the town denote the numbers of the wards. The letters signify,—A, Town Hall; B, Old meeting; C, the Chapel; D, Governor's house; E, Christ Church; F, Trinity Church; G, Faneuil Hall; H, Old North meeting; I, Old South meeting; L, Work-house; M, Prison. A map like it appeared in 1782 in a work of similar title to that published in Boston, but printed at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, being a second edition of one printed at London in 1779. (Cf. Henry Stevens's Hist. Coll., i. no. 435.) The whole design seems, however, to be taken from a map which appeared in London, Sept. 2, 1775, whose main title is Seat of War in New England, by an American Volunteer, with the marches of the several Corps sent by the Colonies towards Boston, with the Attack on Bunker Hill; and which has in the margin a Plan of Boston Harbor, and is also the prototype of the one in the Impartial History (Boston, 1781). Modern reproductions are also given in Wheildon's New History, F. S. Drake's Tea Leaves, and in various other of the Centennial memorials of 1875.

[579] Military Journal (Boston, 1823). Others are the following: Diary of Jeremy Belknap, Chaplain, in Life of Belknap and Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., June, 1858. Diary of David How, ed. by H. B. Dawson (Morrisania, 1865). A journal of Solomon Nash (beginning Jan. 1, 1776) is included in the series (vol. i.) edited by C. I. Bushnell, called Crumbs for Antiquarians, 2 vols., 1862-66 (Sabin, iii. 9,538). Journal of David McCurlin, beginning at Cambridge, Aug. 9, 1775, and ending May, 1776, in Papers relating to the Maryland line, ed. by Thomas Balch (Philad., 1857). Diary of Lieut. Jonathan Burton, of Wilton, N. H., on Winter Hill, Dec., 1775, to Jan. 26, 1776, in N. H. State Papers (1885), vol. xiv., and N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. 667-689. Diary of Aaron Wright, June 29, 1775, to March 11, 1776, in Boston Transcript, April 11, 1862, and Hist. Mag., vi. 208. He was a private in a rifle company from the South. Diary of Lieut.-Col. Experience Storrs, June 13, 1775, to Feb., 1776, in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Feb., 1882, p. 124. Journal of Crafts, June 15, etc., in Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., iii. Diaries in the Hist. Mag., Oct., 1864; Aug., 1871, p. 128; March, 1874, p. 133, by Ensign Clap. Diaries in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1863 (by Ezekiel Price); Feb., 1872 (by Paul Lunt, May 10 to Dec. 23, 1775); March, 1876 (by Samuel Bixby); Sept., 1882 (by Paul Litchfield, at Cambridge and Scituate). A diary of Caleb Haskell, beginning May 5, 1775, was published at Newburyport in 1881. There are some rather vague reminiscences in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xv. 390; and others in Elkanah Watson's Memoirs.

[580] In Sparks's Washington; in W. B. Reed's Life of Reed; in the Chas. Lee Papers (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871); in Lee's R. H. Lee (vol ii.). A letter to his brother, July 20, 1775, is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., x. 353. His appeals for powder are in the N. H. Prov. Papers (vii. pp. 571, 572, 581), as in other places. Two letters (July 23 and Dec. 4) are in the Gen. Thomas Papers. His correspondence with Josiah Quincy about fortifying the harbor is in the Quincy Papers in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Cabinet.

John Adams tells of dining with Washington and the Caghnawaga sachems (Familiar Letters, p. 131). From near headquarters there are letters of Charles Lee (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871; Lee's Life of R. H. Lee, i. 281; Memoirs of Charles Lee; one of July 23 in the Gen. Thomas Papers); of Horatio Gates (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1871; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 281; several in the Thomas Papers); of Gen. Ward (many in the Thomas Papers); of Lewis Morris (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1875, p. 433, etc.); of Joseph Trumbull (Hist. Mag., vii. 22; Hinman's Conn. in the Rev., 554); of Asa Fitch (Hist. Mag., iii. p. 6); of Samuel B. Webb (Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 284; Sparks MSS. no. xxv.); of Thomas Brown (Trumbull MSS., iv. no. 75). Other letters of more or less interest will be found in the N. Jersey Archives, x. 606-608; in the Memoirs of General Heath; Drake's Life of Knox; Bicknell's Barrington, R. I. (p. 190); and others of Richard Devens and Richard Gridley are in the Thomas Papers. Letters of Robert Magaw, in August, are in the Mag. of West. Hist., Sept., 1886, p. 674.

[581] There are others in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. p. 282 (Joseph Ward to John Adams); in Mag. of Amer. Hist., March, 1884, p. 221 (by Stephen Johnson); and by W. T. Miller, of the Rhode Island camp, in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1857, p. 136.

[582] Amory's Life of Sullivan; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. pp. 275, 283; others from the Langdon papers are copied in the Sparks MSS. (no. lii., vol. ii.; see also Ibid., no. xxi.). There are also letters of Scammel (Hist. Mag., xviii. 129); of John Stark and others (N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 528-29, 531, 557, 565, 581, 612, 616, 675; viii. 30; one of Aug. 23 is in the Thomas Papers); of Samuel Sweat (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1879); and some in R. A. Guild's Chaplain Smith and the Baptists (p. 166, etc.). Others from Medford are in N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 530, 555, 565.

[583] There is a letter of Thomas Mifflin in the Thomas Papers (Aug. 26). Others of W. T. Miller in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (1857, p. 137); and of William Thompson in the Life of George Read of Delaware (pp. 112, 128).

[584] Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiv. 277, 279, 280. Various letters of Joseph Warren, James Warren, and Mercy Warren are in the Thomas Papers. A book of contracts for supplies for the army, 1776, kept at Watertown and in part in the handwriting of Elbridge Gerry, is in the Boston Public Library [H. 90 a, 7].

[585] Col. Ephraim Doolittle's, April 22 to Aug. 19, 1775; an anonymous one, Sept.-Oct., 1775; and another, written at Roxbury and Cambridge, July 29, 1775, to Jan. 12, 1776; Sergeant Isaac Nichols's, Sept. 5 to Dec. 11, 1775, and Col. William Henshaw's, Oct. 1, 1775, to March 12, 1776, and March 19-27,1776. A book of Henshaw's, preceding this one, and covering April 20 to Sept. 26, 1775, as edited by C. C. Smith, was printed in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1876, and separately with additions (Boston, 1881).

[586] In the library of the Mass. Hist. Society, and unprinted, Maj. William Lee's orderly-book (Cambridge); and, in Harvard College library, that of Jeremiah Fogg (Winter Hill), Oct. 28, 1775, to Jan. 12, 1776. In the Penna. Hist. Society is one kept at Cambridge, July 3 to Sept. 11, 1775; and another, also at Cambridge, Nov. 5, 1775, to Jan. 1, 1776, is in the Boston Public Library [H. 90 a, 9]. Two were sold in F. S. Drake's sale, Boston, Nov., 1885, nos. 1,073, 1,074: one covering Feb. 1 to March 31, 1776; the other, Nov. 5 to Dec. 31, 1775. Glover's (June 29, etc.) is printed in the Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., V. 112. That of Col. Israel Hutchinson, Cambridge and Winter Hill, Aug. 13, 1775, to July 8, 1776, is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., November, 1879. Baldwin's, Jan. 5 to March 28, 1776, is at the State House, Boston, with a large mass of rolls, commissary and other papers. Sullivan's brigade-book is in the library of the Mass. Hist. Soc. (Proc., Oct., 1884, p. 250). There are in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., iv. 67, papers on the rank of the field-officers at Cambridge, Nov., 1775; and in Ibid., xxviii. 259, a list of the bodies of troops near Boston in 1775. The state of affairs in and about Boston in 1774-75 is cleverly sketched in Winthrop Sargent's Life of André, ch. iv.,—that young British officer being there at the time.

[587] Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 130.

[588] Evelyns in America, 273. Some of Gage's letters, however, are preserved in the Haldimand Papers in the British Museum, and their substance is given in the Calendar of the Haldimand Papers (p. 52, etc.), published by the Canadian Archivist, Brymner, in 1884. They end, however, in March, 1775. There are letters of Gage and Howe to Dartmouth and Germaine in the Sparks MSS. (no. lviii., Part 2).

[589] Given in synopsis by Dr. Ellis in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., March, 1876, p. 233.

[590] Boston Evacuation Memorial, 1876.

[591] Cf. his Men and Manners in America one hundred years ago (N. Y., 1876).

[592] The liberty-tree was cut down Sept. 1, 1775 (Moore's Diary, i. 131). There is a picture of it in Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. p. 159. The various houses occupied by the British generals are traced in Ibid., iii. 155, with references. Within our day, a cannon-ball imbedded in the tower of the Brattle Square Church has attracted attention. A ball from the American lines struck there, and was afterwards fastened in the hole it made, as a memorial. When the church was taken down, the ball was transferred to the cabinet of the Historical Society (Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, 108; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xx. 189; Catal. Cab. Hist. Soc., p. 141). The house of John Hancock was rather roughly used (Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. 155).

[593] Newell's diary in Mass. Hist. Coll., xxxi.; that of "a British officer in Boston in 1775", edited by R. H. Dana, in Atlantic Monthly, April and May, 1877. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 307.)

We have also the diaries of some American prisoners in the town: Peter Edes's, which was printed at Bangor in 1837; and John Leach's, June 29 to Oct. 4, printed in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1865 (see also Oct., 1865). On the imprisonment of James Lovell, see Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, p. 33. Much of interest is found in the Memoir and letters of Captain W. Glanville Evelyn, from North America, 1774-1776, ed. by G. D. Scull, Oxford, privately printed, 1879. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1879, p. 289.) The letters were reprinted in Scull's Evelyns in America (1881). Letters of Peter Oliver and others in P. O. Hutchinson's Diary and letters of Thomas Hutchinson (vol. i., 1884; vol. ii., 1886). The letters of John Andrews, in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., July, 1865, are scant in the period from June, 1775, to April, 1776. The passing of news in and out of Boston is illustrated in letters, edited by W. P. Upham, printed in the Essex Institute Hist. Coll. (July, 1876), vol. xiii. 153, etc. Letters addressed to Gardiner Greene are in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., June, 1873. Samuel Paine, Oct., 1775, in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1876. American Hist. Record, Dec., 1872. Andrew Eliot remained for pastoral duty in the town during the siege. His letters to friends without, April, 1775, to Feb., 1776, are in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvi. 182, 288-306. Letters on the last days of the siege, in Almon's Remembrancer, iii. 106-8, quoted in the Evacuation Memorial, 175. Letters of Maj. Francis Hutcheson are in the Haldimand Papers (Calendar, p. 177).

A MS. orderly-book of Adjutant Waller is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Library. A fac-simile of the order for the attack at Bunker Hill is given from it in Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii.

The log-book of the British ship "Preston", lying in the harbor, April-Sept., 1775, is printed in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Aug., 1860.

[594] Sparks, iii. 319, 320, 330; Dawson, i. 96; Life of Jos. Reed, i. ch. 8; N. H. Prov. Papers, viii. 86.

[595] Force's Amer. Archives. A letter by Eldad Taylor, Sunday, March 18, 1776, in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., viii. 231; Edmund Quincy's, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., April, 1858, p. 27, etc.; John Winthrop to John Adams, in Heath Papers, etc. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll.); Abigail Adams, in Familiar Letters, p. 148. See Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii., with references; and Potter's Amer. Monthly, vi. 166; and Chief Justice Oliver's diary, in P. O. Hutchinson's, Thomas Hutchinson, ii. 46.

[596] It appears from Hutchinson's Diary (ii. 44) that while Dartmouth had directed the evacuation, Lord George Germain, in coming into office, had rescinded the order, but for some reason the despatch was not forwarded.

[597] There is a description of Crean Brush in a letter from Ebenezer Hazard (Feb. 18, 1775) in the Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 201.

[598] The royal arms carried off from the old State House are now in St. John, N. B. (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xx. 231).

[599] Edmund Quincy wrote at the time: "The tories, they say, have been equal plunderers with the military." N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1859, p. 231. Washington wrote to Lee, "The destruction of the stores at Dunbar's camp, after Braddock's defeat, was but a faint image of what was seen in Boston" (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1872, p. 32). For the contributions of the Friends of Philadelphia to the poor of Boston, see the Penna. Mag. of Hist., i. 168.

[600] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 191, 200. There is an orderly-book of Colonel Francis's regiment, at Dorchester Point, Aug.-Dec., 1776, among the Moses Greenleaf MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc.) Various castle and harbor rolls, seacoast defence rolls, etc., are in the Mass. Archives; Rev. Rolls, vols. xxv., xxxvi., xxxvii.

[601] Similar letters are in John Adams's Works, ix. 381, etc. Abigail Adams constantly informed her husband of the condition of affairs (Familiar Letters, 78, 85, 91, 111, 124, 129, 137, 138, 141, 156). There is a diary of Chief Justice Oliver at Halifax, after the refugees had reached there, in P. O. Hutchinson's Hutchinson, ii. 50.

[602] It was not procured from Paris till four years after the peace (Colonel Humphrey's letter, Nov., 1787, in Amer. Museum, ii. 493). John Adams (Familiar Letters, 210) describes a device proposed for it, as early as 1776. It was purchased for the city of Boston in 1876, and is now preserved in the Boston Public Library. Its history is given in the Boston Evacuation Memorial. It has been described and delineated, obverse and reverse, several times, as in Sparks's Washington, i. 174, iii. 356; in Frothingham's Siege (cover); Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. 100; Amer. Journal of Numismatics (July, 1880), xv. 1, 38; Snowden's Medals of Washington; Loubat's Medallic Hist. of the United States; Nat. Port. Gallery (N. Y. 1834); Johnston's Orig. portraits of Washington, p. 235; Guizot's Atlas to his Washington. Baker (Medallic Portraits of Washington, p. 27) says the artist made in it the earliest use of Houdon's bust. See Washington's letter in Force's Archives, v. 977. On one side are the words "Hostibus primo fugatis", and Mahon (vi. 85) seizes upon them to show that they plainly renounce all "the idle vaunts of Lexington", that the British had there fled.

[603] There is a reduction of this issue in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. p. lv.

[604] It is reproduced in Wheildon's Siege, etc., of Boston; in Moore's Ballad History, etc.

[605] Reproduced by Wheildon (p. 32).

[606] This is reproduced in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. iii.

[607] Like those in Marshall's Washington (1806); in Sparks's Washington (iii. 26, also in the Boston Evacuation Memorial, 1875); in Frothingham's Siege (1849), p. 91; and in Carrington's Battles, p. 154,—to say nothing of those in Guizot's Washington, Lossing's Field-Book (p. 154), Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. 427), etc.

[608] This is reprinted in Frothingham's Siege (p. 409).

[609] There is among the Washington plans a plan of the works on Winter Hill. Cf. Sparks's Catal., p. 207. It is not at Cornell. It is understood that nos. 1-11 of this set of plans, as per catalogue, were not sent to the Cornell University library. They do not appear to be among the Sparks MSS. in Harvard College library. This aspect of the siege of Boston is particularly studied in Lossing's Field-Book of the Revolution (also in Harper's Monthly, vol. i.), and in S. A. Drake's Landmarks of Middlesex, and County of Middlesex (ch. 19). There are photographs of this sheet in the Boston Public Library, the Mass. Hist. Soc. library, and in the State Library of Massachusetts. Cf. map of Boston, 1750-1773, in Brit. Mus. MSS., 21,686, fol. 70, in the Index to Brit. Mus. MSS. (1880).

[610] The whole map was reëngraved and published at Augsburg by T. C. Lotter, and the plan of the town was reproduced in Boston in 1875 by A. O. Crane. The whole map was reëngraved in Paris (1777) by Le Rouge, and makes part of the Atlas Ameriquain (1778).

[611] It is reduced in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, iii. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., May, 1860.)

[612] It has been reproduced in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vol. xvii.

[613] Sabine's Amer. Loyalists, i. 537.

[614] Cf. Boston Harbor, [with] nautical remarks and observations by G. Callendar, London, 1775. Brit. Mus. Maps (1885), col. 491.

[615] Cf. the Rawdon map in Harper's Mag., xlvii. 20.

[616] There are photographs of it in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Library, Boston Public Library, and State Library. Brit. Mus. Map Catal., 1885, col. 493.

[617] Belknap Papers, ii. 115; Mass. Hist. Soc Proc., xix. 93, 94. A tracing is given in the Boston Evacuation Memorial (1876), and it is reduced, but not in fac-simile, in Frank Moore's Diary of the Revolution, i. p. 213, and given in reduced fac-simile in S. A. Drake's Old Landmarks of Middlesex, and in the Mem. Hist. of Boston (vol. iii.; introduction).

[618] These Faden maps are numbered, for the finished and rough drafts in E. E. Hale's Catal. of the Faden Maps, nos. 32-36, and include one by Lieutenant Hill, of the Welsh Fusileers.

[619] Frothingham reproduces it in his Siege, and it is reduced in the Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. iii., introduction.

[620] Brit. Mus. Map Catal., 1885, col. 493.

[621] A reproduction of the harbor map was issued in Boston by W. P. Parrott, in 1851. It is also reproduced as no. 5 in the Neptune Americo-Septentrional, 1780.

[622] Dr. Thomas A. Emmet, of New York, owns several interesting, graphic memorials of the seat of war round Boston, one of which, a Map of Boston and vicinity, made during the British occupancy, is given by Benson J. Lossing in Harper's Magazine, July, 1873.

[623] Labanoff Catalogue, no. 1,576; copy in Amer. Geog. Soc. library.

[624] There are photographs of it in the Boston Public Library, Mass. State Library, and Mass. Hist. Society library.

[625] Cf. his letter to the provincial congress of Massachusetts in their journals, and various letters from him in the Trumbull Papers, vol. iv.

[626] Dr. Trumbull also stated the Connecticut case in the Hartford Daily Courant, Jan. 9, 1869, likewise printed separately. Cf. further Hollister's Connecticut, ii. ch. 7; Hinman's Connecticut in the Revolution, p. 29.

[627] Holland's Western Mass.; Barry's Mass.; Smith's Pittsfield; letters of Thomas Allen, May 4 and 9, 1775, in Hist. Mag., i. p. 109, etc.

[628] The original edition, A narrative of Col. Ethan Allen's Captivity, Sept. 25, 1775, to May 6, 1778, containing his voyages and travels, with the most remarkable occurrences respecting himself, ... particularly the destruction of the prisoners at New York by Gen. Sir William Howe, in 1776 and 1777. Written by himself (Philad., 1779), was reprinted the same year in Philad., and also in Boston; again at Newbury, for publication in Boston, 1780; at Norwich in 1780; at Philadelphia in 1799; in the Appendix of the second volume of Ira Allen's Particulars of the Capture of the ship Olive Branch, etc. (Philad., 1805); with notes, at Walpole, N. H., 1807 (Stevens, Hist. Coll., ii. no. 6); at Albany, 1814; at Burlington, 1838; as Ethan Allen's Captivity, being a Narrative, etc. (Boston, 1845); as A Narrative of Col. Ethan Allen's Captivity (Burlington, 1846, and, with slightly changed title, in 1849); as Ethan Allen's Narrative of the Capture of Ticonderoga and of his Captivity, etc. (Burlington, 1849); as Narrative of the Captivity, etc. (Dayton, 1849). Cf. Sabin, i. 793-800, 821. Allen's letter (May 11th) to the Massachusetts Congress is in Dawson's Battles, i. 38; and another (May 10th) to Seth Warner is in the Mag. of Am. Hist., 1885, p. 319. Various letters of Ethan Allen at this time are among the Trumbull Papers (vol. iv.): to the Conn. Assembly, from Crown Point, May 26, 1775, covering a copy of his letter to the Indians (p. 96); to Governor Trumbull, July 6th and Aug. 3d. His letter from Crown Point, June 2d, to the N. Y. Congress, is in Sparks's Gouverneur Morris, i. p. 54. Cf. Lives of Allen by Sparks and by Hugh Moore; De Puy's Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain heroes; Williams's Vermont. Dr. De Costa having, in the Galaxy, Dec., 1868 (also in his Fort George, p. 10), disputed Allen's claim to the sole credit of the surprise, he was answered by Hiland Hall in a pamphlet, The Capture of Ticonderoga (Montpelier, 1869; also in the Vermont Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct. 19, 1869). Cf. Ira Allen's Vermont; Goodhue's Shoreham, Vt.

[629] Cf. Lives of Arnold by Sparks and by Isaac N. Arnold (ch. 2). The regimental memorandum-book of Benedict Arnold, written while at Ticonderoga and Crown Point, is printed in the Penna. Mag. of History (Dec., 1884), viii. 363, and separately. It begins May 10th and ends June 24th, and is published from a copy made by W. H. B. Thomas before the original was lost. The Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii. p. 27) contain letters from Arnold between 1775 and 1780, beginning with a letter from Crown Point, May 23, 1775, and ending with a letter dated at Philadelphia, July 17, 1780, to Governor Huntington. There is a letter of Arnold from Crown Point, June 13, 1775, in the Trumbull Papers (vol. iv. p. 111). Arnold was accused of countenancing the robbery of Skene's house a few days before the capture, and some papers in his defence are given in Stevens's Bibliotheca Historica (1870), no. 96. The original list of trophies of Ticonderoga, in Arnold's handwriting, is in Dr. T. A. Emmet's Collection (Carrington's Battles). Cf. "Who took Ticonderoga?" in Hist. Mag., vol. xv. (Feb., 1869) p. 126. Arnold's appointment of May 3d, and his report of May 14th, are given from the original documents in the possession of Jonathan Edwards, of N. Y., in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. pp. 546-7.

[630] Jones (p. 49) sets forth the tergiversations of Duane and other New Yorkers (who had assisted a few months before in proclaiming Allen an outlaw) as soon as the capture of Ticonderoga had made him the hero of the hour. Depositions and other documents in the Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv., touch the riotous proceedings of Allen, which had caused a price to be set on his head by the New York authorities. Cf. also Jones, N. Y. during the Rev., i. note xx.

[631] Cf. also Schuyler's letters in Sparks's Correspondence of the Amer. Revolution and Lossing's Life of Schuyler, i. 310. Lossing also deals with the subject in his Field-Book of the Revolution, and in Harper's Monthly, vol. xvii. p. 721. Chas. Carroll (Journal to Canada, 1876, p. 75) describes the ruinous condition of Ticonderoga a year later. Reference may be made to Sparks's Gouverneur Morris (vol. i. ch. 4), and to the general historians: Bancroft (orig. ed., vii. 338); Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. ch. 17); Irving's Washington (i. 404); and local histories, like Watson's Essex County (ch. 9); Palmer's Lake Champlain; Holden's Queensbury (p. 405); Bourne's Wells and Kennebunk, Me.; Van Rensselaer's Essays; Poole's Index, etc. A letter of Joseph Warren congratulating Connecticut on the event is in Frothingham's Warren, p. 490. Another letter of Joseph Warren (Watertown, May 17, 1775) to John Scollay, being captured by Gage, gave the British general the first intimation of the fall of Ticonderoga (Sparks, MSS., xxxii.). Governor Franklin communicates a diary at Ticonderoga, May 11-19, to Dartmouth (N. Jersey Archives, x. 608). Respecting the condition of Ticonderoga after the capture, see Eliphalet Dyer's letter, May 31, 1775, in Hist. Mag., vii. 22; and the letters of Governor Trumbull and the Connecticut committee to the New Hampshire authorities, in the N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 489-501.

[632] Sparks caused copies to be made of some of the most important parts, which are in the Sparks MSS., no. lx.

[633] The orderly-book of Sergeant Aaron Barlow, under Montgomery, June 2 to Dec. 6, 1775, was preserved in 1848, when a copy was made for the New York Historical Society (Proc., 1849, p. 279).

[634] Dawson, i. p. 116, who points out some errors in Leake's Life of Lamb (p. 374), or 4 American Archives, iii. p. 1343. Cf. Lossing's Schuyler, i. 444; Sargent's Major André, p. 79; Alex. Scammel's letter in Hist. Mag., xviii. 136; accounts in Gen. John Lacy's papers in the N. Y. State Library; Samuel Mott's letters in the Trumbull Papers (iv. p. 174); and others of Timothy Bedel in N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 637, 670. There are in the Archives at Ottawa a Mémoire of Amable Berthelot, of Quebec, on the war of 1775; a journal at Three Rivers, May 18, 1775, etc.; and a journal of the siege of St. John, 1775 (Brymner's Report on the Canadian Archives, 1881, p. 46). These are printed in Verreau's Invasion du Canada (Montreal, 1873). Carroll (Journal to Canada, 1876, p. 89), describing the works at St. John, says they were not injured by Montgomery's siege of them. There is a view of the works in Lossing's Field-Book, i. 172.

[635] Dawson, i. p. 115, etc.

[636] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 477. Montgomery's letter to the inhabitants is given in fac-simile in 4 Force's Archives, iii. 1596, and his demand for its surrender, Ibid., v. 312. The articles of capitulation were printed in broadside. Sabin, xii. p. 314. Copies of Montgomery's letters are in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.). Lareau, Littérature Canadienne, p. 240, says that L'Abbé Perrault intended a book, Le Siège de Montreal en 1775. See various documents in Verreau's Invasion du Canada.

[637] Dennie's Portfolio, xx. 75. A paper by Louise L. Hunt in Harper's Monthly, vol. lxx. (Feb., 1885), in which the story of the preservation of Montgomery's sword is told. Cf. Living Age, no. 1,017, p. 428; Biog. Notes concerning Richard Montgomery, by L. L. Hunt (1876); A Sketch of Montgomery (1876), by General Geo. W. Cullum, and an article by him in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., April, 1884, with interesting illustrations, including (p. 277) a view of Montgomery Place, on the Hudson, which was building at the time of his death, and was afterwards the home of his widow. There are other views of this well-known estate in Lamb's Homes of America, Harper's Mag., lxx. 354, etc. General Cullum's paper has also a fac-simile of a letter sent by Montgomery to Colonel Bedel, Oct. 2, 1775. For the ancestry of Montgomery, see N. Y. Geneal. and Biog. Record, July, 1871, p. 123. The memory of Montgomery suffered for a long time in Canada from the belief that he was the officer of that name who was charged with atrocities during the siege of Quebec in 1759 (Quebec Lit. and Hist. Soc. Trans., 1870-71, p. 63).

On his death and burial, see, beside the usual accounts, a paper among the Belknap papers in Mass. Hist. Soc. library (Proc., x. 323), called "A true account of Gen. Montgomery's death and burial at Quebec" (cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. p. 111), Life of Geo. Read, p. 140; Hilliard d'Auberteuil's Essais, with a stately picture of his funeral; Niles's Register, xiv. 371; Sparks's Washington, iii. 264, on the identification and burial of his remains; a picture of the house to which his body was carried in Grant's Picturesque Canada (Toronto, 1882, vol. i. p. 28); the final removal of his remains to New York, when his widow, forty-three years after his death, watched the barge which bore them as it slowly floated down the Hudson in front of Montgomery Place (Dennie's Portfolio, xxi. 134; Harper's Mag., lxx. 357; Quebec Lit. and Hist. Soc. Trans., 1870-71, p. 63; Dr. W. J. Anderson's paper was reprinted in Hist. Mag., xiii. 97); and a paper on the hundredth anniversary of his death in the New Dominion Monthly (Montreal), xvii. 397.

The tributes of Congress to Montgomery are recorded in the Journals of Congress, i. 247. Public services took place before that body Feb. 19, 1776, when an address was delivered which was published as An Oration in Memory of General Montgomery, and of the Officers and Soldiers who fell with him, December 31, 1775, before Quebec; drawn up (and delivered February 19th, 1776). At the Desire of the Honorable Continental Congress. By William Smith, D. D., Provost of the College and Academy of Philadelphia (Phila., 1776) It was reprinted in Norwich, Conn., and in London twice in the same year.

Franklin was commissioned to procure in France a monument to Montgomery's memory. One was finally erected in Trinity Church in New York (Mag. of Amer. Hist., April, 1884, p. 297; Harper's Mag., Nov., 1876, p. 876; Penna. Mag. of Hist., iii. 473).

Of some interest are a contemporary tragedy by H. H. Brackenridge, The Death of Montgomery (Norwich and Providence), with an engraving of the death scene by Norman (Sabin, ii. no. 7,185; Sparks' Catal., no. 337); and Thomas Paine's A Dialogue between the ghost of general Montgomery just arrived from the Elysian fields; and an American delegate, in a wood near Philadelphia. [Anon.] [Phila.], 1776. N. Y.; privately reprinted, 100 copies, 1865.

[638] Printed in the Maine Hist. Soc. Coll. (i. 343), at Portland, in 1831; Sabin, xii. 50,221. Cf. N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1881, p. 117, for an account of the Montresors, father and son, and G. D. Scull's Mem. and letters of Capt. W. G. Evelyn (1879), enlarged as The Evelyns in America (1881). Cf. also N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Jan., 1882, p. 104.

[639] Catal. of King's Maps, Brit. Mus., i. 608. Cf. also the Map of New Hampshire, by Col. Joseph Blanchard and Rev. Samuel Langdon, engraved in Jefferys, dated Oct. 21, 1761.

[640] Lossing's Field-Book, i. 193.

[641] Lives of Arnold, by Sparks (ch. 3 and 4) and Isaac N. Arnold (ch. 3); Irving's Washington (ii. ch. 5 and 8); Graham's Morgan (ch. 4); Lossing's Schuyler (i. ch. 26); B. Cowell's Spirit of Seventy-Six in Rhode Island; North's Hist. of Augusta; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 441; a paper by William Howard Mills, describing the route, in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Feb., 1885), xiii. 143; and William Allen's "Account of Arnold's Expedition" in the Maine Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. i. p. 387, derived mainly from the journals of Meigs and Henry.

The conduct of Enos in deserting Arnold has been extenuated in General Roger Enos—a lost Chapter of Arnold's Expedition to Canada, 1775, by Horace Edwin Hayden (1885), reprinted from Mag. of Amer. Hist. (May, 1885). The papers of the court-martial which acquitted Enos are in the State Department at Washington, and have been printed by Force and Allen, and also in Henry's Journal (ed. of 1877), p. 59.

[642] Described by G. T. Packard in the N. Y. Independent, 1881. Cf. Good Literature, 1881, p. 239.

[643] Dawson (i. 118) also gives his Quebec despatch of Dec. 31, 1775. Sparks preserved copies of various of Arnold's letters in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.); and in Ibid. (no. lvii. 10) are letters of Arnold on his early trading visits to Quebec, when he acquired a knowledge of the region.

[644] Journal of the march of a party of Provincials from Carlyle to Boston and from thence to Quebec, begun the 13th of July and ended the 31st of Dec., 1775. To which is added an account of the Attack and Engagement at Quebec, the 31st of Dec., 1775 (Glasgow, 1775, pp. 36). It is, says Sabin (ix. no. 36,728), the journal of a company of riflemen under Captains William Hendricks and John Chambers, and it was sent from Quebec to Glasgow by a gentleman who appended the "account."

Henry Dearborn's is in the Boston Public Library, and is called Journal of the proceedings, and particular occurrences, which happened, within my knowledge, to the troops under the command of Benedict Arnold, in 1775, which troops were detached from the American army lying before Boston for the purpose of marching to, and taking possession of Quebec. [From Sept. 10th, 1775, to July 16th, 1776.] It has been printed by Mellen Chamberlain in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., April, 1886, and separately.

Caleb Haskell's diary, May 5, 1775, to May 30, 1776,—a revolutionary soldier's record before Boston and with Arnold's expedition (Newburyport, 1881, 8vo, pp. 23). It is edited by L. Withington. Haskell belonged to Ward's company.

John Joseph Henry's Accurate and interesting account of the hardships and sufferings of that band of heroes, who traversed the wilderness in the Campaign against Quebec in 1775 (Lancaster, Pa., 1812). Campaign against Quebec, being an accurate, etc. (Watertown, N. Y., 1844). Account of Arnold's Campaign against Quebec, and of the hardships, etc. (Albany, 1877). This last edition has a memoir of Judge Henry by his grandson, Aubrey H. Smith. (Cf. Brinley, ii. no. 4,026; Murphy, no. 1,192.) Mr. Smith says that the Account was dictated by Henry to his daughter in his latest years, with the aid of casual notes and memoranda, and was published without any revision and proper press-reading. (Cf. Sabin, viii. 31,400-1.)

Lieut. William Heth's journal is referred to in Marshall's Washington, i. pp. 53, 57, and is still preserved in Richmond, Va.

A journal of Sergeant McCoy, of Hendricks's company, is referred to by Henry in his Account.

Major Return J. Meigs's Journal of the expedition against Quebec under Col. Benedict Arnold in the year 1775. (Cf. Almon's Remembrancer, Part ii., 1776, p. 294.) This is in vol. i. of Chas. I. Bushnell's Crumbs for Antiquarians (New York, 1859). This series is recorded in Sabin, iii. no. 9,538; Boon Catal., p. 591. The journal is also in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xii., and notices of Meigs are in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. War, i. 180, 668, and in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., April, 1880, iv. 283 (with a portrait taken in his later years), by H. P. Johnston. There is also a life of Meigs in John W. Campbell's Biographical Sketches (Columbus, O., 1838). There appeared at Cincinnati in 1852 Biographical and Historical Memoirs of the early Pioneer settlers of Ohio, with narratives of incidents and occurrences in 1775, by S. P. Hildreth, M. D., to which is annexed a journal of occurrences which happened in the circles of the author's personal observation in the detachment commanded by Colonel Benedict Arnold, consisting of two battalions of the United States Army at Cambridge in 1775. By Colonel R. J. Meigs. The Meigs journal thus called for in the title was never included in the book (Field, Ind. Bibliog.; Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 551).

J. Melvin's Journal of the Expedition to Quebec in the year 1775, under the command of Col. B. Arnold. In the "Publications of The Club", New York, 1857 (100 copies). The introduction is signed with the initials of William J. Davis. The Club was a preliminary organization which became the Bradford Club. The journal was also printed in a small edition by the Franklin Club, in Philadelphia, in 1864 (Alofsen, Catalogue, nos. 12, 13). Melvin was attached to Dearborn's company.

John Peirce's journal of daily occurrences, Sept. 8, 1775, to Jan. 16, 1776, is that of an engineer with the pioneers. It is defective at the beginning and end, and has not been printed. Stone refers to it.

Journal of Isaac Senter, Physician and Surgeon to the Troops on a Secret Expedition against Quebec, under command of Col. Benedict Arnold, in Sept., 1775 (Phila., 1846). This journal, which begins at Cambridge, Sept. 13, 1775, and ends at Quebec Jan. 6, 1776, made part of the Bulletin, vol. i., of the Penna. Hist. Society. There is an account of Senter, with extracts from his journal, in Stone's Invasion of Canada in 1775, p. 65.

The Diary of Ephraim Squier, Sept. 7 to Nov. 25, 1775, preserved in the Pension Office in Washington, is printed in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 685.

Capt. John Topham's Journal of the expedition to Quebec through the wilderness of Maine in Sept., Oct., and Nov., 1775. Stone reports it as being in the hands of David King, of Newport, as not published, and not being legible before the date of Oct. 6th.

Invasion of Canada in 1775, including the Journal of Cap. Simeon Thayer, describing the Perils and Sufferings of the Army under Col. B. Arnold. With Notes and Appendix, by E. M. Stone (Providence, 1867). This has a bibliography, and made part of the R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. vi.

Journal of an Expedition against Quebec in 1775, under Col. Benedict Arnold, by Joseph Ware, of Needham, Mass. Published by Joseph Ware, grandson of the journalist (Boston, 1852). The journal begins Sept. 13, 1775. The writer was taken prisoner during the attack of Dec. 31st, and his journal ends on a cartel at sea, Sept. 6, 1776. The notes are by Justin Winsor, and the journal was first printed in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., April, 1852. A question has been raised as to Ware's authorship of this journal (Whitmore's Amer. Genealogist, p. 84).

There is in Harvard College library a copy of the MS. journal of Ebenezer Wild, beginning at Cambridge Sept. 13th, and ending at Quebec, while he was a prisoner, June 6, 1776. It was printed by Justin Winsor with a note on similar records, in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., April, 1886, and separately (75 copies).

Of Christian Febiger, the adjutant of the expedition, a Dane, but resident in Massachusetts, there is an account and portrait in Mag. of Amer. Hist., March, 1881.

An orderly-book of the expedition, Nov. 8, 1775, to Feb. 26, 1776, is in the Pension bureau of the War Department at Washington. There is in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii. p. 25) a list of officers and volunteers on the expedition and at Quebec, furnished to Sparks at New York, Feb., 1831, by Col. Samuel Ward, of whom a letter describing his experiences on the march is also preserved (Sparks MSS., no. xxv.). There are in the Mass. Archives: Revolutionary Rolls, vol. xxviii., lists of officers of the reinforcements for Ticonderoga and Canada, and in a separate volume a list of soldiers under Colonel Arnold, and of the killed, wounded, and prisoners at Quebec, Dec. 31, 1775. (Cf. list in Ware's Journal.) The N. Y. Continental line (four regiments and one artillery company) was organized, under a vote of the N. Y. provincial congress, June 28, 1775, and served on this campaign. Capt. John Lamb's artillery company left New York with seventy enlisted men, and (March 30, 1776) were reduced to thirty-one rank and file. The term of service of the N. Y. line expired in April, 1776; but a large part reënlisted (Asa Bird Gardiner in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Dec., 1881). The service of New Hampshire is shown in the N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. pp. 209, 311, 339, etc. Cf. Quebec Lit. and Hist. Soc. Trans., 1871-73, 1876-77; Potter's Amer. Monthly, Dec., 1875.

[645] Wooster's share in the campaign was not a happy one. "His defect was his age", says C. F. Adams. "Few of the brave officers in the French war sustained their reputation in the revolutionary struggle" (Life and Works of John Adams, iii. 44). Lossing's Schuyler and Hollister's Connecticut have somewhat opposing sympathies respecting Wooster's character. Cf. much in 4 Force's Archives, iv., v., vi., and 5 Ibid., i. The opinion upon Wooster of the Commissioners to Congress is shown in their letter of May 27th (Force's Archives, vi. 589). There is a letter of Wooster from Montreal, Feb. 11, 1776, addressed to Roger Sherman, in Letters and Papers, 1761-1776 (MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc., p. 167). In this he speaks of his disagreements with Schuyler, and says that his persuasion had prevented Montgomery from resigning.

[646] Sparks's Corresp., etc., vol. i. 116, 154, and App. (Dec. 31, 1775; Jan. [1776] 2, 11, 12, 24; Feb. 1, 27; April 20, 30; May 8, 15; June, etc.). Arnold's letter of Dec. 31 in the N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 719. Cf. Lossing on Arnold in Harper's Monthly, xxiii. 721.

[647] American.—Report, Jan. 24th, to Congress, in Secret Journal, i. 38.

Letters from Point-aux-Trembles in App. of Henry's Journal (ed. of 1877).

Donald Campbell's despatch to Wooster, Dec. 31, 1775, in Dawson, i. 116; and in N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 718.

Letters of Wooster to Schuyler and Warner (Jan. 5th and 6th), and Schuyler to Washington (Jan. 13th), in N. H. Prov. Papers, vii. 720-22. Cf. Sparks MSS., lviii. 12.

Lieut. Eben Elmer's diary of the Canada expedition in N. Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., ii. and iii.

General Irvine's diary, beginning May, 1775, in Hist. Mag., April, 1862.

The journal of Col. Rudolphus Ritzema, first N. Y. regiment, Aug. 8, 1775, to March 30, 1776, now in the N. Y. Hist. Soc., and printed in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Feb., 1877), i. p. 98. Under date (Montreal) of Jan. 3, 1776, he gives an account of the failure at Quebec, news of which had just reached there by Mr. Antell, an express (from N. Y. Archives in Sparks MSS., xxix.).

Journal of the Rev. Ammi Ruhamah Robbins, chaplain in the American army, in the northern campaign of 1776 (New Haven, 1850).

The Shurtleff manuscript, No. 153. Being a narrative of certain events in Canada during the invasion by the American army, in 1775, by Mrs. Thomas Walker, with notes and introd. by Silas Ketchum (Contoocook, 1876), making part no. 2 of the Collections of the N. H. Antiquarian Soc.

Some of the diaries noted under the Kennebec expedition cover the attack on Quebec. Cf. Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. 185. A letter of Samuel Ward, Philad., Jan. 21, 1776, gives the news as it reached Congress (Sparks MSS., xxv.; cf. N. H. Prov. Papers, viii. 49).

A letter of Samuel Hodgkinson, before Quebec (April 27, 1776), is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., July, 1886, p. 158.

Wilkinson joined the army in May, 1776, and his Memoirs (i. p. 39) has accordingly a personal interest.

The Memoirs of Charles Dennis Rusoe d'Eres, a native of Canada (Exeter, 1800), begins with the attack on Quebec.

More or less of reference to original sources is made in the lives of Washington by Marshall (i. 329) and Irving (ii. ch. 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 15, 20, 22, 23); Lossing's Schuyler (i. ch. 28, 29); Leake's Lamb (ch. 7 and 8); Read's Geo. Read (i. 141); and the lives of Montgomery and Arnold already referred to. Intercepted letters from Arnold to Montgomery and Washington are in the Haldimand Papers.

Daniel Morgan, the commander of the Virginia riflemen, was a conspicuous actor in the attack. Rebecca McConkey, in her Hero of Cowpens (New York, 1881), claims that Morgan deserves the credit which Arnold usually receives. A description by Morgan of his part in the attack is among some papers gathered by Sparks for a life of Morgan (Sparks MSS., lii. vol. ii. p. 99), and this same autobiographic letter is printed at greater length in the Hist. Mag., xix. 379, as from the Pittsburgh Gazette of July 10, 1818, where it is said to have been found among some papers once belonging to Gen. Henry Lee, and is supposed to have been addressed to Lee by Morgan about 1800, two years before Morgan died. The copy made by Sparks is given as from a paper then (1831) in the possession of General Armstrong. Cf. Graham's Life of Morgan (ch. 5); Dennie's Portfolio, viii. p. 101; Southern Lit. Messenger, xx. p. 559.

The principal general accounts on the American side are in Bancroft (viii. ch. 52-54, or final revision, iv. ch. 19 and 24); Ramsay's Amer. Rev.; Hollister's Connecticut (ii. ch. 9); Dawson's Battles (ch. 7); Carrington's Battles (ch. 20, 21); Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., ix. 133; Dennie's Portfolio, ix. 133.

Sullivan rehearses the news as it reached the Cambridge camp (N. H. Prov. Papers, viii. 36). There are in the Aspinwall Papers (ii. 772) various items of intelligence respecting "the defeat of the rebels" in Canada, gathered in New York in Feb., 1776.

British.—Carleton's despatch to Howe (Dawson, 118; also see Gent. Mag., June, 1776). The letters which passed from Dartmouth to Carleton, Dec. 10, 1774 to Sept. 9, 1777, are noted in the Chalmers MSS. (Thorpe's Supplement, 1843, no. 622). Other papers are in the Haldimand Papers (Brit. Mus.), of which a calendar has been printed (p. 207) by the Dominion archivist at Ottawa. The volumes in the Public Record Office, London, marked "Quebec, xiv., xv., vols. 348, 349", cover this period.

Journal of the siege of Quebec, by Hugh Finlay, in Quebec Lit. and Hist. Soc. Docs., 4th series. (The bibliography of this society is given in Sabin, xvi. no. 67,015, etc.)

Account of the siege, beginning Nov., 1775, dated on board sloop-of-war "Hunter", June 15, 1776, addressed by Col. Henry Caldwell to Gen. Jas. Murray, has been printed in the Transactions of the Quebec Lit. and Hist. Soc., and in Hist. Mag., xii. 97 (1867).

A Journal of the Siege, Dec. 1, 1775, to May 7, 1776, is noted in the Chalmers MSS. (Thorpe's Supplement, 1843, no. 623). This MS. is now in the Sparks MSS. (xlii. no. 1). Its earliest entry is really Dec. 5th. It gives a particular account of the share taken by the journalist in the defence of Dec. 31st, calling it "a glorious day for us, and as complete a little victory as was ever gained." The last entry is, in fact, May 9, 1776.

In Thorpe's Supplement (no. 624) there is also noted a Journal of the Siege, by Capt. Thomas Ainslee, written on the spot, Sept., 1775, to May 6, 1776. This is also now in the Sparks MSS., i.

Journal of the Siege of Quebec in 1775-76, collected from some old manuscripts originally written by an officer, to which are added a preface and illustrative notes by W. T. P. Short (London, 1824). It begins Dec. 1, 1775, and ends May 6, 1776; but the editor continues the narrative, briefly, through the campaign (Menzie's Catal., no. 1,107).

Journal of the most remarkable occurrences in Quebec, from the 14th of Nov., 1775, to the 7th of May 1776, by an officer of the garrison. It is printed in the N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1880, p. 175. Of the British general accounts, mention may be made of the Annual Register, xix. ch. 1, 5; xx. ch. 1; Andrew's Late War (ch. 19, 20); Stedman's Amer. War (ch. 2, 10); Adolphus's England (ii. 237); Bisset's George the Third (i. ch. 15); Mahon's England (vi. 76); W. Lindsay's Invasion of Canada by the American provincials (1826). Sir James Carmichael-Smythe's Précis of the War in Canada criticises the plan of Montgomery's attack. Cf. Canadian Antiquarian, v. 145; Lemoine's Maple Leaves, pp. 84, 95; his Picturesque Quebec, pp. 120, 231; J. Lesperance's Bastonnais: tale of the American invasion of Canada in 1775-76 (Toronto, 1877).

Lossing has a paper on the local associations of Quebec in Harper's Monthly, xviii. 176; and similar detail is also given in his Field-Book of the Am. Rev.

French.—There are three records in the Lit. and Hist. Soc. of Quebec: 1. Le témoin oculaire de la guerre des Bastonnais durant les années 1775 et 1776 par M. Simon Sanguinet.

2. Journal contenant le récit de l'invasion du Canada en 1775-1776, redigé par M. Jean B. Badeaux, printed in their Hist. Documents, 3d series. For Nos. 1 and 2 see Verreau's Invasion du Canada (Montreal, 1873).

3. Journal tenu pendant le Siège du fort St. Jean en 1776 par M. Antoine Foucher.

The principal general French history on the subject is Garneau's Histoire du Canada.

Cf. Centenaire de l'assaut de Québec par les Américains 31 Décembre, 1775. Compte-rendu de la Séance solennelle donnée par l'Institut Canadien, 30 Déc., 1875. Quebec, 1876 (Sabin, xvi. 66,997).

[648] A letter of Samuel Hodgkinson, April 27th, is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., July, 1886, p. 162.

[649] Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 185, 189, 196; Force's Archives, 4th, v., vi.; 5th, i. Among the General Thomas papers, beside drafts of his own letters at this time, there are letters to him from Arnold (May 1, 11, 14); from Schuyler (May 17); and from Baron de Woedtke (May 11, 12, 18, 19). Some memoranda from Thomas's letters are in a collection of Letters and Papers, 1761-1776 (p. 165), in the Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet. Cf. also Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 1, 2); I. N. Arnold's Arnold (ch. 5); Read's Geo. Read, 150; Bancroft's United States (orig. ed., viii. ch. 67); Irving's Washington (ii. ch. 20; 22); Stone's Brant, i. 154.

[650] See the general narratives, and specially Sparks's Washington (iv. 56), for the capitulation; Resolutions of Congress, July 10, 1776, in Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev. (i. 258); S. E. Dawson in Canadian Monthly, v. 305; and Authentic narrative of facts relating to the exchange of prisoners taken at the Cedars, with original papers (London, 1777—Brinley Catal., ii. no. 3,967). Cf. John Adams's Life and Writings, ix. 407; N. H. Rev. Rolls, i. 477; and Force's Archives, 4th, vi. (p. 598), and 5th, i. The Agreement (May 27, 1776) of Arnold and Foster about the prisoners is in Sparks MSS., xiii. and xlv. Jones recounts the disputes arising over the fulfilment of Arnold's agreement for an exchange of the prisoners. N. Y. during the Revolution, i. 93. There is a French edition of the Authentic Narrative, by Marcel Ethier (Montreal, 1873).

[651] Sparks's Corresp. of Rev., i. 525, 531; Force's Archives, 4th, vi.; Colonel Irvine's account in Hist. Mag.; vi. 115; Life of George Read (ch. 3, with memoir of Thompson at end of ch. 2); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 85); Marshall's Washington (ii. 362); Amory's John Sullivan; Bancroft's United States, original edition, viii. p. 415, etc.

[652] Sparks's Washington, iii. 423; Corresp. of the Rev., 211, 216, 231, 237, 239, 241; John Adams's Life and Writings, ix. 43. Letters of Sullivan, with some from Arnold during the retreat from Canada, are among the Sullivan papers (Sparks MSS., xx.). A letter from Arnold to Gates, Chamblée, May 31, 1776, is among the Gates Papers (copies in Sparks MSS., xx.). A letter of Thompson to St. Clair from Sorel, June 2, 1776, is in the St. Clair Papers (i. 367), with notes on the retreat.

[653] The are several personal records and diaries of these final months of the campaign. Dr. S. J. Meyrick, a surgeon of a Massachusetts regiment, wrote, June 1, 1836, to J. Trumbull, his recollections of the retreat, drawn up from contemporary minutes, beginning May 21, 1776 (Trumbull's Autobiography, 299).

Diary of Joshua Pell, Jr., beginning at Quebec, May 29, 1776, giving an account of Three Rivers defeat, ending Nov. 22d, is printed in Mag. of Am. Hist., ii. 43.

Letters of Colonel Bond (July, Aug., 1776) in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., iv. 71.

In the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii. p. 69, etc.) are copies of papers belonging to the Amer. Philosophical Society (Feb., 1831), which contain a journal of Jacob Shallus, beginning in the camp before Quebec, May 6, 1776, and ending at Crown Point, July 1st. A journal of Lieut. Jona. Burton, Aug. 1 to Nov. 29, 1776, is in the N. H. State Papers, vol. xiv.

There are local aspects and connections of the campaign to be got from Watson's Essex County (ch. 10); Dunlap's New York (ii. ch. 1, 4); Mrs. Bonney's Hist. Gleanings, i.; Smith's Pittsfield, Mass. (ch. 15); Temple and Sheldon's Northfield, etc.

[654] Sedgwick's Livingston. There is also a copy in the Langdon Papers, and a copy from that in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.). A letter of Paine is in Ibid. (xlix. ii.).

[655] A letter of John Carroll, describing his journey, and written from Montreal, May 1, 1776, is in Force's Archives, v. 1,158.

[656] Memoir of Josiah Quincy, Jr., 418. Lives of Franklin by Sparks, Parton, and Bigelow.

[657] Journal of Charles Carroll to Canada, with notes by B. Mayer (Baltimore, 1845). Journal of Charles Carroll of Carrollton during a visit to Canada in 1776, as one of the Commissioners from Congress (Baltimore, 1876—the Centennial volume of the Maryland Hist. Soc.). On Carroll, see Boyle's Marylanders; Annals of Annapolis; Niles's Register, xxx. 79; J. C. Carpenter in Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 101; J. M. Finotti in Cath. World, xxiii. 537; S. Jordan in Potter's Amer. Monthly, vii. 401. Poole's Index gives other references upon John Carroll. The Commissioner Charles Carroll was reputed to be the wealthiest man in America. Views of his mansion are in Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 101; Lamb's Homes of America; Brotherhead's Signers (1861, p. 81); and in Appleton's Journal, xii. p. 321. For a Carroll medal, see Amer. Journal of Numismatics, v. 8, xv. 45; Cath. World, July, 1876, p. 537.

The best known portrait of Carroll is that painted by Chester Harding, which for a while was deposited in the cabinet of the Mass. Hist. Soc. (Proc., i. 500). It has been engraved by A. B. Durand (National Portrait Gallery, N. Y., 1834), H. B. Hall (in Carroll's Journal, 1876), and J. B. Longacre. A portrait by Thomas Lally, formerly belonging to Governor Swann, of Maryland, is now in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Gallery (Proc., 2d ser., ii. 261). Cf. McSherry's Maryland.

[658] A letter of Chase and Carroll from Montreal, May 26, 1776, to General Thomas, is in the Mass. Archives, and is copied in the Sparks MSS (lii. vol. iii.).

[659] Their letters, written in May, are in Force's Archives, and the originals are preserved in the Archives at Washington; but Brantz Mayer says (Carroll's Journal, 1876, p. 37) that their report of June 12, 1776, could not be found. Their last letter, however, of May 27th, which Mayer prints (p. 38), gives their results. It is also in Force (vi. 589). The papers of General Thomas show their letters addressed to him of May 6, 12, and 15.

[660] Maj.-Gen. Robert Howe's report on the defences of Charlestown, some months later (Oct. 9th), is in the Amer. Archives, iii. 49.

[661] An Introduction to the History of the Revolt of the American Colonies, being a comprehensive view of its origin derived from the State Papers contained in the public offices of Great Britain (Boston, 1845).

[662] It is to be remembered that these positive statements as to the spirit of independence latent in the colonies were written after the achievement of the fact. It is but fair to say that it has been objected against the positiveness of Chalmers's statements that he presents no specific evidence of their truth from written authorities. (See Sparks's Washington, vol. ii. Appendix x., and his Preface to the American edition of Chalmers.) Viscount Bury, in his Exodus of the Western Nations (i. 395, 412), repeats the opinion of Chalmers as positively, yet also without authorities. On the other side, as illustrating how general statements may be affirmed, as if not to be qualified or challenged, we read in Governor Hutchinson's volume of his History written during his exile in England this sentence (vol. iii. p. 69), as of date 1758: "An empire, separate or distinct from Britain, no man then alive expected or desired to see",—an assertion more rhetorical than true. In the debate in the Commons on the Boston Port Bill and the infraction of the charter of Massachusetts, Sir Richard Sutton said "that even in the most quiet times the disposition to oppose the laws of this country was strongly ingrafted in the Americans, and all their actions conveyed a spirit and wish for independence. If you ask an American who is his master, he will tell you he has none, nor any governor, but Jesus Christ" (Adolphus, ii. 108).

[663] This last word recognized the jealousy and apprehension felt in Massachusetts about the sending over of bishops to the province.

[664] Examination before Committee of Parliament.

[665] See ante, chapter i.

[666] This Congress issued a very strong declaration "of the causes and necessity of taking up arms." It sought by clear statements "to quiet the minds of our friends and fellow-subjects. We do not mean to dissolve the union. Necessity has not driven us into that desperate measure. We have not raised armies with the ambitious designs of separation from Great Britain, and establishing independent states." This hesitating and vacillating course of the first two congresses would naturally encourage the British ministry in the belief, first, that the colonists were by no means of one mind as to valid reasons for a united opposition to government; and second, that the strength of the existing feelings of loyalty and attachment, backed by efficient policy, would withstand any looking towards independence.

[667] For an explanation of the reasons why R. H. Lee, the mover, was not made chairman of this committee, see Randall's Life of Jefferson, vol. i. 144-159.

[668] There is a slight conflict of testimony in private records—for we have none that are official—as to some of the details in the preparation of the Declaration. John Adams, trusting to his memory, wrote in his Autobiography (cf. Works, ii. 512), twenty-eight years after the transaction, and again in a letter to Timothy Pickering, forty-seven years after it (cf. Life of Pickering, iv. 463), and when he was in his eighty-eighth year, substantially to the same effect, namely, that Jefferson and himself were appointed by their associates a sub-committee to make the draft. Jefferson (Mem. and Corresp., iv. 375), on reading this letter, published in 1823, wrote to Madison denying this statement, and making another, relying on notes which he had made at the time. He says there was no sub-committee, and that when he himself had prepared the draft he submitted it for perusal and judgment separately to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Adams, each of whom made a few verbal alterations in it. These he adopted in a fair copy which he reported to the committee, and on June 28th to Congress, where, after the reading, it was laid on the table. On July 1st Congress took up for debate Mr. Lee's resolution for independence. Nine colonies—New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia—voted for the resolution. The two delegates of Delaware were divided. South Carolina and Pennsylvania voted against it. The New York delegates affirmed that they approved it, but that their instructions at present did not warrant their voting for it; but on July 9th a New York convention ratified it. Rutledge moved for a day's delay, which being granted, South Carolina accorded. A third delegate coming by post from Delaware turned that colony to the affirmative. Two substituted delegates from Pennsylvania carried that province. The roll of the thirteen colonies was now in union. On the same day, July 2d, and the two days following, Jefferson's draft was under debate, and was amended in committee of the whole. The author of the instrument leaves us to infer that he sat in an impatient and annoyed silence through the ordeal of criticism and objection passed upon it. The two principal amendments were the striking out a severe censure on "the people of England", lest "it might offend some of our friends there." and the omission of a reprobation of slavery, in deference to South Carolina and Georgia. When the committee reported to Congress, such notes of the debates as we have inform us, that, with much vehemence, discordance, remonstrance, and pleadings for delay, with doubts as to whether the people were ready for and would ratify the Declaration, it secured a majority of one in the count of the delegates. Jefferson said that John Adams was "the colossus" in that stirring debate.

There is no occasion here for a critical study or estimate of the Declaration, either as a political manifesto or as a literary production. Its rhetoric, as we know, was at the first reading of it regarded as excessive,—needlessly, perhaps harmfully, severe. That has ever since been the judgment of some. But Jefferson, Franklin, and John Adams, men of three very different types of mental energy and styles of expressing themselves, accorded in offering the document. The best that can be said of it is, that it answered its purpose, was fitted to meet a crisis and to serve the uses desired of it. Its terse and pointed directness of statement, its brief and nervous sentences, its cumulating gathering of grievances, its concentration of censure, and its resolute avowal of a decided purpose, not admitting of temporizing or reconsideration, were its effective points. Dating from its passage by the Congress, and its confidently assured ratification by the people, it was to announce a changed relation and new conditions for future intercourse between a now independent nation and a repudiated mother country. The resolve was sustained. Henceforward, whatever proffers, threats, appeals of amity, for readjustment of quarrels, or for harmony, might come from king or Parliament, or through commissioners, must proceed after the diplomatic fashion, on the admission that the negotiation was no longer between a government and its revolted subjects, but between two distinct sovereignties.

[669] It might be regarded as a matter of course that no parliamentary or other official proceeding or document of the British government would recognize, by way of examination or controversy, the crowning state paper of the American Congress. Chagrin, contempt, vengeful feelings, or a simple regard for its own dignity, may have induced the government to assume indifference. As yet the Declaration was a paper assertion of what was not then secured. But the English press was neither silent nor respectful about the Declaration. An able pamphlet appeared as An Answer to the Declaration of the American Congress (London, 1776). Another pamphlet, at first privately circulated, afterwards published, was written by Governor Hutchinson, then in England, entitled Strictures on the late Declaration of Congress. It is reprinted anonymously in Almon's Remembrancer, iv. 25. The writer says that the reasons given in the Declaration to justify it are "false and frivolous." He sent a copy of this pamphlet to the king, with an obsequious letter. Adolphus, after saying "that at no preceding period of history was so important a transaction vindicated by so shallow and feeble a composition", adds that "some passages are remarkable for low and intemperate scurrility", (vol. ii. 405, 406).

[670] A shining exception to the sweep of Judge Jones's assertion is found in the case of that gifted and eminent man, Dr. William Samuel Johnson, first Senator in the Constitutional Congress from Connecticut, and president of Columbia College. Though not a clergyman, he had been a lay reader in the Episcopal Church, as inheriting from his distinguished father, and accepting through his own convictions, its doctrine and discipline. Strongly conservative, with many fond ties to England and Englishmen from long residence abroad as an agent of his colony, he might naturally have espoused the side of the mother country. Indeed, rather from a suspicion that he would do so than from any overt act of his, he was arrested on an occasion of popular excitement, in 1779. But he proved to be among the wisest and firmest of patriots. See his Life, by Dr. E. E. Beardsley, 2d edition, Boston, 1886.

[671] Reflections, etc., p. 115.

[672] The History of the American Episcopal Church, 1587-1883, by Bishop W. S. Perry, Boston, 1885, vol. i. chap. xxiv., "The Position of the Clergy at the Opening of the War for Independence."

[673] On the records of the New York Provincial Congress, or Convention, is a letter dated July 11, 1776, drafted by Gouverneur Morris, and addressed to Hancock, president of the Continental Congress, which contains the following remarkable proposition: "We take the liberty of suggesting to your consideration the propriety of taking some measures for expunging from the Book of Common Prayer such parts, and discontinuing in the congregations of all other denominations all such prayers, as interfere with the interests of the American cause. It is a subject we are afraid to meddle with. The enemies of America have taken great pains to insinuate into the minds of the Episcopalians that the church is in danger. We could wish that the Congress would pass some resolve to quiet their fears, and we are confident it would do essential service to the cause of America at least in this State." Happily Hancock did not act on this suggestion. Congress might indeed have issued a revised edition of the English Liturgy; but a censorship of the utterances of extemporaneous prayers would have been beyond its range. These extemporaneous devotions were doubtless at the time sufficiently patriotic.

[674] See ante, chapter i.

[675] The writings of Samuel Adams abound in the expression of opinions similar to the following from the pen of his cousin, John Adams: "If Parliament could tax us, they could establish the Church of England, with all its creeds, articles, tests, ceremonies, and titles, and prohibit all other churches, as conventicles and schism-shops" (Works, x. 287, 288).

[676] See The Pulpit of the American Revolution: or, the Political Sermons of the Period of 1776. With a Historical Introduction, Notes, and Illustrations. By John Wingate Thornton. (Boston, 1860.) It contains Election and Thanksgiving sermons by Dr. Mayhew, Dr. Chauncy, Mr. Cook, Mr. Gordon, Dr. Langdon, Mr. West, Mr. Payson, Mr. Howard, and President Stiles, all of them eminent and able divines of Massachusetts and Connecticut, fearlessly bold, yet guided by wisdom.

In the French Archives, among the papers of Choiseul, prime minister of France before our Revolutionary period, there are curious evidences of the intelligent and keenly inquisitive method which that astute statesman employed to acquaint himself thoroughly with the relations of the religious teaching and belief of the people of New England and the spirit of liberty aroused among them. He sent here a messenger to gather information especially upon those as upon many other subjects. He was to collect newspapers, advertisements, and extracts from sermons. It was inferences from such communicative papers, with other interpretations of omens and signs of the times, that helped prepare the government for the alliance of 1778. The French minister sent two emissaries, M. de Fontleroy in 1764 and the Baron De Kalb in 1768. (See Kapp's Life of John Kalb.) The latter's letters are copied in the Sparks MSS. Cf. the Vicomte de Colleville's Les missions secrètes du général-major baron de Kalb, et son rôle dans la guerre de l'indépendance américaine (Paris, 1885). Franklin was in Paris at this time. Cf. E. E. Hale's Franklin in France, p. 2.

[677] American Presbyterianism, its Origin and Early History, etc. By Charles Augustus Briggs, D. D. (New York, 1885, ch. ix.)

[678] All that can be said in justification of George III. is said by Mahon (vi. 100). The fact is, that, with the exception of a few like Dean Tucker and John Cartwright, the king's subjects were, like himself, deceived for a long time into believing that the loss of England's colonies would cause her sun to set. It was the king's obstinacy or "steadfastness", as you choose to call it, which kept him longer of that opinion than almost all of his subjects.—Ed.

[679] Well might Washington, writing to Dr. Franklin in France, October, 1782, and referring to the delay of the negotiations for peace, emphasize "the persevering obstinacy of the king, the wickedness of his ministry, and the haughty pride of the nation" (Sparks's Franklin, ix. 422).

[680] Lord Mahon's History, vol. vi. Appen. lviii.

[681] Ibid., vii. Appen. xxix.

[682] An emphatic sentence from the pen of the able and candid historian Lecky may be quoted here. Referring to "the sullen and rancorous nature of an intensity of hatred" towards Chatham, which led the king, against all advice and urgency, to refuse any aid from that noble statesman, Lecky writes "This episode appears to me the most criminal in the whole reign of George III., and in my own judgment it is as criminal as any of those acts which led Charles I. to the scaffold" (Hist. of Eng. in the XVIIIth Cent., iv. 83).

[683] The Massachusetts refugee, Judge Curwen, thus writes, in London, in 1780: "In this baneful, woful quarrel, such a continued, unbroken series of disappointments, disasters, and mortifying events have taken place, that it seems to me to be morally impossible but the eyes of all thoughtful, prudent, knowing men must open and discern the impolicy and impracticability of accomplishing the great end for which this war was undertaken,—the reduction of the colonies to the obedience of the British Parliament" (Curwen, p. 311).

[684] Wells's Adams, i. p. 164.

[685] There is something very significant as well as comical in the following entry in John Adams's Diary in Congress, in 1775, when he had made his way to a full deliverance: "When these people began to see that independence was approaching, they started back. In some of my public harangues, in which I had freely and explicitly laid open my thoughts, on looking round the assembly, I have seen horror, terror, and detestation strongly marked on the countenances of some of the members, whose names I could readily recollect; but as some of them have been good citizens since, and others went over afterwards to the English, I think it unnecessary to record them here" (Works of John Adams, ii. p. 407). Mr. Sparks has gathered (Washington, Appendix x. vol. ii.) the expressed opinions of such typical patriots as Washington, Franklin, Henry, Madison, Jay, etc., utterly and emphatically disavowing all thoughts or purposes of independence till the crisis made it a matter of necessity, not of choice. It is but candid, however, to note an anticipation of that acute observer Joseph Galloway, whether it was but a surmise or a reasonable inference. In a letter addressed by him, Jan. 13, 1766, to Dr. Franklin, in London, he writes: "A certain sect of people, if I may judge from all their late conduct, seem to look on this as a favorable opportunity of establishing their republican principles, and of throwing off all connection with their mother country. I have reasons to think that they are forming a private union among themselves from one end of the continent to the other" (Sparks's Franklin, vii. 305). The assertion of John Jay is most explicit and emphatic: "During the course of my life, and until the second petition of Congress, in 1775, I never did hear any American of any class, or any description, express a wish for the independence of the colonies" (Life and Writings of John Jay, ii. p. 410). Mr. Jay probably referred to the contemptuous treatment of that second petition, "Dickinson's Letter", not to its transmission.

[686] Works, vii. 391.

[687] Reflections, etc., p. 102.

[688] Before this decision was reached, however, Congress, in 1774, made this tentative effort to recognize the unity of the empire in the extending through it of some sovereign power while holding to a local independence, in this form: "From the necessity of the case and a regard to the mutual interests of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British Parliament as are bonâ fide restricted to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and the commercial benefits of its respective members, excluding every idea of taxation, internal and external, for raising a revenue, on the subjects in America, without their consent." This was a seemingly candid and sincere suggestion to harmonize the positions taken by the respective parties in the controversy. Britain, the mistress of the seas, protected the great highways of commerce, and so might regulate the trade of her colonies by the ocean, as she did her own. But these colonies had constitutional charter assemblies with exclusive powers for raising and disposing of their own revenues.

[689] A very admirable and faithful digest of the proceedings of Congress, the materials and incidents being gathered by wide and diligent research, may be found in the ninth chapter of The Rise of the Republic of the United States, by Richard Frothingham (Boston, 1872).

[690] History of England in the XVIIIth Century, iii. p. 377.

[691] A very significant reference to the mixed qualities recognized in Paine by his contemporaries is found in Men and Times of the Revolution; or Memoirs of Elkanah Watson, etc. (New York, 1856). Mr. Watson, a native of Plymouth, was patriotic in his sentiments, and was on mercantile business in Europe during the war, honored with the friendship of Dr. Franklin and John Adams in Paris. His brother, Benj. Marston Watson, of Marblehead, was a noted loyalist. (See a "Memoir" of him in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Oct., 1873.) When Elkanah was at Nantes in 1781, Paine arrived there as secretary of Colonel Laurens, "and took up his quarters at my boarding-place. He was coarse and uncouth in his manners, loathsome in his appearance, and a disgusting egotist. Yet I could not repress the deepest emotions of gratitude towards him, as the instrument of Providence in accelerating the declaration of our independence. He certainly was a prominent agent in preparing the public sentiment of America for that glorious event."

A very fair estimate of the qualities in Paine's pamphlet which adapted it for popular effect is the following, by the English historian Adolphus: "His pamphlet was replete with rough, sarcastic wit, and he took, with great judgment, a correct aim at the feelings and prejudices of those whom he intended to influence. Writing to fanatics, he drew his arguments and illustrations from the holy Scriptures; his readers, having no predilection for hereditary titles, distinctions to them unknown, received with applause his invectives and sneers at hereditary monarchy; a notion of increasing opulence, and false calculations on their population and means of prosperity, had rendered them arrogant and self-sufficient, and consequently disposed them to relish the arguments he employed to prove the absurdity of subjugating a large continent to a small island on the other side of the globe. To inflame the resentment of the Americans, every act of the British government towards them was represented in the most ungracious light", etc. (Adolphus, ii. 400). A most thoroughly candid and discriminating estimate of the character and abilities, the good and the bad elements in Paine, may be found in a letter, not for publication, by Joel Barlow to Cheetham, Paine's biographer (Life and Letters of J. Barlow, by Charles Burr. Todd, 1886, pp. 236-239). Cheetham meanly published this letter.

[692] Dr. Josiah Tucker, Dean of Gloucester, sought to be an oracle alike on its commercial and political bearings. He had well informed himself about the history and condition of the colonies. He thought it a mistake that Britain had broken the power of the French, and, by withdrawing the threat of their presence over the English colonists, had left them to set up for independence. The idea that their disaffection began with the Stamp Act he repudiated, as disproved by their restiveness and truculency from their first settlements, and from the occasion there had always been for the interposition of sharp measures of government for restraining them. His opinion of their general character was highly unfavorable, but he was thoroughly satisfied with the impossibility of subduing them, and even of the inexpediency of retaining a forced relation to them. His advice was that Britain should at once give over its attempts at subjugation, and even acquiesce in leaving them to take care and govern themselves, at least till they should repent of their folly. He anticipated, as the solution of wisdom, the complete abandonment of any interference with the recusant Americans, maintaining that the methods of profitable commerce, which would secure English interests and supremacy, would be more effective than a fretting interference with them. His views—which, looked at in the retrospect, appear thoroughly sagacious—were, to most of his contemporaries, either visionary or exasperating. Tucker set forth the positive facts, that while war was most ruinous to the interests of commerce, those interests ought to serve to the security of peace. The war of England against the Spanish right of search had won no benefit, but had added sixty millions sterling to the debt of the realm. The late French war had cost ninety millions more, and by relieving the colonists of all dread of the French had encouraged them to set up for independence.

[693] For further account of Galloway as a controversialist, see post, the section on the Loyalists.

[694] Introduction to the Hist. of the Revolt, and in his preface to his Opinions of eminent lawyers. Cf. J. R. Seeley on the accountability of the old colonial system for the revolt of the American colonies. Expansion of England, lecture iv. Cf. W. T. Davis's Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth, p. 75. On religious causes, see B. Adams's Emancipation of Mass. (last chap.).

[695] Works, ii. 411, 413, iii. 45, ix. 591, 596, x. 284, 359, 394; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 300, 465; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1876.

[696] There is help in tracing the sporadic instances of the independent spirit to be found in Sparks's App. to his Washington (ii. 496), in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic (pp. 154, 245, 291, 315, 364, 428, 438, 449, 452, 469, 483, 489, 499, 506, 509); in Hutchinson's Massachusetts (iii. 134, 264, 265,—cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xix. 135); in Jefferson's Notes on Virginia; in Galloway's Examination; in Force's American Archives, 4th ser., ii. 696, and vi., index, under "Independence;" in Bancroft, vii. 301, viii. ch. 64, 65, 68; in Grahame, iv. 315; in J. C. Hamilton's Repub. of the U. S., i. 110; Palfrey's New England, i. 308, ii. 266; Mem. of Josiah Quincy, Jr., p. 228; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 242, 352; Greene's Nath. Greene, i. 122; Austin's Gerry, ch. 13; Rives's Madison, i. 108, 124.

The position of parties in Congress can be traced in Randall's Jefferson, i. 153; Read's Geo. Read; John Adams's Works, i. 220, 517, ii. 31-75, 93; Pitkin's United States, i. 362.

[697] Boston Gazette, April 15th and 29th; Penna. Evening Post, April 20th, etc. Several of these are quoted in Moore's Diary.

[698] Declaration of Independence by the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, May 1, 1776, by H. B. Dawson, N. Y., 1862; or Hist. Mag., May, 1862.

[699] Adams's Works, iv. 201; Mag. of Amer. Hist., May, 1884, p. 369; Bancroft, viii. ch. 64; Force, 4th ser., vi. 1524.

[700] N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1872, p. 26; and on the timidity of Penna., Reed's Reed, i. 199-202.

[701] Works, ii. 489, 510; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 466; Jameson's Constitutional Conventions, pp. 115, 116.

[702] No. Amer. Rev., by L. Sabine, April, 1848.

[703] Passed May 15th, and written by Edmund Pendleton,—Rives's Madison, i. 123, 130. For R. H. Lee see Life by R. H. Lee, Jr.; Sanderson's Signers; Brotherhead's Book of Signers, etc.

[704] The record is scant in the one called "Secret Domestic Journal." These are described in M. Chamberlain's Authentication, etc., p. 17.

[705] In Jefferson's Writings, i. 10, 96; Madison Papers (1841), i. 9; Elliot's Debates, vol. i. 60; Read's George Read, 226. There are other accounts in John Adams's Works (i. 227, iii. 30, 55, ix. 418). John Adams's letter to Mercy Warren (1807) is in Frothingham's Rise of the Republic (App.) and in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 465.

[706] Works, i. 229, and Mellen Chamberlain's John Adams, the Statesman of the Revolution (Boston, 1884).

[707] Bancroft, viii. ch. 65; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. ch. 41, 42; Rives's Madison, i. 125; C. F. Adams's John Adams's Works, i. 227; and a brief but clear exposition in Lecky (iii. 498). The reasons for and against the Declaration are summarized in Read's George Read, 226, 247; and Smyth (Lectures, ii. 370) gives from an English point of view the reasons which rendered separation and independence inevitable. The lives of the leading participants—Jefferson, the two Adamses, R. H. Lee, Franklin—necessarily include accounts.

[708] Pitkin's U. S., vi. 263; Penna. Journal, June 19, 1776; Read's Geo. Read, 164; John Adams, ix. 398.

[709] Niles's Weekly Register, xii. 305, etc.; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 507; his letter of June 16, 1817, in App. of Christopher Marshall's Diary, and one of Aug. 22, 1813, in Harper's Mag., 1883, p. 211.

[710] This being sent to a friend in England, thirty copies of the paper were printed under the title of The Declaration of independence, or notes on Lord Mahon's history of the American declaration of independence (London, 1855). The criticism was also printed in Littell's Living Age (xliv. 387).

[711] A copy of it with notes by John Home, the author of Douglas, is in the Philadelphia library.

[712] Cf. Morley, in his Edmund Burke, p. 125. Lord John Russell (Mem. and Corresp. of Fox, i. 152) thinks the truth was warped in charging all upon the king, while in fact "the sovereign and his people were alike prejudiced, angry, and wilful."

[713] Cf. Franklin's Works (Sparks), x. 293; Wells's S. Adams, ii. 340, 360; John Adams's Works, i. 204, ix. 627, and his Familiar Letters, 134, 137, 146; Moore's Diary, i. 208; Jones's N. Y. during the Amer. Rev., i. 63; Force's, Amer. Archives, indexes. A letter from Charleston, S. C., March 17, 1776, says, "Common Sense hath made independents of the majority of the country, and [Christopher] Gadsden is as mad with it as ever he was without it" (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xi. 254). On Paine, see Duyckinck, Allibone, Poole's Index, W. B. Reed in No. Amer. Rev., vol. lvii.; J. W. Francis' Old New York, 2d ed., p. 137; Parton's Franklin, ii. 19, 108; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., October, 1879. See further, on his influence at this time, Frothingham's Rise, etc., 476, 479; Barry's Mass., iii. 89; Randall's Jefferson, i. 137; Bancroft, orig. ed., ch. 56. On the English side, Smyth's Lectures, ii. 430, 446; Mahon, vi. 93; Ryerson, ii. ch. 32. For the Rousseauishness of the sentiments, see Lecky, iv. 51. Louis Rosenthal (Mag. of Amer. Hist., July, 1884, p. 46) thinks we need not go beyond English precedents for any of the sentiments of the day. For the bibliography of Common Sense, See Hildeburn's Issues of the Press in Penna. (1886), nos. 3,433, etc.; Sabin, xiv. p. 124; Menzies Catal., no. 1,536; Brinley, ii. p. 166. It was printed and reprinted in Philadelphia, in English and once in German, and in the same year (1776) reprinted in Salem, Newburyport, Providence, Boston, Norwich, Newport, New York, Charleston, and also in London and Edinburgh, and is included in Paine's Writings (Albany, 1791-92; Charlestown, Mass., 1824; New York, 1835, etc.) A volume of Large Additions to Common Sense (Philad. and London, 1776, etc.) was got up by Robert Bell to extend his edition over that of Paine's then publisher (Hildeburn, no. 3,439; Brinley, ii. no. 4,100). Frothingham (p.476) has a bibliographical note. It is included in a French Recueil des divers écrits of Paine (Paris, 1793).

There is a portrait of Thomas Paine by Peale, engraved by J. Watson (cf. J. C. Smith's Brit. Mez. Portraits, iv. 1529). A likeness by Romney, engraved by William Sharp, in two sizes. There is a portrait in Independence Hall, Philadelphia.

The chief answer was Plain Truth, written by Candidus (Philad. and London, 1776). In the Doc. Hist. N. Y., 4to ed., iii. 642, its authorship by Charles Inglis is thought to be established; but see Franklin Burdge in Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 59. Sabin (xv. p. 176) says it was probably by Jos. Galloway; but there is no evidence of it. Hildeburn (no. 3,345) gives reasons for assigning it to George Chalmers. It passed to a second edition.

[714] Bancroft (United States, orig. ed., ix. ch. 15; final ed., v. ch. 9), and G. W. Greene (Hist. View, p. 104) groups the several records.

[715] Rives's Madison, i. ch. 5; Madison's Writings, i. 21; Niles's Principles and Acts, 1876, p. 301; J. E. Cooke in Mag. of Amer. Hist., May, 1884; Preston's Docs. illus. Amer. Hist., p. 206, and Bill of Rights passed June 12, 1776, adopted without alteration by the Convention of 1829-30, and readopted with amendments by the Convention of 1850-51, and now readopted as passed June 12, 1776 (Richmond, 1861; also Journal of the Convention of 1861). On George Mason see R. Taylor in No. Amer. Rev., cxxviii. 148; Southern Bivouac, April, 1886. A portrait is owned by the Penna. Hist. Soc.

[716] Randall's Jefferson, i. ch. 6; Grigsby's discourse on the Convention in 1855.

[717] Cf. the account of its centennial celebration, July 30, 1877, with a view of the old senate house at Kingston, in the Centennial Celebrations of N. Y. (Albany, 1879), and J. A. Stevens's "Birth of the Empire State" in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. p. 1. Also see Ibid., April, 1887, p. 310, and Dawson's West Chester County, pp. 182, 206.

Congress, July 1, 1782, passed votes for perpetuating the observance of the day (Journals, iv. 43). A famous letter of John Adams to his wife, dated July 3d, and predicting that the future observance would be of July 2d as the essential day, was so far altered as to be dated July 5th when first printed, in order to keep the prophecy true to the custom, which by that time had designated July 4th as the day to be observed (Familiar Letters, p. 190; Works, ix. 420). A letter of Adams to Judge Dawes on this point is in Niles's Principles, etc. (1876), p. 328. Cf. Potter's American Monthly, Dec., 1875.

[718] The Report of a Constitution or Form of Government for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: agreed upon by the Committee—to be laid before the Convention of Delegates, assembled at Cambridge, on the First Day of September, A. D. 1779, and continued by adjournment to the Twenty-eighth Day of October following (Boston, 1779). Cf. also A Constitution or Frame of Government agreed upon by the Delegates of the People of the State of Massachusetts Bay, in Convention begun and held at Cambridge on the First of September, 1779, and continued by adjournment to the Second of March, 1780. To be submitted to the Revision of their Constituents &c. (Boston, 1779), and An Address of the Convention for Framing a new Constitution of Government for the State of Massachusetts Bay, to their Constituents (Boston, 1780). Cf. also Parsons's Life of Theophilus Parsons, p. 46; Brooks Adams's Emancipation of Massachusetts, p. 307.

[719] Cf. Dr. Charles Deane's report on this document in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., v. 88. The Hon. Alexander H. Bullock read a paper before the Amer. Antiq. Society in April, 1881, which was printed as The Centennial of the Mass. Constitution (Worcester, 1881), and the Proceedings of the N. E. Hist. Geneal. Society in commemoration were also printed, and embodied a report of the proceedings of the State authorities.

[720] The Articles of Confederation can be found in Elliot's Debates, i. 79; Ramsay's Rev. in So. Carolina, i. 437; Hinman's Conn. in the Rev., 103; George Tucker's United States, i. App., p. 636; L. H. Porter's Outlines of the Constitutional Hist. of the U. S., p. 48; Walker's Statesman's Manual (New York, 1849), i. p. 1; New Hampshire State Papers, viii. 747; N. C. Towle's Hist. and Analysis of the Constitution of the U. S. (Boston, 1871), p. 328; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 859; H. W. Preston's Documents illustrating Amer. Hist. (1886), p. 218, etc. For the debates and contemporary and later views, see John Adams's Works, i. 268, ii. 492, ix. 467; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 315; Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. 473, 480; Bancroft, ix. 436; Hildreth, iii. 266; Parton's Franklin, ii. 125; Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 569; Pitkin's United States; Story (i. 209) and Curtis (i. 114) on the Constitution; Elliot's Debates, i. 70; Von Holst's Constitutional Hist. of the U. S., ch. 1; Rives's Madison, i. ch. 10; Greene's Hist. View, 14; Draper's Civil War, i. 265, etc.

[721] Mother of Lindley Murray, the grammarian.

[722] ... "On the 2^nd of November 1776 I sacrificed", says he, "all I was worth in the world to the service of my King & country, and joined the then Lord Percy, brought in with me the Plans of Fort Washington, by which Plans that Fortress was taken by his Majesty's Troops the 16 instant, together with 2700 Prisoners and Stores & Ammunition to the amount of 1800 Pounds. At the same time, I may with Justice affirm, from my knowledge of the Works, I saved the Lives of many of his Majesty's subjects. These, Sir, are facts well known to every General officer which was there." . . . . . . . . .

[723] For this New Jersey campaign see chapter v.—Ed.

[724] Every true American should be most profoundly grateful that this incompetent general was placed at the head of the British army, not for his own merits, but because of his connection with royalty through his grandmother's frailty. His mother was the issue of George I. and Sophia Kilmansegge.

[725] After Germain had written out Howe's orders, he left them to be "fair copied", and went to Kent on a visit, forgetting on his return to sign them; consequently they were pigeon-holed till May 18th, and did not reach Howe till August 16th, after he had left New York upon his expedition to the Chesapeake, and when it was too late to effect a junction with Burgoyne. Cf. Fitzmaurice's Shelburne, i. 358; Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 233); Jones's N. Y. during the Revolution, i. App. p. 696.—Ed.

[726] In ridicule of this appeal, Burke indulged in an illustration which delighted the House of Commons. "Suppose", he exclaimed, "there was a riot on Tower Hill. What would the keeper of his Majesty's lions do? Would he not fling open the dens of the wild beasts, and then address them thus: 'My gentle lions—my humane bears—my tender-hearted hyenas, go forth! But I exhort you, as you are Christians and members of civil society, to take care not to hurt any man, woman, or child.'"

[727] The familiar portrait of Schuyler is one by Trumbull, both in civil and military dress, in engravings by Thomas Kelly, H. B. Hall, and others. Cf. Lossing's Life of Schuyler, vol. i.; Irving's Washington, vol. ii. 40; Stone's Campaigns of Burgoyne, p. 38; Centennial Celebrations of N. Y. (Albany, 1878); C. H. Jones's Campaign for the Conquest of Canada in 1776; The Amer. Portrait Gallery, etc.

G. W. Schuyler (Colonial New York, ii. 253), in his account of General Philip Schuyler, points out some errors of a personal nature, into which Lossing and Judge Jones have fallen, respecting Schuyler's private history. For the Schuyler family, see N. Y. Geneal. and Biog. Record, April, 1874.

Schuyler's house in Albany, at which he entertained Burgoyne after his surrender, is shown in Lossing's Field-Book, i. 304; his Hudson River, p. 129; Mag. of Amer. History, July, 1884. Cf. Hours at Home, ix. 464. Of Mrs. Schuyler, the hostess, see account in S. B. Wister and Agnes Irwin's Worthy Women of our First Century (Philad., 1877). The mansion was sold in October, 1884, to be removed. A plan of Albany during this period (dated 1770) is in the Doc. Hist. N. Y., iii. 697.—Ed.

[728] The total losses in this campaign of the Anglo-British army were: British prisoners, 2,442; foreign prisoners, 2,198; General Burgoyne and staff officers (including six members of Parliament), 12; sent to Canada, 1,100; sick and wounded, 598; making the total surrendered, October 17, 1777, to be 6,350. Then there were taken prisoners before the surrender, 400; deserters, 300; lost at Bennington, 1,220; killed between September 17 and October 17, 1777, 600; taken at Ticonderoga, 413; killed at Oriskany, 300; giving an entire loss of 3,233,—which, with those surrendered, make a total loss of 9,583.

Besides the personnel, there were lost in the campaign, 6 pieces of cannon at Bennington; 2 pieces and 4 royals at Fort Stanwix; 400 set of harness; a number of ammunition wagons and horses; 5,000 stand of arms; 37 pieces of brass cannon, implements and stores complete, camp equipage, etc., etc.

[729] Captain John Montressor, a British "Chief Engineer of America" in the Revolution, who was with Putnam under Colonel Bradstreet in 1764, goes so far as to intimate (very likely without warrant) a still stronger reason for the general's inefficiency at Long Island and in the Hudson Highlands. In his journal (page 136), published by the New York Historical Society, 1882, speaking of the venality of the American "Rebel Generals", he says "Even Israel Putnam, of Connecticut, might have been bought, to my certain knowledge, for one dollar per day."

[730] Life and Times of General Philip Schuyler, by Benson J. Lossing, N. Y., 1872; Battles of the American Revolution, by General Henry B. Carrington, N. Y., 1876; Life and Correspondence of Lieutenant-General John Burgoyne, by Edward B. de Fonblanque, London, 1876; Burgoyne and the Northern Campaign, by Ellen Hardin Walworth, 1877; The Campaign of Lieutenant-General John Burgoyne and the Expedition of Lieut.-Col. Barry St. Leger, by William L. Stone, 1877; Addresses and Papers upon Major-General Philip Schuyler and the Burgoyne Campaign, by General J. Watts de Peyster, published variously, 1877-83; Centennial Celebration of the State of New York, 1879; Life of Major-General Benedict Arnold—his Patriotism and Treason, by Isaac N. Arnold, 1880; Sir John Johnson's Orderly Book, annotated by William L. Stone, with an introduction on his Life by General J. Watts de Peyster, and Sketch of the Tories or Loyalists by Colonel T. Bailey Myers, 1882; Hadden's Journal and Orderly Book, annotated by General Horatio Rogers, Providence, 1881; The Hessians in the Revolution, by Edward J. Lowell, 1884.

[731] Correspondence and Remarks upon Bancroft's History of the Northern Campaign of 1777, and the Character of Major-General Philip Schuyler, by George L. Schuyler; The Life and Times of Major-General Philip Schuyler, by Benson J. Lossing, LL. D.

[732] The Articles of Oct. 16, 1777, were as follows, viz.:—

"I. The troops, under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne, to march out of their camp with the honors of war and the artillery of the intrenchments, to the verge of the river where the old fort stood, where the arms and artillery are to be left; the arms to be piled by word of command from their own officers.

"II. A free passage to be granted to the army, under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne, to Great Britain, on condition of not serving again in North America during the present contest; and the port of Boston is assigned for the entry of transports to receive the troops whenever General Howe shall so order.

"III. Should any cartel take place, by which the army under General Burgoyne, or any part of it, may be exchanged, the foregoing article to be void as far as such exchange shall be made.

"IV. The army under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne to march to Massachusetts Bay, by the easiest, most expeditious, and convenient route; and to be quartered in, near, or as convenient as possible to Boston, that the march of the troops may not be delayed when transports arrive to receive them.

"V. The troops to be supplied on their march, and during their being in quarters, with provisions by General Gates's orders, at the same rate of rations as the troops of his own army; and if possible, the officers' horses and cattle are to be supplied with forage at the usual rates.

"VI. All officers to retain their carriages, bat-horses, and other cattle, and no baggage to be molested or searched; Lieutenant-General Burgoyne giving his honor that there are no public stores secreted therein. Major-General Gates will of course take the necessary measures for the due performance of this article. Should any carriages be wanted during the march, for the transportation of officers' baggage, they are, if possible, to be supplied by the country at the usual rates.

"VII. Upon the march, and during the time the army shall remain in quarters in Massachusetts Bay, the officers are not, as far as circumstances will admit, to be separated from their men. The officers are to be quartered according to rank, and are not to be hindered from assembling their men for roll-call and other necessary purposes of regularity.

"VIII. All corps whatever of General Burgoyne's army, whether composed of sailors, bateau-men, artificers, drivers, independent companies, and followers of the army, of whatever country, shall be included in the fullest sense and utmost extent of the above articles, and comprehended in every respect as British subjects.

"IX. All Canadians, and persons belonging to the Canadian establishment, consisting of sailors, bateau-men, artificers, drivers, independent companies, and many other followers of the army, who come under no particular description, are to be permitted to return there; they are to be conducted immediately by the shortest route to the first British port on Lake George, are to be supplied with provisions in the same manner as the other troops, and are to be bound by the same condition of not serving during the present contest in North America.

"X. Passports to be immediately granted for three officers, not exceeding the rank of captains, who shall be appointed by Lieutenant-General Burgoyne, to carry despatches to Sir William Howe, Sir Guy Carleton, and to Great Britain by way of New York; and Major-General Gates engages the public faith that these despatches shall not be opened. These officers are to set out immediately after receiving their despatches, and are to travel the shortest routes and in the most expeditious manner.

"XI. During the stay of the troops in Massachusetts Bay, the officers are to be admitted on parole, and are to be allowed to wear their side arms.

"XII. Should the army under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne find it necessary to send for their clothing and other baggage to Canada, they are to be permitted to do it in the most convenient manner, and the necessary passports granted for that purpose.

"XIII. These Articles are to be mutually signed, and exchanged to-morrow morning at nine o'clock, and the troops under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne are to march out of their intrenchments at three o'clock in the afternoon.

(Signed) Horatio Gates, Major-General.
(Signed) J. Burgoyne, Lieutenant-General.

"Saratoga, October 16th, 1777."

[733] A letter of Glover about the march, dated Cambridge, Jan. 27, 1778, is in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. iii.). The line of their march is shown in Anburey's Travels. Mrs. Hannah Winthrop's letter, Nov. 11, 1777, describing the entry of Burgoyne's army into Cambridge, is cited in Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Revolution, i. 96. A journal of the Northern campaign of 1777 (Oct. 6th to Nov. 9th), at which last date the writer "attended Mr. Burgoyne to Boston", is among the Langdon Papers, copied in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.). The commander of the Eastern department at this time was Gen. Heath (Heath's Memoirs, p. 134; Hist. Mag., iii. 170; Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 183). Letters of Burgoyne to Heath are in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., 1885, p. 482, etc. A letter of Burgoyne (copy) to the president of Congress, dated at Cambridge, Feb. 11, 1778, is in Letters and Papers, 1777-1780 (MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc.). Burgoyne preferred charges against Capt. David Henley, an officer of the guard, for cruel behavior towards the prisoners. He was tried and acquitted. An Account of the Proceedings of a Court Martial held at Cambridge by order of Maj. General Heath for the trial of Col. David Henley, taken in short hand by an officer who was present, was published in London, 1778. The trial lasted from Jan. 20 to Feb. 25, 1778. The proceedings were also printed in Boston (Brinley Catal., nos. 4,024-25). The trial is epitomized in P. W. Chandler's Amer. Criminal Trials (ii. 59). There are jottings about the influence of the prisoners in Boston at the time in Ezekiel Price's diary in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., October, 1865. The orders of Burgoyne issued in Cambridge are given in Hadden's Journal. Gen. Phillips commanded the convention troops after Burgoyne's departure. There are letters of Phillips in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., July, 1885, p. 91. The parole which the English and German officers signed, to keep within certain limits of territory, is in the Boston Public Library (Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 878, and Burgoyne's Orderly-Book). There are details of their life in Cambridge in Schlözer's Briefwechsel (iv. 341); the memoirs of Riedesel and Madame Riedesel; and in Eelking's Hülfstruppen. Cf. Lossing's Field-Book; Drake's Landmarks of Middlesex; and Mrs. Ellet's Domestic Hist. of the Amer. Rev. (N. Y., 1850), p. 85. A MS. copy of Nathan Bowen's Book of General Orders is in the Boston Public Library.—Ed.

[734] Bancroft, orig. ed., ix. 466, x. 126. Cf. Lafayette's Mémoires, i. 21; Hildreth's United States, iii. 237, 255; Lowell's Hessians, ch. 12.—Ed.

[735] Cf. also Geo. W. Greene in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. 231; De Lancey in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 698.—Ed.

[736] Hadden's Journal, p. 397.

[737] Sparks, Washington, v. 144.

[738] Journals of Congress, ii. p. 18. Cf. Jones, N. Y. during the Rev. War, App. p. 699. Cf. further in Journals of Congress, ii. 343, 397; Pennsylvania Archives, vi. 162.—Ed.

[739] Lafayette told Sparks that there was the strongest circumstantial evidence that the British intended to take the troops, not to England, but to New York, the vessels not being provisioned for an Atlantic voyage, and that they claimed justification in this purpose because the Americans had themselves broken the convention. He also added that the British government would not ratify the convention, because they could not keep faith with rebels.

Much of the correspondence about the detention is copied in the Sparks MSS., no. lviii., part 2. The English files are in the War Office, London, in the collection "Quebec and Canada, 1776-1780;" and other papers are in the Headquarters or Carleton Papers.—Ed.

[740] There is a map of their route and a view of their encampment at this place in Anburey's Travels, which last is reproduced in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 552. Cf. also the print as published by Wm. Lane, London, Jan. 1, 1789 (Catal. Cab. Mass. Hist. Soc., p. 89, no. 612). The command of the encampment in Virginia was given to Col. Theodorick Bland, Jr., and copies of some of his papers are in the Sparks MSS. (no. xli.). The Bland Papers, edited by Chas. Campbell, were published at Petersburg, 1840-43. Accounts of the troops' sojourn in Virginia are given by Anburey, Riedesel, and Eelking. Cf. also Jefferson's Writings (i. 212); lives of Jefferson, by Tucker (i. ch. 5), Randall (i. 232, 285), and Parton (p. 222); Howison's Virginia (ii. 250); Lowell's Hessians. On October 26, Jefferson had urged upon Washington the removal of the convention troops, as it might not be possible to protect them in case of an invasion of Virginia (Sparks MSS., lxvi.). In November the English troops were removed to Fort Frederick. Large numbers deserted (Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., ii. 324).—Ed.

[741] By this exercise of sovereignty, the government of the United States unhesitatingly repudiated Major-General W. T. Sherman's agreement with Lieutenant-General Joseph E. Johnston, for the surrender of the Confederate Army, April 13, 1865, at Durham Station, North Carolina.

[742] "It matters little what terms are granted, if it be not intended to fulfil them." Mahon, vi. 278. Cf. Lecky, iv. 96.—Ed.

[743] 4 Force's Amer. Archives, vol. iii., iv., v., and vi.; Sparks's Washington (iv. 416); his Correspondence of the Rev. (i. 377); Heath's Memoirs, 47; Boynton's West Point; Duer's Stirling; Lossing's Schuyler, and Field-Book (ii. 135); and particularly Edward Manning Ruttenber's Obstructions to the navigation of Hudson's River; embracing the minutes of the secret committee, appointed by the Provincial convention of New York, July 16, 1776, and other original documents relating to the subject. Together with papers relating to the beacons (Albany, 1860), being no. 5 of Munsell's Historical Series.

[744] Among the Sparks maps at Cornell University are two sheets showing the Hudson River with soundings, in part at high tide and in part at half tide. They are each thirty inches long, and appear to be by the same draftsman. One of them is indorsed: "Drawn by the request and under the inspection of the Commissioners of Fortifications in the Highlands, Province of New York, by John Grenell." One shows Haverstraw Bay and Tappan Bay to a point above Dobbs Ferry, and indicates the site of Tarrytown. The other extends from Stony Point to "Polyphemes Island", below Newburgh. Constitution Island is called "Martler's Rock;" and beside Bunn's house, there is indicated at that point the block house, a "curtain fronting the river, mounting fourteen cannon", the wharf, barracks, storehouse, and commissioner's room, and landing place. West Point is opposite, unoccupied, and Moore's house is above. Fort Montgomery and a higher battery is delineated at "Poop Lopes Kill", and from it along the river towards West Point is the inscription: "By good information there is a waggon road from Poop Lopes Kill to West Point."

Another sheet contains "a plan of a fort proposed on the east of Fort Constitution, laid down by scale of twenty feet to an inch per Isaac Nicoll", and indorsed "Received May 10, 1776." Another has a distant view of fortifications, topping a range of hills, and is marked "Fort Montgomery." It is not clear what is meant by it.

There is in the same collection "A rough map of Fort Montgomery, showing the situation on Puplopes [sic] Point; ground plot of the buildings, etc., etc., Pr. T. P. No. 2", which is indorsed also "Plan of the works at Fort Montgomery, May 31, 1776, no. 2." Mr. Sparks has written upon the original draft, "For an explanation see Ld. Stirling's letter to Washington, dated June 1, 1776."

There are likewise two plans in colors among the Sparks maps at Cornell University, marked "No. 1" and "No. 3", which seem to have been made in 1776. The first shows the Hudson River from Stony Point to Constitution Island. West Point, which is opposite, is not named. It bears no indorsement and no names, but in one corner is a profile view of the bank in the neighborhood apparently of Peekskill. The works on Constitution Island are indicated, and Sparks has noted on it, "See Ld. Stirling's letter to Washington, June 1, 1776." The other plan shows the neighborhood of Fort Constitution (opposite West Point) on a larger scale, a sketch of which, reduced, is given herewith and marked "Constitution Island, 1776." Cf. the map from the American Archives in Boynton's West Point, p. 26.

[745] For this period see 4 Force, vol. v.; Heath's Memoirs; Sparks's Gouverneur Morris (i. ch. 5); lives of Putnam; Almon's Remembrancer; histories of New York, city and province. There is much of detail with references in Dawson's Westchester County, during the American Revolution (Morrisania, 1886), p. 159, etc., particularly as respects the political influence of the provincial congress and the treatment of suspected persons. This book, for the period covered by it, is one of the thoroughest pieces of work respecting the history of the Revolution; but it is unfortunately marred by a captious and carping spirit, so characteristic of Dawson's historical work. This monograph is a separate issue of a portion of a History of Westchester County, by several hands.

[746] Johnston's Campaign of 1776, p. 91. This lighthouse was built in 1762. There is a view of it in the N. Y. Mag., Aug., 1790.

[747] Persifer Frazer to his wife, May 23-June 29, 1776, in Sparks MSS. (no. xxi.). General Glover's letters in Upham's Glover. Others in 5 Force, ii. Colonel Joseph Hodgkin's in Ipswich Antiquarian Papers, vols. ii. and iii. Letter of Samuel Kennedy in June, in Penna. Mag. of Hist. (1884, p. 111). Cf. Diary of the Moravian Ewald Gustav Schaukirk, 1775-1783, in Ibid., x. 418. In July, the statue of George III. in Bowling Green was pulled down. P. O. Hutchinson's Gov. Hutchinson, ii. 167. George Gibbs's account of the statue in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1844, p. 168.

[748] Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. ch. 6. Some of the British frigates ascending the Hudson in July, an attempt was made to destroy them. Worcester Mag., i. 353; Hist. Mag., May, 1866, Suppl., p. 84. Dawson (Westchester County, 192, 207, 213, 214, 215, 216) goes into detail, faithfully citing all the authorities.

[749] Cf. Bellin's Petit Atlas Maritime (1764), vol. i.

[750] Cf. a MS. map by John Montresor, surveyed by order of General Gage, and dated Sept. 18, 1766, which is among the Faden maps (no. 96) in the library of Congress. A plan by Montresor in 1775 of New York et Environs, with the harbor in the corner in much detail, measuring about 48 inches wide by 22 high, is among the Rochambeau maps (no. 23) in the same library.

[751] A Draught of New York harbor from the Hook to New York town, by Mark Tiddeman, was issued by Mount and Page in London, and is reproduced in Valentine's New York City Manual, 1855. (Cf. also Ibid., 1861, p. 628.) There is another (1776) in the North American Pilot, no. 24, which was published separately as A Chart of the Entrance of Hudson's River from Sandy Hook to New York, with the banks, etc. (London, Sayer and Bennett, June 1, 1776). One was made in 1779 by Robert Erskine; and another is contained in the Neptune Americo-septentrional, no. 19.

A map of New York and Staten Island, with intervening waters, made by order of General Clinton in 1781, is noted in the King's Maps (Brit. Mus.), ii. 355. Cf. N. Y. City Manual, 1870, p. 845. A MS. draft of Long Island Sound and the entrance of New York harbor is among the Faden maps (no. 54) in the library of Congress.

[752] Known as the Hickey Plot. It is detailed in the Minutes of the trial and examination of certain persons in the Province of New York, charged with being engaged in a conspiracy against the authority of the Congress and the liberties of America (London, 1786,—Menzies, no. 1,400), which was reprinted (100 copies) as Minutes of Conspiracy against the liberties of America, at Philadelphia in 1865. The ringleader was one of Washington's life guard, Thomas Hickey, who was hanged in June, 1776. David Matthews, the mayor of New York, was implicated, and Governor Tryon was charged with a knowledge of the plot. Matthews was arrested and confined in Connecticut (Orderly-book of Sir John Johnson, 214, 215). Cf. N. Y. in the Rev. (papers in N. Y. Merc. Library), p. 66; Irving's Washington, ii. 232; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xxiii. 205; Johnston's Campaign of 1776, Doc. 129.

[753] N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Jan., 1866, p. 69.

[754] Sparks's Washington, iii. 451; Journals of Congress, June 3 and July 19, 1776; Journal of Algernon Roberts on an expedition to Paulus Hook, in Sparks MSS., no. xlviii.; Johnston's Campaign of 1776, p. 113. The New Jersey militia were acting in concert under Livingston. There is a journal of a Lieut. Bangs among them, from April to July. N. Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., viii.

[755] Cf. letter, Aug. 4, from Staten Island, in Lady Georgiana Cavendish's Mem. of Admiral Gambier, copied in Hist. Mag., v. 68.

[756] Naval Chronicle, xxxii.

[757] Greene's Greene, i. 158.

[758] Col. Moses Little's, beginning April 30, 1776, belonging to Benj. Hale, of Newburyport, Mass., including orders of Greene and Sullivan; the latter's orders of Aug. 25 are in Hist. Mag., ii. 354, and Col. Wm. Douglas's, belonging to Benj. Douglas of Middletown, Conn. That of Capt. Samuel Sawyer, Aug. 22-Nov. 27, is in the Mass. Archives. Cf. Journals of the New York provincial congress. Greene's apprehensions as to the situation on Long Island in the early summer of 1776 can be got from his letters in Greene's Life of Greene, ii. 420, etc.

[759] 5 Force, i. 1244, ii. 196; Sparks, iv. 59; Field, 383; Johnston, Docs., p. 32.

[760] Sparks, iv. 513; Dawson, i. 150.

[761] Field, 369; Dawson, i. 156; Penna. Hist. Soc. Bull., i. no. 8; Sparks, iv. 517.

[762] Gen. Parsons to John Adams, Aug. 29 and Oct. 8, in Johnston. Smallwood's, Oct. 12, in 5 Force, ii. 1011; Field, 386; Dawson, i. 152; Ridgeley's Annals of Annapolis, App. Stirling to Washington in Dawson, i. 151; Duer's Stirling, 163; Sparks, iv. 515. Col. Haslet's in Sparks, iv. 516; Dawson, i. 152. Col. Chambers's, Sept. 3, in Chambersburg in the Colony and the Revolution; Field, 399. Col. Gunning Bedford's and Cæsar Rodney's in Read's George Read, 170. Letters of Pennsylvania soldiers in 2 Penna. Archives, x. 305.

[763] Col. Samuel J. Atlee's in 2 Penna. Archives, i. 509; 5 Force, i. 1251; Field, 352; Life of Joseph Reed, i. 413. Samuel Miles's, in 2 Penna. Archives, i. 517.

[764] Graydon's Memoirs, ch. 6; Mem. of Col. Benj. Talmadge (N. Y., 1858), cited in Johnston. James Sullivan Martin's Narrative of some of the adventures of a revolutionary soldier (Hallowell, 1830, p. 219), cited in Field, 507. Brodhead in 1 Penna. Archives, v. 21, cited by Johnston. Hezekiah Munsell's account in Stiles's Ancient Windsor, Conn., 714. Cf. further, N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1875, p. 439; Onderdonk's Rev. Incidents in Queens County; S. Barclay's Personal Recollections of the American Revolution (? fiction).

[765] Freeman's Journal and Penna. Journal, quoted in Moore's Diary, i. 295-297. Dr. Stiles's diary, giving the news as it reached him, is cited by Field and Johnston.

[766] Gazette Extraordinary, Oct. 10, also in 5 Force, i. 1255-56; Naval Chronicle (1841); Field, 378; Moore's Diary, 300; Dawson, i. 154. Howe's letters during this campaign are in the Sparks MSS., no. lviii.

[767] Israel Mauduit's Remarks upon Gen. Howe's account of his proceedings on Long Island (London, 1778). Howe defended himself in his Narrative of his Conduct in America. Field (p. 460) gives the parliamentary testimony, and the examination of Howe's statements (p. 471) from the Detail and Conduct of the Amer. War (3d ed., 1780, p. 17). There were mutual criminations by Howe and the war minister, Lord George Germain. Cf. Stedman, i. 193; Smyth's Lectures on Modern Hist. (Bohn ed., ii. 463-65); Parliamentary Reg., xi. 340; Almon's Debates, xii.; Almon's Remembrancer, iii. A loyalist's view of the opportunity lost in not forcing the American lines is in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 112. Johnston (p. 185) points out how the English did the real fighting, while the Hessians joined in the pursuit. Major James Wemys, an officer of the British army serving in America, dying in New York in 1834-35, left papers, which were copied by Sparks while in the hands of Rev. Wm. Ware (Sparks MSS., xx.). They include his estimates of various generals of the British army; strictures on the peculations of some of them; including criticisms of Howe's conduct in the fights at Long Island, Whiteplains, and Trenton.

[768] Naval Chronicle, xxxii., 271. Field (p. 407) gives G. S. Rainer's account from the journals of Collier. Cf. Ithiel Town's Particular Services (N. Y., 1835).

[769] Evelyns in America, pp. 266, 325. Lushington's Lord Harris, cited by Field (p. 405). A letter of Earl Percy, Newtown, on Long Island, Sept. 1, in which he says that the English loss was 300, the American 3,000, with 1,500 privates, beside officers, taken prisoners, and "he flatters himself that this campaign will put a total end to the war" (MSS. in Boston Pub. Library). The Hist. MSS. Com., 2d Report, p. 48, shows a letter of Sir John Wrottesley to his wife, dated Long Island, Sept. 3.

[770] Eelking's Hülfstruppen, ch. 1; Lowell's Hessians, p. 58; and the appendix of Field. There is a French view in Hilliard d'Auberteuil's Essais, vol. ii.

[771] Bancroft made some adverse criticisms of Greene in his orig. ed., ix. ch. 4. George W. Greene replied in a pamphlet, which he has reprinted in his Life of Greene, vol. ii., in which (book ii. ch. 7) he gives his own version of the battle. Cf. Hist. Mag., Feb. and Aug., 1867.

[772] Respecting the retreat, Washington had ordered Heath (5 Force, i. 1211) to send down boats from up the Hudson, which he did (Heath, Memoirs, 57). Washington's reasons for a retreat are told in a letter of Joseph Reed, Aug. 30th, to Wm. Livingston, given in Sedgwick's Livingston, 201. (Cf. Sparks, Washington, iv. 81.) Johnston collates the authorities upon the reasons (p. 215), and thinks Gordon's account the most probable, that the American lines were unfit to stand siege operations, which Howe had begun. The proceedings of the council of war (Aug. 29th) which decided upon the retreat are in 5 Force, i. 1246, and in Onderdonk's Rev. incidents in Suffolk County, p. 161.

Bancroft (final revision, v. 38) and Wm. B. Reed (Life of Jos. Reed, i. 121-126) are at issue upon the point whether the lifting of the fog, which revealed the purpose of the English ships to get between Brooklyn and New York, took place before the retreat was ordered, or after it was nearly over. Bancroft's witnesses seem conclusive against the claim of W. B. Reed that such a revelation induced Joseph Reed to urge the retreat upon Washington (note in Bancroft, orig. ed., ix. 106; final revision, v. 38). Joseph Reed's own account is in Sedgwick's Livingston, 203. Cf. Johnston, ch. 5. Col. Tallmadge (Memoirs, p. 11) says that Washington never received the credit which was due to him for his wise and fortunate retreat from Long Island.

[773] Dawson (Westchester Co., 224) puts the British army at over forty thousand men when the campaign opened. Beatson's Naval and Mil. Memoirs, vi.; 5 Force, i.; Bancroft, orig. ed., ix. 85-90; final revision, v. 28; Johnston, 195-201, and Docs., p. 167, 176, 180; De Lancey in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., 600. There is a MS. on the prisoners taken noted in the Bushnell Catal. (1883), no. 791. Lecky (England in the XVIIIth Century, iv. 2, N. Y. ed.) says: "The English and American authorities are hopelessly disagreed about the exact numbers engaged, and among the Americans themselves there are very great differences. Compare Ramsay, Bancroft, Stedman, and Stanhope, [Mahon]."

There has been a controversy over the death of Gen. Woodhull, who was captured a few days later, and killed, as was alleged, while trying to escape. Cf. 5 Force, ii., iii. (index); De Lancey in Jones, ii. chap. 20, and p. 593; Johnston's Observations on Jones, p. 73; Luther R. Marsh's Gen. Woodhull and his Monument (N. Y., 1848); Hist. Mag., v. 140, 172, 204, 229; Henry Onderdonk, Jr.'s Narrative of Woodhull's Capture and death (1848).

[774] Mercy Warren's Amer. Revolution; Bancroft, ix. ch. 4 and 5; final revision, v. ch. 2; Lossing's Field-Book, ii.; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. ch. 20, etc.

[775] Lives of Washington by Marshall, ii. ch. 7; by Sparks, i. 190; by Irving, ii. ch. 31, 32; of Sullivan by Amory, p. 25; of Stirling by Duer; of Olney by Williams; of Burr by Parton, i. ch. 8, etc.

[776] Most elaborate of such is R. H. Stiles's Hist. of Brooklyn (p. 242). Cf. Thompson's Long Island; Strong's Flatbush; Henry Onderdonk, Jr.'s Kings County. Letters of Onderdonk to Sparks in 1844, on the battle, are in the Sparks MSS., no. xlviii. There is a paper by the Rev. J. W. Chadwick, of Brooklyn, in Harper's Mag., liii. p. 333. Cf. Hollister's Connecticut, ii. ch. 11. A personal narrative of Thomas Richards, a Connecticut soldier, is in United Service (Aug., 1884), xii. 216.

[777] The earliest special treatment is Samuel Ward in Battle of Long Island (1839; also see Knickerbocker Mag., xiii. 279). Field's monograph makes vol. ii. of the Memoirs of the Long Island Hist. Soc., and nearly half the volume is an appendix of documents. The Campaign of 1776 round New York and Brooklyn (Brooklyn, 1878), by Henry P. Johnston, makes vol. iii. of the same series, and chapter 4 is given to the subject, and his narrative is well fortified by documentary proofs. In placing the responsibility of the defeat, he takes issue (p. 192) with Bancroft, Field, and Dawson, who charge it upon Putnam. Dawson (Battles, i. 143) gives numerous references. Carrington's Battles of the Amer. Rev. (ch. 31 and 32).

[778] Annual Reg., xix. ch. 5; Parliamentary Reg., xiii.; The Impartial Hist. of the late War; Andrews's Late War, ch. 21; Stedman's Amer. War, ch. 6; Bissett's Reign of George III., i. 401, also speaks of the retreat as "masterly;" Knight's Pop. Hist. England, cited in Field, 447, and Mahon's.

[779] John Adams's Works, ix. 438; letters of Franklin and Morris to Silas Deane, Oct. 1, 1776, noted in Calendar of Lee MSS., p. 7; Stuart's Jona. Trumbull; Sedgwick's Wm. Livingston, 201; Donne's Corresp. of George III. and Lord North, vol. ii.; Rockingham and his Contemp., ii. 297; Russell's Life of Fox, and Memorials and Corresp. of Fox, i. 145; Walpole's Last Journals, ii. 70.

[780] This map of Hill's is reproduced in Valentine's Manual, 1857, and in Dunlap's New York (vol. ii.).

[781] Campaign of 1776, p. 84.

[782] Letters from America, p. 429.

[783] Smith tells us that in 1766 a line of palisades, with block-houses, still stretched across New York Island, near the line of the present Chambers St., which had been built in the French war, at a cost of about £8,000. Crèvecœur described the town in 1772, and his description is translated in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 748. Cf. Dawson's account in his New York during the Revolution. There are various views of the town during the revolutionary period. One from the southeast and another from the southwest, by P. Canot, 1768, are reëngraved in Hough's translation of Pouchot (ii. 85, 88). Cf. Doc. Hist. N. Y., octavo, ii. 43. There are others in the travels of Sandby and Kalm. See Moore's Diary of the Amer. Rev., p. 311; Valentine's Manual, 1852, p. 176; Appleton's Journal, xii. 464. A view of New York as seen from the bay, found among Lord Rawdon's papers, is given in Harper's Mag., xlvii. p. 23. Gaine's N. Y. Pocket Almanac, 1772, has "Prospect of the City of N. Y." A bird's-eye view of the island, as seen from above Fort Washington in 1781, is in Valentine's Manual, 1854. This last publication contains various views of revolutionary landmarks, a of Hellgate (1850,—cf. London Mag., April, 1778); the Battery and Bowling Green (1858, p. 633); the City Hall (1856, p. 32; 1866, p. 547); the Beekman house, headquarters of Sir William Howe in Sept., 1776 (1861, p. 496,—see also Gay, Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 503); the Rutgers mansion (1858, p. 607); Lord Stirling's house (1854, p. 410); Alexander Hamilton's house (1858, p. 468). Knyphausen's quarters in Wall St. are shown in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., June, 1883, p. 409.

[784] Gordon shows this. Cf. Putnam's letter to Trumbull, Sept. 12, 1776.

[785] Correspondence of the Provincial Congress of N. Y.; Sparks's Washington, iv.; Memoirs of Chas. Lee; Dawson's N. Y. during the Rev., p. 82; Booth's New York, p. 493; Irving's Washington, ii. ch. 33; Johnston's Campaign of 1776, ch. 5; Carrington's Battles, ch. 33, and his paper in Bay State Monthly, March, 1884. An American orderly-book, Sept. 1-13, is among the Northumberland Papers, Alnwick Castle (Third Rept. Hist. MSS. Commission, p. 124). A copy of George Clinton's reasons against evacuating is in the Sparks MSS., no. xlix., vol. i. p. 10. Bancroft (ix. 175; final revision, v. 69) shows how Stedman and W. B. Reed are in error in supposing that Lee's counsels prevailed in ordering a retreat.

[786] Cf. Washington's views, 5 Force, ii. 495, and Niles's Principles and Acts, etc. (1876 ed.), p. 464. "As the army now stands", said Knox in 1776, "it is only a receptacle for ragamuffins" (Drake's Knox, 32). Cf. Greene's Life of Greene, i. ch. 6. The British army was perhaps nearly double in numbers. On the extent of the opposing armies, see 5 Force, i. and ii.; Carrington's Battles, p. 224; Johnston's Campaign of 1776, ch. 3; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. War, i. App. 599. On Oct. 3d a committee of Congress reported on the condition of the army around New York (5 Force, ii. 1385), and Ibid. (iii. 449) there is a return of the entire army made Nov. 3d.

[787] Original sources: Evidence of the Court of Inquiry in 5 Force, ii, 1251; Washington to Congress in Sparks, iv. 94; Greene to Cooke, Sept. 17th, in 5 Force, ii. 370 (cf. Green's Greene, i. 216); Cæsar Rodney to Read, Sept. 18th, in Life of George Read, 191; Smallwood, Oct. 12th, in 5 Force, ii. 1013; letter of Nicholas Fish, Sept. 19th, in Hist. Mag., xiii. 33; letter, Sept. 24th, in Evelyns in America; Major Baurmeister's account, Sept. 24th, in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Jan., 1877, p. 33 (Johnston, p. 95),—a MS. owned by Bancroft; Rufus Putnam's Memoirs (Johnston, p. 136); Heath's Memoirs, p. 60; Jas. S. Martin's Narrative (Johnston, Doc., p. 81). Cf. note on the authorities in Bancroft, orig. ed., ix. p. 122; also Gordon, ii. 327. Later accounts: Johnston, pp. 92, 232; De Lancey in Jones, App. p. 604; Irving's Washington, ii. 333.

Captain Nathan Hale, of the Connecticut troops, had been sent over to Long Island to discover the intentions of the enemy; but, being apprehended, was hanged as a spy, Sept. 22, 1776. Cf. Hinman's Connecticut during the Rev., 82, and other histories of Connecticut; I. W. Stuart's Life of N. Hale, Hartford, 1856, and New York, 1874; Memoir of N. Hale, New Haven, 1844; Lossing's Two Spies (N. Y., 1886); Moore's Diary of the Rev., p. 314; Songs and Ballads of the Rev., 130; Worcester Soc. of Antiquity Proc., 1879; H. P. Johnston in Harper's Monthly, June, 1880 (vol. lxi. p. 53); Greene's Hist. View, 338; and references in Poole's Index, p. 566. Congress voted him a monument. Poore's Descriptive Catal., etc., index, p. 1294.

[788] See the plan in Johnston's Campaign of 1776 (ch. vi. p. 259), with topography based on Randall's map and old surveys.

[789] There is in the N. Y. Hist. Soc. a contemporary view of Harlem from Morrisania (1765), drawn from an original in the British Museum, and this is reproduced in Valentine's Manual, 1863, p. 611. (Cf. King's Maps, Brit. Mus., i. 476.)

[790] Original sources: Washington's letter to Congress, in Dawson, i. 163, and Sparks, iv. 97; Geo. Clinton's letter in Dawson, i. 164, and in Dawson's N. Y. City during the Rev. (1861), 108; General Silliman's in App. of Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. War, p. 606; John Gooch's in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., July, 1876, p. 334; original documents in Mag. of Amer. Hist., iv. 375; viii. 39, 627; and in 5 Force, ii.

On the British side, Gen. Howe's letter is in Dawson, i. 165; a letter (Sept. 22d) in the Lord Wrottesley MSS., noted in Hist. MSS. Com. Second Rept., p. 48; and Lushington's Lord Harris, p. 79. Later accounts: Johnston, Campaign of 1776; Dawson's Battles, i. 160, and his account in the N. Y. City Manual, 1868, p. 804; Carrington's Battles, ch. 34; Lossing's Field-Book; Gay, iii. 509; J. A. Stevens in Mag. of Amer. Hist., iv. 351, vi. 260,—also see vii., viii. 39; E. C. Benedicts Battle of Harlem Heights (N. Y., 1881), read before the N. Y. Hist. Soc., 1878; John Jay's Centennial Discourse, 1876, with App. of documents, including extracts from Stiles's diary; Smyth (Lect. Mod. Hist., Bohn's ed., ii. 459) on Washington's proposed Fabian policy. Cf. also Greene's Greene, Reed's Joseph Reed, i. 237; Colonel Humphrey's Life of Putnam; Memoirs of Col. Tench Tilghman (Albany, 1876). Letters of Tilghman and others at this time, copied from the papers in the N. Y. Hist. Soc., are in the Sparks MSS., no. xxxix. Cf. histories of New York city. The amplest details of the movements which led to the actions at Harlem, of the various changes thereabouts, and of the later retreat to White Plains will be found in Dawson's Westchester County, p. 229 et seq., abundantly fortified with references.

[791] Cf. current accounts from the newspapers in Moore's Diary, p. 311. A popular colored print published in Paris not long afterwards assigned the cause to American incendiaries (Dufossé's Americana, 1879, no. 5,480). There is in Valentine's Manual, 1866, p. 766, a diagram marking the spread of the fire in 1776 compared with that of 1778. A view of Trinity Church, in New York, as ruined by the fire, is given in Harper's Mag., xlvii. p. 24; Valentine's Manual, 1861, p. 654; and Gay, iii. 510.

[792] There were reports at the time that the British troops had set the fire. Read's George Read, p. 196. De Lancey (Jones, i. p. 611) collates the accounts, both British and American, citing that of Henry, who had just been brought by water from Quebec, and who saw it from the transport, as one of the best descriptions (Henry's Campaign against Quebec). Sparks (iv. 100, 101) gives a note to Washington's account. Howe's account is in 5 Force, ii., with other documents. Cf. J. C. Hamilton's Republic, i. 127; Reed's Joseph Reed, 1, 213. Mahon (Hist. England, vi. 116) believes it was not set. Lecky (England in Eighteenth Century, iv. p. 5, with references), who is usually very considerate in his criticisms, cites Washington's desire to burn New York as a sort of justification of the British burning of Falmouth and Norfolk; but he fails to distinguish between such wanton, isolated destruction and one of strategical use.

[793] The original map is entitled A Plan of the Operations of the king's army under the command of General Sir William Howe, K. B., in New York and East New Jersey against the American forces commanded by General Washington from the 12th of October to the 28th of Nov., 1776, wherein is particularly distinguished the engagement on the White Plains, the 28th of October, by Claude Joseph Sauthier. Engraved by Wm. Faden, 1777. Published Feb. 25, 1777. The original MS. draft is among the Faden maps (library of Congress), no. 58. The engraved map is given in fac-simile in Dawson's Westchester County, p. 227. The direction of the American movements is indicated by arrows on the broken line (— — — —), and triple lines ≡ mark camps and positions. The British marches are shown by line and dot (—·—·—·) and their camps by □.

The American army extended from Fort Washington to Kingsbridge, when Howe began a movement to threaten their communications with the upper country. Leaving Percy to cover New York at McGowan's Pass, near Bloomingdale (A), the British embarked at Turtle Bay, Harlem, and Long Island (B) in detachments which landed at Frog's Neck (D, under cover of the "Carysfoot", man-of-war, C) on Oct. 12, 16, and 17, when the Americans (at E) on the 12th broke down the bridge in their front across the marsh, and retired part towards Kingsbridge and part towards New Rochelle. A MS. "Survey of Frog's Neck and the route of the British army to the 24th of Oct., 1776, by Charles Blaskowitz", on a scale of 2,000 feet to an inch, is among the Faden maps (no. 57) in the library of Congress. The British now proceeded farther by water to Pell's Point (F), where they landed Oct. 18, and pushing forward had the same day a skirmish with the retiring Americans (H), and still farther pursued them and occupied the lower bank at Mamaroneck (M) while the Americans held the opposite bank, Oct. 22. That same day, Knyphausen with his Germans landed at Myer's Point (G), and moving forward took ground (at K), and remained there from Oct. 22 to 28, while close by (at J) the main body from Pell's Point were already in camp (Oct. 18-21), when, on the 21st, they moved forward and encamped under Heister and Clinton (at L), where they remained till Oct. 25, and then proceeded to N, where they stayed till Oct. 28.

Meanwhile, the Americans (at Z) had passed Kingsbridge, breaking it down after their passage, and then dividing into two detachments. One of these proceeded and occupied the ridge of land from X to the White Plains, intrenching at intervals along the summit running parallel to Bronx River. The other division proceeded north through Wepperham, and both reunited Oct. 25 within the lines at White Plains (Q). The British (at N) advanced on the same day, and formed, Oct. 28, opposite the American lines (at O), while on the same day Leslie attacked the American corps of Spencer (at P), and Oct. 29 the Americans occupied the lines at R, and Nov. 1 fell back across the Croton River. During Oct. 30, a part of Percy's force from Bloomingdale had come up, leaving the road as they came north at N, and joining the left of the British line, in place of the troops which after the fight of the 28th had encamped at S. The British now marched, part direct and part by Tarrytown, to Dobbs Ferry (T), where they were in camp Nov. 6, and proceeding south they were at U, Nov. 13. Dawson, Westchester County, 239, points out some errors in the names in this map, which were allowed to stand in Stedman's map, and in the first edition of Lossing's Field-Book. On the American side there is a Plan of the Country from Frog's Point to Croton River, showing the positions of the American and British armies from the 12th of Oct., 1776, until the engagement on the White Plains on the 28th, drawn by S. Lewis from the original surveys made by order of Washington, and published in 1807. It has been reproduced in Dawson's Westchester County, from the original edition of Marshall's Washington. Later eclectic plans can be found in the Life of Washington, by Sparks; in Hamilton's Republic of the United States, i. 132; and in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 820-826.

For Washington's headquarters (Miller house) see Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 108; and for a view of Chatterton's Hill, Gay, iii. 514.

[794] Documents in 5 Force, ii. (statement of the regiments, 1,319) and iii.; Sparks's Washington, iv. 524-526, including Harrison's letter, which is also in Dawson, i. 183, as well as a letter of Col. Haslett to Gen. Rodney (i. 183). A letter in Johnson, Docs. p. 135. A letter of James Tilton (Brunswick, N. J., Nov. 20, 1776) to Cæsar Rodney, among the Pettit papers in the Amer. Philosophical Society, and a copy in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii.). Allen's diary in Smith's Pittsfield, Mass., i. 252. Memoirs of Heath, and the Rev. Services of Gen. Hull, ch. 4. Newspaper accounts in Moore's Diary, 335; and the statements of De Lancey in Jones, i. App. 621.

On the English side Howe's despatch (Nov. 30), which appeared in a Gazette of Dec. 30, is reprinted in Dawson, i. 184. This gave rise to Observations upon the Conduct of Sir Wm. Howe at the White Plains, London, 1779, known to be the work of Israel Mauduit, though published anonymously. It included Howe's despatch. In this he criticises Howe severely, as well as in his Three Letters to Lt.-Gen. Sir William Howe (London, 1781), with an appendix and map. When the brothers Howe, general and admiral, were appointed, it was Hutchinson's opinion (Diary, ii. 40) that "no choice could have been more generally satisfactory to the kingdom." Hutchinson (Ibid., ii. 121) at this time speaks of a letter from Major Dilkes (Nov. 3) describing the series of actions, in which he calls White Plains the principal one, and adds, "Though the king's troops had the advantaged pursuing them, it does not appear that the loss was much different." Stedman's account is in his ch. 7, and Eelking's in ch. 2 of his Hülfstruppen. Lowell in his Hessians uses several German accounts.

[795] Johnston, p. 262. Carrington, ch. 35. Bancroft, ix. ch. 10; final revision, v. ch. 3 and 5. Dawson, ch. 14. Lossing's Field-Book, vol. ii. For biographies: Washington, by Marshall, ii. ch. 8, and by Irving, ii. ch. 37. J. C. Hamilton's Republic, i. 132. Reed's Jos. Reed, i. ch. 12. Read's George Read, 210. Memoirs of Col. Benj. Tallmadge (N. Y., 1858). Dawson is still the amplest in detail. His list of authorities on the action at White Plains is one of his longest (Westchester County, 256, 271).

[796] Johnston's Map.—Percy advancing from McGowan's Pass (T), the several American outposts withdrew from Snake Hill (V), Harlem Plains (D D), and across the hollow way (U), and under Cadwallader resisted for a while the attack of Percy at W, till Lt.-Col. Stirling, dispatched from the redoubt at F F, and landing at X, threatened to intercept Cadwallader, when the Americans fell back to the lines above Fort Washington. Meanwhile, two columns of attack approached the fort from the other side. Cornwallis, embarking at Kingsbridge (B B), went down Harlem River and landed at A A, under cover of batteries at F F, and there attacked Col. Baxter at the redoubts, who retreated to the fort. Knyphausen and Rall, advancing also from Kingsbridge (B B) to Z, attacked Col. Rawling at Y, who also retreated to the fort. The immediate outworks being carried on all sides, the fort surrendered Nov. 16, 1776.

Sauthier-Faden Plan.—On the day of the fight at White Plains, Oct. 28, Knyphausen had left his camp (at K), and marching west had crossed above Kingsbridge; and had encamped, Nov. 2, at W. The Waldeck regiment stationed at New Rochelle had also marched, and Nov. 4 were at V, and then proceeded towards Wepperham. The same day a portion of the British under Grant, coming south from Dobbs Ferry, had left the main line at 4 and proceeded to 5 and 6, continuing their march next day to 7. The American outposts on Tetard's Hill withdrew to the works about Fort Washington, when Knyphausen threatened to cut them off. The siege and capture of Fort Washington now followed. This accomplished, Cornwallis embarked a part of his force at "Spiting Devil Creek" and part at 8, united them on landing, Nov. 18, at 1, and encamped that night at 2, the garrison of Fort Lee having already fled towards 3, whither Cornwallis followed them.

Note to the opposite Map.—This sketch follows A topographical map of the north part of New York Island, exhibiting the plan of Fort Washington, now Fort Knyphausen, with the rebel lines to the southward, which were forced by the troops under the command of the Rt. Hon^ble Earl Percy the 16th Nov. 1776, and surveyed immediately after by order of his lordship by Claude Joseph Sauthier, to which is added the attack made to the north by the Hessians, surveyed by order of Lieut.-Gen. Knyphausen. London, Wm. Faden, March 1, 1777.

The broken lines (— — —) represent roads. The Hessians advanced from Westchester County by Kingsbridge, under Knyphausen, with detachments of his corps, the brigade of "Raille", and the regiment of Waldeck. They crossed the little stream L in two columns. That of Raille's [Rall, Rahl] mounted the hill, forced the battery of twelve-pounders and howitzers at H, and was joined before G by Knyphausen's column, which had followed up the stream. Both pushed on and carried the works at A. The British light infantry under Brig.-Gen. Matthews, to be supported by the grenadiers and 33d regiment under Cornwallis, landed at B under cover of batteries at E, whereupon the Americans on the hill at J retired to the main works. The 42d regiment under Lt.-Col. Stirling, with two battalions of the second brigade, crossed the river by the dot and dash line (·—·—) and landed at C as a feint, and advanced by the battery M. Earl Percy with a brigade of English and another of Hessians left the advanced posts of the British at McGowan's Pass, and following the main road (— — —) forced the successive American lines through their abatis (× × × ×) and attacked at D. Philip's or Dightman's bridge is at F. The British vessel "Pearl" at K assisted the attack at A. The buildings marked a were barracks erected for winter-quarters by the Americans, but burned by them when the British landed at Frog's Neck.

Sauthier's plan is included in The American Atlas, no. 23, and in Stedman (i. 210). Three MS. plans of the attack on Fort Washington, one of them surveyed by Sauthier on the day of the attack by order of Lord Percy, are among the Faden maps (nos. 59, 60, 61) in the library of Congress. The engraved map is reproduced in The Evelyns in America (p. 318), in Valentine's Manual, 1859, p. 120 (see 1861, p. 429), and in the Calendar of Hist. MSS. relative to the War of the Revolution (Albany, 1868), i. 532.

There is in the Geschichte der Kriege in und ausser Europa, Nuremberg, 1777, Sechster Theil, a folding plan of the operations on New York Island in the autumn of 1776, showing the attack on Fort Washington, "nun das Fort Knyphausen genannt" (see also "Achter Theil"). A German plan belonging to Mr. J. C. Brevoort, after an original preserved in Cassel, is given in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Feb., 1877.

The leading American later accounts give eclectic plans,—Sparks's Washington, iv. 96, 160; Guizot's Washington; Carrington's Battles, p. 254,—but they include all the movements in the north part of the island. Cf. also Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 816, and Grant's British Battles, ii. 147.

A drawing found among Lord Rawdon's papers, representing the landing of the British forces under Cornwallis, Nov. 20, 1776, on the Jersey side of the Hudson, after the fall of Fort Washington, is given in Harper's Mag., xlvii. p. 25.

[797] Original sources: Documents in 5 Force, iii.; Washington to Congress in Sparks, iv. 178, and Dawson, i. 193; letters of Samuel Chase, Nov. 21-23, in the Sparks MSS., ix.; letter in Hist. Mag., March, 1874, p. 180; newspaper accounts in Moore's Diary, 345, 348; Graydon's Memoirs, 197; Heath's Memoirs, 86; Gordon's Amer. Rev., ii. 350; N. Hampshire State Papers, viii. 408. On the British side, Howe's despatch to Germain is in Dawson, i. 194; Lowell, in his Hessians, p. 80, uses German diaries (cf. Eelking's Hülfstruppen, i. 84).

Later accounts: Bancroft, orig. ed., ix. ch. 11; final revision, v. ch. 5; Johnston, 276; Carrington, ch. 37; Dawson, i. 188; Lossing's Field-Book, ii.; Gay, iii. 517.

G. W. Greene, in his Life of Gen. Greene, as it was the first military mistake of that officer, is at pains to treat the history of the siege at considerable length, enlarging upon antecedent events (i. ch. 10 and 11). Greene had urgently claimed that it was advisable to attempt to hold the fort, and letters giving his reasons are in Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., i. 297, and Drake's Knox, 33. G. W. Greene holds that Gen. Greene had a right to expect a better defence, and championed his ancestor in a tract against the criticisms of Bancroft (Greene's Greene, ii. 431, 470), who put the responsibility of the disaster upon Green's persistent refusal to evacuate the fort. This Bancroft maintains in his original edition, and in his final revision, where, however, he recognizes, but does not deem essential to the British success, the treachery of Magaw's adjutant, William Demont. There had been an intimation in Graydon's Memoirs that Howe had been helped by some kind of faithlessness in the American ranks. In February, 1877, in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (i. 65, 756), Mr. E. F. De Lancey first made public a letter of Demont written in 1792, in which he acknowledged having carried the plans of the fort to Percy, "by which the fortress was taken", and this information is thought to have induced Howe to make his sudden withdrawal from Washington's front at White Plains. De Lancey's paper was published separately as Capture of Mount Washington, 1776, the result of treason (New York, 1777), and he repeated the story in the notes (i. p. 626) to Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. War. Johnston (p. 283) doubts if this treachery was decisive of the result. Cf. further in lives of Washington by Marshall and Irving (ii. ch. 38, 40); Reed's Joseph Reed (i. ch. 13); and a paper by W. H. Rawle on the part taken by Col. Lambert Cadwalader, in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., April, 1886, p. 11. There is a portrait of Cadwalader in the Penna. Archives, vol. x. A letter (Dec. 23, 1778) of Robert Magaw on the surrender of Fort Washington is in the Sparks MSS., no. xlix. vol. iii. Cf. the account of Magaw in the Mag. of Western History, September, 1886, p. 678.

[798] Sparks, iv. 186; Greene's Greene, ch. 12. Cf. on Fort Lee Appleton's Journal, vi. 645, 660, 673, 688. Cf. the present volume, ch. v.

[799] There is a fac-simile of it in Valentine's Manual, 1864, p. 668. A German map is given in the Geschichte der Kriege in und ausser Europa (Nuremberg, 1776).

[800] A map was annexed to Israel Mauduit's criticism on Howe's conduct of this campaign, Three letters to Lt.-Gen. Sir Wm. Howe (London, 1781). Marshall gives maps in both the large and small atlases accompanying his Life of Washington. A MS. plan is in the Heath Papers (i. 224) in Mass. Hist. Soc. library.

[801] The Calendar of the Lee MSS., p. 8, shows a letter, Dec. 20, of Robert Morris, on the campaign's misfortunes, which is printed in the Diplomatic Corresp., i. 225.

[802] The Journal of Samuel Nash, Jan. 1, 1776, to Jan. 9, 1777; diary in Hist. Mag., Dec., 1863, covering Aug.-Dec., 1776; N. Fish's account in Ibid., Jan., 1869 (iii. 33). Rufus Putnam's journal in Mary Cone's Life of Rufus Putnam (Cleveland, 1886); Moravian Journals in N. Y. City, in The Moravian, 1876; Penna. Mag. of Hist., i. 133, 250; Johnston, p. 101. There is in The Evelyns in America (p. 319) a "Journal of the operations of the American army under Gen. Sir William Howe from the Evacuation of Boston to the end of the Campaign of 1776", by a British officer. Cf. Gent. Mag., Nov. and Dec., 1776. The letters of Maj. Francis Hutcheson are in the Haldimand Papers (Brit. Museum). Howe's letters to Germain are in the Sparks MSS., lviii., part 2. The military movements near New York are chronicled in papers in the London War-Office, "North America, 1773-1776."

Respecting New York city during this period, there are data in New York City during the American Revolution, being a Collection of original papers, now first published from MSS. in the possession of the Mercantile Library, with an introduction by H. B. Dawson (N. Y., privately printed, 1861), which includes an account by William Butler; and in papers in Valentine's Manual (1862, p. 652). Cf. Harper's Mag., xxxvii. 180, and Scribner's Monthly, Jan., 1876.

[803] Sparks's Washington, iii. 433; Corresp. of the Rev., i. 225; Wilkinson's Memoirs, i. ch. 2.

[804] 4 Force's Archives, vi., and 5, vols. i., ii., and iii.; Lossing's Schuyler, ii. 92; John Adams's Works, iii. 47.

[805] Various letters of this period about the army are in the Persifer Frazer Papers (Sparks MSS., xxi., from July 9 to Nov. 18, 1776); in the Gates Papers (copies in part among the Sparks MSS., xxii.); in the Schuyler Papers as used in Lossing's Schuyler, and as existing in the N. Y. Archives (copies in part in the Sparks MSS., xxix.). A letter of Thomas Hartley (Ticonderoga, July 19, 1776) in Mag. West. Hist., Sept., 1886, p. 677; one of Wayne (July 31) to Franklin in Sparks MSS., no. lvii. The N. H. State Papers, viii., 311, 315, 325-6, 329, throw light on the feelings of the adjacent country,—Col. Asa Potter seeking to throw the people upon Burgoyne's protection against the Indians. The N. H. Rev. Rolls, ii. 2, 22, show how troops were sent to Ticonderoga as the spring opened.

Orderly-books and army diaries of the period have been noted as follows: Col. J. Bagley's, Lake George (Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc., new ser., i. 134). Col. Ruggles Woodbridge, Ticonderoga, Aug. 25 to Oct. 27, 1776 (Sparks MSS., lx. p. 317). Col. Wheelock's, Aug.-Nov., 1776 (in Mass. Archives). Anthony Wayne's Orderly book of the northern army, at Ticonderoga and Mt. Independence, from October 17th, 1776, to January 8th, 1777, with biographical and explanatory notes, and an appendix (Albany, 1859, being no. 3 of Munsell's historical series). It gives the daily orders issued by General Gates and himself. Letters of Wayne from Feb. to April, 1777 are in the St. Clair Papers, i. 384, etc. Moses Greenleaf, Ticonderoga, March 23 to April 4, 1777 (among the Greenleaf MSS., in Mass. Hist. Soc.).

Journal of Rev. Ammi R. Robbins in the northern campaign of 1776 (New Haven, 1850). It extends from March 18 to Oct. 29, and covers a part of the retreat from Canada. Diary of Lieutenant Jonathan Burton, Aug. 1 to Nov. 29, 1776 (New Hampshire State Papers, xiv.).

[806] The original is among the Gates Papers (cf. Sparks MSS., xxii. and xxxix.). They are printed in Wilkinson's Memoirs (i. 83) and Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev. (i. 537).

[807] They are printed in 5 Force's Amer. Archives (ii. 1102); Dawson (i. 171, 172); Arnold's Arnold (p. 118). See also Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev. (i. App.), and 5 Force (vols. i., ii., iii.).

[808] Other contemporary American accounts are in Wilkinson's Memoirs (ch. 2); Trumbull's Autobiography (p. 34); Marshall's Washington (iii. ch. 1).

[809] Later accounts are in Cooper's Naval Hist.; Bancroft's final revision (v. ch. 4); Irving's Washington (ii. ch. 39); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 116, 137), his Field-Book (vol. i.), and a paper in Harper's Monthly (xxiii. 726); Dawson's Battles (i. ch. 13); Arnold's Arnold (ch. 6); W. C. Watson in Amer. Hist. Record, iii. 438, 501 (Oct., Nov., 1774); Palmer's Lake Champlain (ch. 7); Wayne's Orderly-Book, where Arnold's tactics are particularly examined; a pamphlet, Battle of Valcour (Plattsburg, 1876); and Osler's Life of Viscount Exmouth. W. L. Stone in his notes to Pausch (p. 85) thinks the account by that German artillerist and that in Hadden's Journal as edited by Gen. Rogers are the best ones.

[810] A MS. draft of Brassier's survey (1762) is in the Faden collection, no. 20-1/2 in the library of Congress.

[811] Vol. i. p. 163; and for a view of the spot, p. 162.

[812] The catalogue of the Brit. Mus. additional MSS. (no. 31,537) refers to a similar map. See the map in The North American Atlas (1777). The original MS. draft of the map engraved by Faden is in the library of Congress (Faden collection, no. 21). There are maps of the lake in Wayne's Orderly-Book, and in Palmer's Lake Champlain. An elaborate survey of Lake Champlain, made in 1778-1779, one inch to the mile, is also among the Faden maps (no. 64,—the library of Congress).

[813] It was printed in the Gent. Mag., April, 1778. In the appendix of Fonblanque's Burgoyne it has the king's comments on it, and it was given in this way from a manuscript in the royal hand in Albemarle's Rockingham and his Contemporaries (ii. 330). Lord Geo. Germain's instructions to Carleton relative to the campaign are in the Gent. Mag., Feb., 1778. The Gent. Mag. (Oct., 1777, p. 472) warned the public of the difficulties which Burgoyne must expect to encounter.

[814] Comment from a British officer is in Anburey's Travels. Lecky (iv. 31) shows the way in which the army was raised. The organization of the army is explained in a chapter in Hadden's Journal. The details of the dispatching of troops are embraced in the volume "Secretary of State, 1776", War Office, London. The letter of Carleton to Germain, Quebec, May 20, 1777, expressing his chagrin at not being appointed to lead the expedition, but promising aid to Burgoyne, is printed in Brymner's Report on the Canadian Archives (1885, p. cxxxii.) with Germain's answer. Howe in New York had notified Carleton at Quebec, April 5, that he should not be able to communicate with Burgoyne. Walpole records in his Last Journals (ii. 160), "Lord George Germain owned that General Howe had defeated all his views by going to Maryland instead of waiting to join Burgoyne." There may have been a purpose to help create the impression of Burgoyne's destination, which that officer tried to spread, in professing to aim at Connecticut, when Howe in April sent an expedition, under Tryon, to Danbury, in Connecticut, to destroy stores. This was accomplished, but Wooster and Arnold pressed the returning party with vigor and inflicted a considerable loss. Wooster was killed. Congress ordered a monument to his memory (Journals, ii. 168. Cf. Deming's oration at the dedication of a monument in 1854, and Hinman's Connecticut during the Rev., 155). The contemporary accounts are Howe's despatch to Germain, and the narrative in the Connecticut Journal, April 30 (both given in Dawson's Battles, i. 217, 219); current reports in Moore's Diary, 423, 441; Trumbull's and Sullivan's letters in N. Hampshire State Papers, viii. 547, 549, 556; a letter of James Wadsworth, dated at Durham, May 1, 1777, in Trumbull MSS., vi. 94; with accounts in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 178, and Stedman's Amer. War, ch. 14. Marshall's account in his Washington was controverted by E. D. Whittlesey (N. Y. Hist. Coll., 2d ser., ii. 227). Cf. Sparks's Washington, iv. 404; Leake's Lamb, ch. xi., with a map; Stuart's Gov. Trumbull, ch. 27; Irving's Washington, iii. 47; I. N. Arnold's Gen. Arnold, ch. 7; Bancroft, ix. 346; Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S., iii. 543; Hollister's Connecticut, ii. ch. 12. For local associations see Dwight's Travels, iii.; Lossing's Field-Book, i. 407-416 (with views); Teller's Ridgefield, p. 69 (1878), with a view of the battlefield, April 27, 1777; C. B. Todd's Redding (1880, p. 47).

[815] These include the Riedesel Memoirs, Schlözer's Briefwechsel (iii. 27, 321, iv. 288), Eelking's, Deutsche Hülfstruppen (ch. 4). There is a letter from a Brunswick officer in Canada in J. H. Hering's Weeklijksche Berichten (Amsterdam,—noted in Muller's Books on America, 1877, no. 1,410).

[816] There is a contemporary broadside of it in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library, and it was printed for the English public in the Gentleman's Mag. in August. Walpole, in London, in August, records his opinion of it, "penned with such threats as would expose him to derision if he failed, and would diminish the lustre of his success if he obtained any" (Last Journals, ii. 130). The dates given to it vary from June 29th to July 4th. It will also be found in Anburey's Travels; Thacher's Military Journal; Moore's Diary (p. 454), from the Penna. Evening Post, Aug. 21; Fonblanque's Burgoyne (App. F); Riedesel's Memoirs; Hadden's Journal (p. 59); Proceedings of the Mass. Hist. Soc. (xii. 189) and N. Y. Hist. Soc. (Jan., 1872); Vermont Hist. Soc. Collections (i. 163); Niles's Register (1876 ed., p. 179); N. Hampshire State Papers, viii. 660. It instigated various burlesques (Moore's Diary, 459; his Songs and Ballads of the Rev., 167).

[817] A map by Montresor, made in 1775, showing the antecedent knowledge of the country, is given in the American Atlas.

A topographical Map of Hudson's River, ... also the Communication with Canada by Lake George and Lake Champlain, as high as Fort Chambly, by Claude Joseph Sauthier. Engraved by Wm. Faden, published (London) Oct. 1, 1776.

A map of the inhabited parts of Canada, from the French surveys, with the frontiers of New York and New England, from the large survey by Claude Joseph Sauthier, engraved by Wm. Faden (London), 1777. It is dedicated to Burgoyne, and in the margin is a table showing the various winter-quarters of the king's army in Canada in 1776. In 1777, Le Rouge, in Paris, reproduced Sauthier's drafts as Cours de la rivière d'Hudson et la Communication avec le Canada par le lac Champlain jusqu'au Fort Chambly. (Cf. the map in the Atlas Amériquain, no. 23.) Sauthier's surveys were also used in a map of New York and adjacent provinces, published at Augsburg in 1777, which is reproduced in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. (vol. i.). The Gentleman's Mag., Jan., 1778, had a map of the Hudson River and the adjacent country. The London Mag., 1778, had a map showing the country between Albany and Ticonderoga. It was drawn by Thomas Kitchin, who in the same year made a map of the Hudson and adjacent parts from Albany to New York.

In 1780 (Feb. 1st) Faden published a more detailed map as drawn by Mr. Medcalfe, and called A map of the Country in which the army under Lieutenant-General Burgoyne acted in the Campaign of 1777, shewing the marches of the army and the places of the principal actions. (Cf. map in Stedman, reproduced in illus. ed. of Irving's Washington, iii. 93.)

The maps as given in Burgoyne's State of the Expedition from Canada (London, 1780) are those usually followed. The original MS. drafts of these, used for engraving them, are among the Faden maps (nos. 66-69) in the library of Congress. A general map of the campaign is given in Hilliard d'Auberteuil's Essais (i. 205).

There is in Hadden's Journal (p. 90) a drawn map of the campaign between Crown Point and Stillwater, showing the marches of the British army and the points of conflict. Among the Faden maps (nos. 62, 63) in the library of Congress is a MS. map of "Lake Champlain and Lake George, and the country between the Hudson and the lakes on the west and the Connecticut on the east." There are later and eclectic maps given in Gordon's American Revolution; Anburey's Travels; Neilson's Burgoyne's Campaign, used and corrected by Stone in his Campaign of Burgoyne; Carrington's Battles (312); Burgoyne's Orderly-Book; Mag. of Amer. Hist. (May, 1877).

[818] Thomson, Ohio Bibliog., no. 1,011; Brinley Catal., no. 4,135 ($50); Menzies, no. 1,741 ($65).

[819] Cf. also Ibid., ii., App. pp. 510, 513.

[820] The life and Public services of Arthur St. Clair, with his correspondence and other papers arranged and annotated by Wm. Henry Smith. The correspondence begins in 1771. H. P. Johnston thinks Smith too sweeping and injudicial in his editing (Mag. of Amer. Hist., Aug., 1882). St. Clair took command at Ticonderoga June 12th. Smith includes in his book the proceedings of the councils of war (pp. 404, 420), and the various letters of St. Clair, respecting his retreat, to Bowdoin (also in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vi. 356), Hancock, Jay, Washington, and others (pp. 396, 414, 423, 425, 426, 429, 433). Cf. Dawson's Battles. St. Clair's letter, July 7th, at Otter Creek, to the president of the Convention of Vermont, is in N. H. State Papers, viii. 618.

[821] Sparks MSS., no. xxix. The papers of the trial of St. Clair are in Ibid., xlix., vol. ii. Congress ordered the inquiry (N. H. State Papers, viii. 649). There are other contemporary accounts of the evacuation in Moore's Diary of the Revolution (p. 470); Wilkinson's Memoirs (ch. 4 and 5); original documents in 5 Force's Archives, vols. i., ii., and iii., and in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Aug., 1882); letter of Asa Fitch, Hist. Mag. (iii. 7); a diary among the Moses Greenleaf's MSS. (Mass. Hist. Society), beginning April 23, 1777, and ending Nov. 22d, near Philadelphia; a diary of Samuel Sweat (June 18, 1777, etc.) in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (vol. xvii. 287). A letter of one Cogan complains of the unnecessary retreat (N. H. State Papers, viii. 640), and other accounts and comment of that day, in Sparks's Washington, vol. v.; Heath Papers (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll.), p. 65. Cf. further, Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 10, etc.); General Hull's Revolutionary Services (ch. 7); Dawson's Battles (ch. 20); Van Rensselaer's Essays; Jay's Life of Jay (i. 74); Sparks's Gouverneur Morris (i. ch. 8); J. C. Hamilton's Life of Hamilton (i. 79, 91); Hamilton's Works (i. 31); Sedgwick's Livingston (p. 233); Watson's Essex County, N. Y. (ch. 11); De Costa's Fort George; Smith's Pittsfield, Mass. (i. 282); Hist. Mag., Dec., 1862, July, 1867 (p. 303), Aug., 1869 (p. 84, by Hiland Hall); Lewis Kellogg's Hist. Discourse (Whitehall, 1847).

[822] Cf. Palmer's Lake Champlain and Watson's Essex County, N. Y.

[823] It is also in the St. Clair Papers, i. 76. See post, p. 352.

[824] Cf. further, Wilkinson's Memoir (ch. 5); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 223), and his Field-Book (i. 145); Carrington's Battles (ch. 45); Henry Clark's Hist. Address, July 7, 1859 (Rutland, 1859); Stone's Beverley, Mass. (p. 75); Amos Churchill's Hist. of Hubbardton (1855); Hadden's Journal (App. no. 15); W. C. Watson in Amer. Hist. Record (ii. 455); beside such personal narratives as Enos Stone's Journal in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (1861, p. 299,—he was made a prisoner), and the Narrative of the captivity & sufferings of Ebenezer Fletcher, of New Ipswich, who was severely wounded and taken prisoner at the battle of Hubbardston, Vt., in 1777, by the British and Indians (New Ipswich, N. H., 1813?).

There are letters of Stephen Peabody and Col. Bellows in N. H. State Papers, viii. 625. There is a British diary by Joshua Pell, Jr., published in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (ii. 107).

[825] There is a composite map in Carrington's Battles (p. 322), and another in Lossing's Field-Book (i. 145), with a view of the battlefield (p. 146).

[826] Cf. Vermont Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 181, 182, where much will be found from the Council of Safety's records and in letters from Schuyler and Warner. Cf. also N. H. State Papers, viii. 658.

[827] An earlier letter of Willet, July 28th, warning the people at German Flats, is in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (1884), p. 285. Cf. also Wm. M. Willet's Narrative of the Military actions of Col. Marinus Willet (N. Y., 1831), for Willet's hasty and his more leisurely accounts, which differ somewhat in minor details.

[828] This orderly-book was originally printed in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (March and April, 1881). The appended essays are incisive expressions of individual views at variance with general beliefs (cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist., March, 1883, p. 219), De Peyster defending Johnson, who was his great-uncle, from the charge of violating his parole, and Myers agreeing with him.

[829] It is reprinted in the Cent. Celebrations of N. Y. (1879, p. 55), where will be found other addresses and engraved views of the present aspect of the scene of the conflict (pp. 91, 127). These local associations are also traced in S. W. D. North's "Story of a Monument" in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (xii. 97,—Aug., 1884; cf. also vol. i. p. 641), giving views of the monuments, a suspicious portrait of Herkimer (p. 103), and a view of Herkimer's house (p. 111,—cf. Lossing, i. 260). On the various spellings of Herkimer's name, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., Aug., 1884, p. 283. Measures for erecting a monument to him are recorded in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1845, p. 172. The later writers are H. R. Schoolcraft in the N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc. (1845, p. 132); Bancroft (ix. 378); Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 15, 16, 17); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 273), and his Field-Book (vol. i.); I. N. Arnold's Benedict Arnold (ch. 8); J. W. De Peyster in Hist. Mag. (xv. 38) and Mag. of Amer. Hist. (ii. 22); T. D. English in Harper's Monthly (xxiii. 327); H. C. Goodwin's Pioneer History of Cortland County; Benton's Herkimer County (ch. 5); Campbell's Tryon County (ch. 4); Pomroy Jones's Annals of Oneida County, with some local touches; Ketchum's Buffalo; S. W. D. North's "Historical Significance of the Battle" in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (i. 641); the appendix of Hadden's Journal (no. 17) for La Corne St. Luc; Hull's Revolutionary Services (ch. 8); Dawson's Battles (i. ch. 21); Carrington's Battles (ch. 45). The German accounts are given in Eelking's Die Deutschen Hülfstruppen, with more prominence naturally from the Hessian participants than the English or American narratives afford; and in Frederick Kapp's Die Deutschen im Staate New York (N. Y., 1884), equally glowing for his countrymen under Herkimer, on the other side. Cf. Lowell's Hessians. The story of Hanyost Schuyler's carrying a deceitful message from Arnold, which Dr. Belknap in 1796 picked up on the spot (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xix. 408), and as told in Dwight's Travels (iii. 183), in Benton's Herkimer County (p. 82), and other later books, is denied by Dawson (i. 247).

[830] Gent. Mag., Mar., 1778; Burgoyne's State of the Expedition; App. to Roberts's Address; Dawson, i. 250; Cent. Celebrations of N. Y., p. 131, and the letter of Col. Daniel Claus, dated at Montreal, Oct. 16, 1777, (N. Y. Col. Docs., viii. 718; Cent. Celebrations of N. Y., p. 141; Roberts's Address, App.) The Tory account is in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. (i. 216, with App., p. 700). St. Leger's retreat is described in a letter, Montreal, Sept. 4, 1777, in the Stopford Sackville Papers, printed in Ninth Report of the Hist. Mss. Commission (London, 1883, App. p. 87). The account of the Annual Register, 1777, is copied in the Cent. Celebrations of the State of N. Y. (p. 137), and is the basis of Andrews's History. Cf. Almon's Parliamentary debates (vol. viii.), and Beatson's Naval and Military Memoirs (vi. 69). The miniature of St. Leger, by R. Cosway, as engraved in the European Mag., 1795, is given in fac-simile in Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne. Cf. Johnson's Orderly-book and Hubbard's Red Jacket.

[831] It is also given in Hough's edition of Pouchot, i. 207, with a plan of the modern city of Rome, superposed. A plan of Rome in 1802, showing the position of the fort, is in the Doc. Hist. N. Y., iii. 687.

[832] There are other plans in Campbell's Tryon County; and in Lossing's Field-Book, i. 249,—the last also giving a view of the site of the fort (p. 231) and of the battlefield of Oriskany (p. 245).

[833] Cf. the Memoir and official Correspondence of Stark, by Caleb Stark (Concord, 1860), and H. W. Herrick On "Stark and Bennington", in Harper's Monthly (vol. lv. 511).

[834] De Lancey (Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 685) has a note on the forces engaged.

[835] In "Mather and other papers", no. 78. There is a contemporary copy among the Trumbull MSS., viii. 176.

[836] Also in Stone's Burgoyne's Campaign, App., iii.; Hadden's Journal (p. 111); Moore's Diary of the Rev. (p. 488); Burgoyne's State of the Expedition; N. H. State Papers, viii. 664; Guild's Chaplain Smith and the Baptist (differing somewhat, p. 203). Cf. Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 271), and his State of the Expedition.

[837] "Of an affair which happened near Walloon Creek" (Sparks MSS., lviii., Part 2). Much on this expedition is in the English Public Record Office, "vol. 351, Quebec, xvii."

[838] Cf. Lowell's Hessians, p. 136; Riedesel, who in his Memoirs (i. 259, 299) somewhat differs from Burgoyne; Schlözer's Briefwechsel; and Stedman's Amer. War (i. ch. 17).

[839] Other contemporary narratives are in the Appendix of Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne (p. 286); Wilkinson's Memoirs (i. ch. 5); and Hadden's Journal (p. 120). There are letters by Peter Clark in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg. (April, 1860, p. 121). A letter of the Council of Safety, written during the action, is in N. H. State Papers, viii. 669, where is also Stark's letter, when he sent the trophies, and the communication of the news to the militia (Ibid. p. 623). Stark was thanked by Congress, and made a brigadier (Ibid. p. 702). He had felt hurt at the failure of such recognition by Congress earlier (Ibid. p. 662).

[840] Cf. also the Vermont Hist. Gazetteer, (vol. i.); A. M. Caverley's Pittsford, Vt.; Frisbie and Ruggles's Poultney, Vt.; the N. H. Adj.-General's Report, 1866 (ii. 315); C. C. Coffin's Boscawen, N. H. (p. 257); H. H. Saunderson's Charlestown, N. H. (ch. 7); O. E. Randall's Chesterfield, N. H.; N. Bouton's Concord, N. H. (ch. 11); D. A. Goddard's paper on the part borne by Massachusetts in the battle, in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (xvii. 90, May, 1879); Holland's Western Mass. (ch. 15); Smith's Pittsfield, Mass. (i. 293); Hammond's N. H. Rev. Rolls (ii. 139).

[841] Cf. Bancroft (ix. ch. 22); Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 16); Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. 581); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 14), his Field-Book (vol. i.), and his article in Harper's Monthly (vol. v.); Dawson's Battles (i. 255), and his account in the Hist. Mag. (xiii. 289, May, 1870); Carrington's Battles (i. 334); Isaac Jenning's Memorials of a Century (Boston, 1869, ch. 12; see N. E. Hist. Geneal. Reg., 1870, p. 94).

[842] Hiland Hall's paper on Warner's share in the battle of Bennington is reprinted from the Vermont Quarterly Mag. (1861, p. 156), in the Vermont Hist. Coll. (i. p. 209). Cf. Hist. Mag. (vol. iv., Sept., 1860, p. 268), and Chipman's Life of Warner.

[843] Albert Tyler's Bennington: the Battles, 1777. Centennial celebration, 1877 (Worcester, 1878).

Centennial anniversary of the independence of the state of Vermont and the battle of Bennington, Aug. 15 and 16, 1877. Westminster—Hubbardton—Windsor (Rutland, 1879). This volume contains an oration by S. C. Bartlett and an historical paper by Hiland Hall, with engraved portraits of some of the chief participants.

F. W. Coburn's Centennial Hist. of the Battle of Bennington (Boston, 1877).

A Bennington Historical Society was formed in 1876.

[844] The original of this, a carefully drawn MS. map of "the position of Col. Baum, 16th Aug., 1776, with the attack of the enemy at Walmscook near Bennington, by Lieut. Durnford, engineer", is among the Faden maps (no. 65). This Faden map is reproduced in Jenning's Memorials of a Century (Boston, 1869), and sketches of it will be found, with views of the field, in Lossing's Field-Book of the Revolution (i. 395, 396); Gay's Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. 583); Harper's Monthly (xxi. 325). Carrington says the map of Baum's march in Harper's Mag., October, 1877, is incorrect. Stone, Campaign of Burgoyne (p. 35), gives a view of the house in which Baum died.

[845] Cf. Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 299); Wells's Sam. Adams (ii. ch. 45); Sparks's Washington (iii. 535; v. p. 14), his Correspondence of the Rev. (i. 427), and his Gouverneur Morris (i. 138).

[846] Cf. Amer. Hist. Record, April, 1873; Hamilton's Repub. of the United States (i. 306). There is a view of the army headquarters at Troy (1777) in Weise's Troy, 1876, p. 17; and of the Dirck Swart house, still standing (used by Schuyler as headquarters), in the Mag. of Amer. History (vii. 226, etc.). The house subsequently used by Gates has disappeared.

[847] Cf. also Kidder's First N. H. Regiment (p. 35). Other narratives are in Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 19) and his Field-Book (i. 51); in Graham's Morgan (ch.7-9); in Arnold's Arnold (ch. 9); Headley's Washington and his Generals; Dawson's Battles (i. ch. 25); Carrington's Battles of the Rev. (ch. 46); Lowell's Hessians (p. 151); and the memoirs of Riedesel; and on the English side Burgoyne's State of the Expedition, and Fonblanque's Burgoyne. The Smith or Taylor house, in which Fraser died, is depicted in Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne (p. 72), and as to a story about the removal of his remains, see Ibid., App. 6. Robert Lowell read a poem, "Burgoyne's last march", at the centennial of this action.

[848] The accounts of the day, as Marshall says, give him the command, and in his Life of Washington, first edition, that writer so states it. Wilkinson, who was with Gates two miles from the fight, said in his Memoirs that there was no general officer on the field; and this led Marshall in his second edition to leave the question open. A letter of R. R. Livingston, Jan. 14, 1778, to Washington (Correspondence of the Revolution, ii. 551) is capable of counter conclusions on this point; and Mr. Bancroft (orig. ed., ix. 410) who holds that Arnold was not engaged during the day, judges that a letter of Colonel Richard Varick to General Schuyler, written on the day of battle, supports that view. Bancroft's opinion is maintained by J. A. Stevens in his paper "Benedict Arnold and his apologists", in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (March, 1880). That the victory was won largely by Arnold's personal exertions is the opinion of nearly every other writer, and they find in the letters of Livingston and Varick as much to sustain their view as Bancroft does to support his. Wilkinson writes to St. Clair: "Gen. Arnold was not out of camp during the whole action" (St. Clair Papers, i. 89, 443). The evidences in rebuttal of Wilkinson, who is the only positive witness on the negative side, are numerous, and have been best arrayed by Isaac N. Arnold in his Life of Arnold (p. 175), and in the paper "Benedict Arnold at Saratoga" (United Service Mag., Sept., 1880; also printed separately), in which he added much new testimony, gathered after he had published his Life of Arnold. This consists of the statements in The Revolutionary Services of General Wm. Hull (N. Y., 1848); in a MS. account by Ebenezer Wakefield, who was in Dearborn's light infantry, and written after Wilkinson, whom he controverts, had published his Memoirs; in the narratives of the Germans Von Eelking and Riedesel. Moore (Diary of the Revolution, p. 498) cites a letter of Enoch Poor, which seems to allow Arnold's share in the battle. Later still the diary of a chaplain of the army has been published, Chaplain Smith and the Baptists, and this says distinctly (p. 209) that Arnold commanded. Mr. R. A. Guild, the editor of that book, collates the evidence on this point. Washington Irving, Lossing, Sydney H. Gay, William L. Stone,—not to name others,—have contended for Arnold's participancy in the day's doings. Lecky (iv. 67) expresses himself satisfied with the proofs adduced by I. N. Arnold. Cf. Rogers in Hadden's Journal, p. 27.

[849] Cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist. (May, 1879, p. 310), and B. W. Throckmorton's address on Arnold in W. I. Stone's Memoir of the Centennial Celebration of Burgoyne's Surrender (Albany, 1878). Col. Brooks, as reported by Gen. W. H. Sumner in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (Feb., 1858, ii. 273), gave some reminiscences of Arnold's conduct. The surgeon attending Arnold said "his peevishness would degrade the most capricious of the fair sex" (N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1864, p. 34).

[850] Stone (Campaign of Burgoyne, App. 5) also gives Woodruff's and Neilson's reminiscences. See also Stone's Life of Brant (i. 475). Cf. Wilkinson's Memoirs; Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 365), and his Field-Book; Hull's Revolutionary Services (ch. 10); Bowen's Lincoln; Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 22); Creasy's Decisive Battles of the World; Dawson (p. 291); Carrington (ch. 47); A. B. Street in Hist. Mag. (March, 1858). Silliman's account of his visit to the battlefield is in the App. of Stone's Burgoyne's Campaign. Stone in the notes to his translation of Pausch (pp. 175-6) enumerates what remains there are at the present day on the battle-ground of Oct. 7 to enable one to identify the points of the conflict. Gen. Hoyt's description of the battlefield in 1825 is given in Hinton's United States, Amer. ed., i. p. 264.

[851] Cf. Fonblanque's Burgoyne, p. 300; Rogers's Hadden's Journal, p. liii.; Hist. Mag. (ii. 121); Once a Week (xviii. 520); Potter's Amer. Monthly (vii. 191); Ellet's Women of the Amer. Rev., vol. i. There are portraits of Lady Acland in Burgoyne's Orderly-Book, in Bloodgood's Sexagenary, and Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne. Reminiscences of her later life are given in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Aug., 1886, p. 193. The house to which the wounded Major Acland was borne is still standing, though much changed (Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 226). It was the Neilson house, used as headquarters by Morgan and Poor.

[852] A naval brigade under young Pellew, afterwards Viscount Exmouth, was not allowed by Burgoyne to cut its way through the American lines, in place of surrendering (Osler's Life of Exmouth, London, 1835, p. 39).

A view of the field of surrender is in the Cent. Celebrations of N. Y. (p. 301). An old print of Burgoyne's camp is copied in Lossing's Field-Book (i. 57). Cf. Anburey's Travels.

[853] It is also in the Brief Examination; Dawson (i. 305, with accompanying private letter); Gent. Mag. (Dec., 1777); Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 313). Riedesel in his Memoirs comments on Burgoyne's despatch.

In general, for American authorities on the surrender, see Wilkinson (ch. 8); Bancroft (ix. ch. 24); Irving's Washington (iii. 22); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 21); Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne; Bloodgood's Sexagenary, which shows the effect of Burgoyne's march on the country people; Lowell's Hessians (p. 162); Harper's Mag. (Aug., 1876); Mrs. E. H. Walworth in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (May, 1877,—i. 273-302). Loubat, Medallic Hist. of the U. S., describes the medal given to Gates.

On the British side there are Jones's New York during the Rev. (i. 201, etc.); Fonblanque's Burgoyne (ch. 7); Mahon's England (vi. 207); G. R. Gleig in Good Words (xii. 849); Blackwood's Mag. (lxiii. 332, cxiii. 427; or Living Age, xvii. 226, cxvii. 543).

[854] There is an account of prisoners and stores in N. H. State Papers, viii. 708.

[855] See accounts of the papers of Schuyler, Gates, Lincoln, etc., elsewhere. No. liv. of the Sparks MSS. is given to papers on this campaign. Cf. letters of Roger Sherman to William Williams in Ibid., lviii. no. 12; of General Armstrong in Ibid., xlix., i. 7. The correspondence of Schuyler and Gouverneur Morris is in Sparks's Morris, i. 141.

[856] Also N. Y. Hist. Coll., 1879. Cf. Geo. W. Schuyler's Colonial New York, ii. 267; Amer. Hist. Record, ii. 145. The jealousy, or rather dislike, of Schuyler on the part of New England men was the natural result of the contact of commander and subordinates so strongly opposed as an aristocratic Knickerbocker and the self-willed democrats of the Eastern States. Cf., on this antagonism, John Adams's Works, iii. 87; Graydon's Memoirs, passim; Gordon, ii. 331; Irving's Washington, iii. 128, etc. A survival of the feelings had doubtless colored some of the later estimates of Schuyler's character, and the opposing views can be seen in Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 325, etc.) and in Bancroft's United States. Cf. also Geo. L. Schuyler's Correspondence and Remarks upon Bancroft's History of the Northern Campaign of 1777 and the character of General Schuyler. The dissatisfaction with Schuyler was not, however, confined to New England. Reference seems to be made to him as an "infamous villain" in the letters of Samuel Kennedy, a surgeon of Pennsylvania troops (Penna. Mag. of Hist., viii. 114, where he is presumably spoken of as "G. S ... r").

[857] Lincoln's orders, Aug. 4th, are in the Sparks MSS., lxvi.

[858] The following orderly-books and journals of the campaign have been noted:—

Orderly book of lieut. gen. John Burgoyne, from his entry into the state of New York until his surrender at Saratoga, 16th Oct. 1777. From the original manuscript deposited at Washington's head quarters, Newburgh, N. Y. Edited by E. B. O'Callaghan (Albany, 1860), being no. 7 of Munsell's Historical Series. (Cf. J. T. Headley in The Galaxy, xxii. 604.) Gen. Horatio Rogers is satisfied that this Newburgh MS. is not an original record; and he has printed in his Hadden's Journal such records as are either defectively printed by O'Callaghan or not printed at all. Burgoyne's orders to the inhabitants of Castleton are in the N. H. State Papers, viii. 625, 658. There was published at Albany in 1882, as no. 12 of Munsell's Historical Series, a book entitled Hadden's journal and orderly books. A journal kept in Canada and upon Burgoyne's campaign in 1776 and 1777, by Lieutenant James Murray Madden. Also orders kept by him and issued by Sir Guy Carleton, Lieut. General Burgoyne and Major General William Phillips, in 1776, 1777, and 1778. With an explanatory chapter and notes by Horatio Rogers. Respecting this publication, Mr. William L. Stone says:—

"The journal of Lieutenant Hadden is, perhaps, one of the most important manuscript documents bearing upon Burgoyne's campaign that has yet been discovered. This journal formerly belonged to William Cobbett of London. The elaborate maps with which the writer has interspersed his journal fully indicate the importance of the strategical positions taken by Schuyler previous to Gates assuming the command. Besides the journal there are several orderly-books, in which the proceedings of the British army from day to day are minutely set forth. In the manuscript book at Washington's headquarters at Newburgh, the order of the day for 19th of August, 1777, is missing. This missing link, however, is supplied by Hadden, who gives it in full, and it proves to have been an order issued by Major-General Phillips, in the absence, that day, of General Burgoyne, as follows: 'Major-General Phillips,' reads the missing order for the 19th, 'has heard with the utmost astonishment, that, notwithstanding his most serious and positive orders of the 16th instant, that no carts should be used for any purpose whatever but the transport of provisions, unless by particular orders from the commander-in-chief as expressed in the order, there are this day above thirty carts on the road laden with baggage said to be their Lieutenant-General's.'"

The Hadden journals and orderly-books were bought in 1875 by General Rogers, having passed through Henry Stevens's hands, and are carefully printed, with fac-similes of the MS. maps accompanying them.

Supplementing these, the following orderly-books may be mentioned:—

Henry B. Livingston's.—Troops under Gen. Schuyler, St. Clair, &c. Ticonderoga, Stillwater, &c., June 13 to August 19, 1777.

Gen. Philip Schuyler's.—Fort Edward, Albany, June 29 to August 18, 1777.

Camp at Stillwater, Saratoga and Albany, &c. August 12 to November 4, 1774.

Col. Thaddeus Cook's, of Wallingford, Conn., Stillwater, September 6 to October 6, 1777. Weekly Returns of the Regiment, September 13, 27, and October 21, 1777.

Capt. William Gates's Company, of Col. Timo. Bigelow's Regiment, Weekly Returns, various dates from October, 1777, to September, 1778. Also in same covers, Orderly Book of Lieut. David Grout's Company, of Timothy Bigelow's Regiment, February 15, 1779, to June 15, 1779, and Weekly Returns of Capt. Peirce's Co., same Regiment, in 1780.

These are all in the library of the Amer. Antiq. Soc. at Worcester, Mass. An orderly-book of James Kimball, of Croft's regiment, June, 1777, to Dec., 1778, has been published by the Essex Institute (Salem, Mass.).

The following diaries may be named:—

The journal of Henry Dearborn, Aug. 3-Dec. 3, which was in the J. W. Thornton sale, 1878, no. 501. It is now in the Boston Public Library, and is included in Dearborn's journals as printed in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1886, edited by Mellen Chamberlain, and separately as Journals of Henry Dearborn, 1776-1783 (Cambridge, 1887).

Chaplain Smith's diary, July and Aug., 1777, in R. A. Guild's Chaplain Smith and the Baptists, p. 197; Ralph Cross's journal, beginning Aug. 29, 1777, at Newburyport, and ending there on his return, Dec. 5th, in the Hist. Mag. (vol. xvii. pp. 8-11); diary of Ephraim Squier, Sept. 4 to Nov. 2, 1777, preserved in the Pension Office, Washington. Extracts from the diary of Capt. Benj. Warren are preserved in the Sparks MSS. (no. xlvii.). A copy of the journal of Samuel Harris, Jr., of Boston, during the campaign of 1777, after he joined the army at Stillwater, Sept. 20th, and describing the fight of Bemis's Heights, Oct. 7th, and the surrender of Oct. 17th, is in the Sparks MSS. (xxv.). Cf. McAlpine's Memoirs, published in 1788.

The British journals of Burgoyne's campaign by actors in it, which have been printed, are Roger Lamb's Original and authentic journal of occurrences during the late American war (Dublin, 1809), and his Memoir of his own Life (Dublin, 1811),—he was sergeant of the Royal Welsh Fusileers,—and Thomas Anburey's Travels through the interior parts of America (London, 1789 and 1791; French versions, Paris, 1790 and 1793; German, Berlin, 1792). Anburey was attached as a volunteer to the grenadier company of the 29th foot. (Cf. Rogers's Hadden Journals, explanatory chapter.) There is an English diary in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Feb., 1878).

For other personal records of the campaign, reference may be made to the brief summary of Maj. Hughes, one of Gates's aides (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Feb., 1858, iii. 279); the autobiography of Col. Philip van Cortlandt, of the second New York regiment (N. Y. Geneal. and Biog. Rec., July, 1874, vol. v. 123, and Hist. Mag., 1878).

Similar records on the British side are Maj. Edward M'Gauran's Memoirs, privately printed in London in 1786, in two volumes, and The narrative of Captain Samuel Mackay, commandant of a provincial regiment in North America; by the appointment of Lieut.-Gen. Burgoyne (Kingston, 1778). The author gives an account of his services as a royalist in command of a company of provincials attached to General Burgoyne's army, and complains of the refusal of the British generals to recognize him as an officer.

The British Museum has recently acquired a contemporary military critique of the campaign, by one of the actors in it, Lieut. Digby, of the British army.

The diary of the Hanau artillerist, Pausch, is preserved at Cassel, and a copy is in the hands of Mr. Edw. J. Lowell, from which a second copy was made, and from this no. 14 of Munsell's Hist. Series was printed as Journal of Capt. Pausch, chief of the Hanau artillery during the Burgoyne campaign. Translated and annotated by W. L. Stone. Introduction by E. J. Lowell (Albany, 1886). Pausch covers the interval from the day he left Hanau, May 15, 1776, to the close of Burgoyne's last battle, Oct. 7, 1777. There is in the notes (p. 149) a letter of one John Clunes, which shows some of the perils of the attempt to keep Burgoyne's rear open at Ticonderoga. A journal of Johann Konrad Döhla, a private of the regiment of Anspach, 1777-1783, is in the Deutsch-Amerikanisches Mag., 1886-1887.

[859] Less important accounts are in Hildreth and Gay; in Thaddeus Allen's Origination of the Amer. Union, etc.

[860] Mr. Stone adds a note (p. 149) on the periodical contributions of Gen. J. Watts De Peyster to the history and criticism of the campaign, aimed in large part to vindicate Schuyler and portray the patriotism of New York State. Cf. his paper in the United Service, ix. 365. A paper on the campaign in the Mag. of Amer. History, Dec., 1881, p. 457, refers to an article on the same topic in Graham's Magazine (Apr., 1847), by N. C. Brooks, mentioning original documents. A. B. Street printed a paper on Saratoga in the Hist. Mag., March, 1858. Cf. Lemoine's Maple Leaves, second series (Quebec, p. 123).

[861] Stone says it is "characterized by great fairness and liberality."

[862] Other German authorities are given in Lowell's Hessians, App. A.

[863] In Burgoyne's State of the Expedition is a "Plan of the encampment and position of the army under Gen. Burgoyne at Sword's House, on Hudson River, near Stillwater, on Sept. 17th, with the positions of that part of the army engaged on the 19th Sept., 1777. Drawn by W. C. Wilkinson, Lt. 62d Reg. Engraved by Wm. Faden", and published in London, Feb. 1, 1780. It has a portion superposed, showing later positions. There is a composite map in Carrington's Battles (p. 344); and in Hadden's Journal (p. 164) fac-simile of drawn plans of the order of march and order of battle on Sept. 19. There is a map of the battle of the 19th in Pausch's Journal, p. 163. Loosing (i. 53) gives a view of the Stillwater ground.

Burgoyne's State of the Expedition also contains a "Plan of the encampment and position of the army under Gen. Burgoyne at Bræmus Heights, on the 20th Sept., with the position of the detachments in the action of the 7th Oct., and the position of the army on the 8th Oct. Drawn by W. C. Wilkinson. Engraved by Wm. Faden", and published Feb. 1, 1780. This is reproduced in Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 292). Carrington (p. 350) gives an excellent eclectic map.

A plan of the battles of Freeman's Farm and Bemis's Heights, made by Col. Rufus Putnam, is preserved at Marietta, Ohio, and a copy is in Col. Stone's collection at Jersey City. There is also a plan given in Charles Wilson's Account of Burgoyne's Campaign (Albany, 1844), which is revised in Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne. Stedman's plan (American War, i. 352) traces the movements from Sept. 10th to the capitulation. Cf. Grant's British Battles, ii. 150.

The positions from Oct. 10th, when the investment of Burgoyne's camp began, to the 16th, when the surrender took place, are shown on the American side in a map sketched by Chapman from an original of an officer, which appeared in the Analectic Mag. (Philad., 1818, p. 433), and is reproduced herewith.

In Burgoyne's State of the Expedition is Faden's "Plan of the position which the army under Lt.-Gen. Burgoyne took at Saratoga on the 10th of Oct., 1777, and in which it remained till the convention was signed." It is reproduced in Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 302). Carrington (p. 354) gives a careful plan, and there are others in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (vol. i. 273) and Lowell's Hessians (p. 163), taken from Lossing's Field-Book (i. 77). Lossing also gives a view (p. 80) of the field of surrender, the signatures to the convention (p. 79), the medal given to Gates (p. 83), the house used by Gates as headquarters (p. 75), and the house occupied by the Baroness Riedesel (pp. i. 89, 557; cf. also Stone's Campaign of Burgoyne, p. 94).

Upon the landmarks and topography of this series of movements, see papers in the Boston Monthly (i. 505) for a visit to Bemis's Heights; a paper by W. L. Stone in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Nov., 1885, p. 510) on the remains of the works as now seen; and an examination of the localities in G. W. Schuyler's Colonial New York (ii. 128). Cf. Lossing's Field-Book and his Book of the Hudson.

[864] Cf. also Trumbull MSS. (vol. vi. and vii.); the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. iii, p. 223); the lives of Putnam; and Upham's Life of Glover.

[865] A letter of Gen. Parsons to Gov. Trumbull, on the capture of Fort Montgomery, is in Hildreth's Pioneer Settlers of Ohio (p. 534). The personal narrative of Thomas Richards is in United Service (xii. 274).

[866] Cf. also Clinton's letter in Rockingham and his Contemporaries (ii. 334), and his annotations on the account in Stedman (ch. 18) in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. (i. 704). A journal of a British officer is printed in Scull's Evelyns in America (p. 345).

The journal of Capt. Scott, who was sent by Burgoyne to open communication with Clinton, is in Fonblanque's Burgoyne (p. 287).

The later accounts are in Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 21); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. ch. 20), and his Field-Book (ii. 165); Leake's John Lamb (p. 179), where is controverted the opinion expressed in Hamilton's Life of Alex. Hamilton (i. 321), that the defence of the forts was feeble; Carrington's Battles; and Sargent's André (p. 102).

[867] There was also a map of the river in the Gent. Mag., 1778.

[868] Letters of Greene and others, May 17, 1777, respecting the obstructions in the North River at Fort Montgomery, are in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. iii.).

[869] Boston Monthly Mag., July, 1826; Loring's Hundred Boston Orators, 174; Parton's Franklin, ii. 283. The brief letter sent by Gates to the Mass. Council is in the Mass. Archives, and is printed in Hale's Franklin in France, p. 160. The letter of the Mass. government to Franklin (Oct. 24th) covered a copy of Gates's letter (Hale, p. 155).

[870] The effect in England is seen in the Debates in Parliament; Curwen's Journal (p. 175); P. O. Hutchinson's Diary of Thomas Hutchinson (vol. ii.); Donne's Corresp. of Geo. III. and Lord North (ii. 93, 111); excerpts in Moore's Diary, i. 525, Macknight's Burke (ii. 202); Russell's Mem. and Corresp. of Fox (i. 161); Fitzmaurice's Shelburne (iii. 12); Bancroft's United States (ix. 478); Mahon's England (vi. 206, and App. p. xxxix.); Fonblanque's Burgoyne (ch. 8); Madison's Writings (i. 31). Walpole (Last Journals, ii. 170) tells us how the king received the news of Burgoyne's disaster.

[871] Fonblanque, p. 333, and Almon's Remembrancer, vi. 207; but they do not agree upon the name of the vessel by which he sailed.

[872] Walpole (Last Journals, ii. 278) describes Burgoyne's appearance in the Commons.

[873] Cf. Bancroft's character of Burgoyne, in his orig. ed., vii. 245. Fonblanque (p. 5) charges Bancroft with coarseness in speaking of alleged but unfounded statements of Burgoyne's shame of birth. A certain swagger about the man laid Burgoyne open to the stinging burlesques of the small writers of the day. Cf. The Lamentations of Gen. Burgoyne (Sabin, iii. 9,262); Calendrier de Philadelphie, 1779 (Ibid. xiv. 61, 511), Moore's Songs and Ballads of the Rev. (176, 185, 189); Stone, Campaign of Burgoyne (App. xvi.).

[874] There were six editions printed in London, and one in Dublin, in 1778 (Sabin, iii. no. 9,257; Menzies, no. 264). These speeches were in response to a motion of inquiry made by John Wilkes, whose copy of this pamphlet belongs now to Mr. Charles Deane; and, by Wilkes's annotations upon it, it seems that Wilkes recalled a good deal that Burgoyne said and did not print, and qualified other parts which he did print.

[875] Sabin, iii. no. 9,257. There were six editions the same year. Menzies, no. 266.

[876] Sabin, iii. no. 9,266,—three editions; Menzies, no. 268.

[877] Sabin, iii. no. 9,263; Menzies, no. 267.

[878] Sabin, iii. no. 9,258; Menzies, no. 265.

[879] Sabin, iii. no. 9,260; Sparks's Catal., no. 405. Menzies, no. 272.

[880] Sabin, iii. no. 9,261; Menzies, no. 273.

[881] It appeared in two editions, and the book is now usually priced at about £3 (Sabin, iii. no. 9,255; Sparks, no. 404; Stevens, Bibl. Amer. (1885), no. 58; Menzies, no. 269.)

Burgoyne's documents, as laid before Parliament, had been printed in the Parliamentary Register. The Gentleman's Mag. had chronicled the progress of the investigation. Cf. Annual Register (xxi. 168) and Russell's Memoirs and Correspondence of Fox (i. 176).

The principal English MS. sources for the study of the whole campaign are these: The minutes of inquiry into the causes of Burgoyne's failure in the volume "Secretary of State, 1777-1781", in the War Office, London; Quebec series, in the Public Record Office, vols. xiv., xvi. (Cf. Brymner's Reports on Canadian Archives, 1883, p. 77; 1885, p. xi.)

[882] The volume contains Burgoyne's speech, prefatory to his narrative; his narrative; the evidence of Carleton, Balcarras, Harrington, Major Forbes, Lieut.-Colonel Kingston, and others; a review of the evidence and conclusion. In the Appendix are Burgoyne's "Thoughts for conducting the war from the side of Canada;" various letters of Burgoyne, Carleton, etc.; Burgoyne's speech to the Indians; Baum's instructions; St. Leger's letter from Oswego, Aug. 27, 1777; Burgoyne's letter from Albany, Oct. 20th; his councils of war, Oct. 12th and 13th; the terms proposed by Gates. There are added various plans of battle, elsewhere mentioned.

[883] Sabin, iii. no. 9,256; Menzies, no. 270. Privately reprinted in New York (75 copies) in 1865. It is said to have been printed without the sanction of Burgoyne.

[884] Sabin, iii. no. 9,265.

[885] Menzies, no. 271; Sabin, iii. no. 9,264. Sabin also notes, no. 9,267, Reponse à un des articles des Annales politiques de M. Linguet concernant la défaite du Général Burgoyne en Amérique (Londres, 1788). Cf. on Burgoyne's subsequent exchange, Rogers's Hadden's Journal.

[886] Other addresses are N. B. Sylvester's Saratoga and Hay-ad-ros-se-ra (July 4, 1876); George G. Scott's Saratoga County address; J. S. L'Amoreaux at Ballston Spa (July, 1876); Edward F. Bullard's, at Schuylerviile (July 4, 1776); H. C. Maine's Burgoyne's Campaign. The remarks of Messrs. Edward Wemple and S. S. Cox in Congress, Dec. 4, 1884, on the Saratoga monument, have been printed.

[887] The evidence on this point is overwhelming. "Those", wrote Washington, in a letter intended only for the eye of his step-son, "who want faith to believe the accounts of the shocking wastes of Howe's army—of their ravaging, plundering, and the abuse of women—may be convinced to their sorrow ... if a check cannot be put to their progress."

[888] Cf. letter of the Secret Committee of Congress to Silas Deane in Paris, Aug. 7, 1776 (N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1877, p. 99). Pertaining to this movement is a journal of a campaign from Philadelphia to Paulus Hook, by Algernon Roberts (Sparks MSS.), which is printed in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., vii. 456. It covers Aug. 16-Sept. 17, 1776. Cf. orderly-book in Hist. Mag., ii. 353; and a journal in the Penna. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 223.

[889] His letters (Sparks, iv., and 5 Force, iii.) give details of this retreat. Cf. also G. W. P. Custis's Recollections, p. 538. Howe has been much blamed for his want of enterprise in allowing Washington to escape (Galloway's Examination; Gordon's Amer. Rev., ii. 355; Wilkinson's Memoirs, i. 120).

[890] Lee was wrought upon by Joseph Reed writing to him, Nov. 21st, of Washington's "indecisive mind" (C. Lee's Memoirs; Moore's Treason of Lee, p. 46), and the next day Lee wrote in the same spirit to Bowdoin (Ibid., p. 49), and on the 24th he wrote to Reed of Washington's "fatal indecision." Moore examines this hesitancy of Lee (pp. 48, 57). For suspicions as to Lee's conduct at this time, see Moore's Treason of Lee; Heath's Memoirs, 88; Reed's Jos. Reed, i. 253; Drake's Knox; J. C. Hamilton's Republic, i. ch. 6; Lee Papers (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll.), ii. 337, etc.

[891] Cf. Force's Archives, 5th ser., vol. iii.; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 173; Wilkinson's Memoirs, i. 105; Sparks's Washington, iv. App. p. 530; Robert Morris's letter, Dec. 17th, in Pa. Hist. Soc. Bull., vol. i.; Moore's Treason of Lee, 61; Bancroft, ix. 210; Irving's Washington, ii. 433; Scull's Evelyns in America, 211; Memoir of Mrs. E. S. M. Quincy (1861); Fonblanque's Burgoyne, p. 50.

A contemporary picture of the capture of Lee, in Barnard's Hist. of England, represents him in uniform at the door of his house, handing his sword to a mounted officer, whose horse prances among dead bodies, while a platoon of dragoons stands at a little distance.

Lee's exchange was rendered possible when Washington acquired a prisoner of equal rank by the exploit of Colonel Barton. This Rhode Island officer summoned a party, and in whale-boats crossed Narragansett Bay, and (July 10, 1777) surprised Gen. Richard Prescott in bed at his headquarters, a few miles north of Newport where he held command of the British who, under Clinton and Percy, had taken possession of that port in Dec., 1776 (Almon'S Remembrancer, iii. 261; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 639). The parole of Gen. Prescott, July 14, 1777, given at Providence, as well as a letter from Lambert Cadwalader, "being greatly indebted to his politeness and generosity while a prisoner in New York", are in the Trumbull MSS. (vol. vi.). The parole is printed in Arnold's Rhode Island, ii. 403. General Smith's letter, July 12th, to Howe is in the Sparks MSS., lviii. Contemporary accounts are in Moore's Diary, i. 468. Cf. Force's Archives, 4th ser., vol. iv., and Thacher's Mil. Journal. Barton was assisted by a negro. Livermore's Historical Research, 143. There was an address by Professor Diman on the centennial of the capture, which was printed as no. 1 of the R. I. Hist. Tracts. Cf. Narrative of the surprise and Capture of Maj.-Gen. Richard Prescott, July 9, 1777 (Windsor, Vt., 1821), and a tract of similar title, Philadelphia, 1817; Mrs. C. R. Williams's Biog. of Revolutionary Heroes (William Barton and Stephen Olney), Providence, 1839; Andrew Sherburne's Memoirs, App.; Sparks's Washington, iv. 495; Arnold's Rhode Island; Scull's Evelyns in America, 280. Diman gives a photograph of a portrait of Barton, and a fac-simile of his orders. Cf. Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 75. Scull (p. 140) gives a likeness of Prescott. Views of the house where the capture took place are in Mason's Newport, p. 8; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 76, and his Cyclo. U. S. Hist., p. 1133.

[892] Penna. Archives, vi. (1853); Colonial Records of Pa., xi. (1852); Hazard's Register, iii. 40; Rev. Dr. Muhlenberg's journal in Pa. Hist. Soc. Coll., i.; Robert Morris's letters in Pa. Hist. Soc. Bull., i. 50, etc.; broadsides enumerated in Hildeburn's Issues of Pa. Press, ii.; the diary of Christopher Marshall (Philad., 1839, to Dec. 31, 1776; again to Dec. 31, 1777; in full, Albany, 1877).

[893] See ante, p. 272.

[894] Wallace's Col. W. Bradford, p. 140. Mr. Stone indicates the following authorities on these points: Charles Thomson's letter to Drayton (Pa. Mag. of Hist., ii. 411; N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1878, p. 274); Reed's Reed (ii. ch. i.); Anna H. Wharton on Thomas Wharton, Jr., in Pa. Mag. Hist. (v. 431, 437,—also in The Wharton Family); St. Clair Papers (i. 370, 373); Proceedings relative to calling the Conventions of 1776 and 1780 (Harrisburg, 1825); Journals of the Ho. of Rep. of Penna. (vol. i.—Philad., 1782); Pa. Col. Rec., xi.; and other titles in Hildeburn.

[895] For further aspects of a political nature, see Wells's Sam. Adams, ii.; Ellery's letter to the governor of Rhode Island (R. I. Col. Rec., viii.), and the Corresp. of the Executive of New Jersey, 1776-1786 (Newark, 1846); Read's George Read, 212, 216, and (Cæsar Rodney's letter) 256. The leading biographies give some original aspects: Greene's Greene, i. 299 (in which Bancroft's statements are controverted); Reed's Reed, ch. 14; Drake's Knox, 36; Stone's John Howland, who was with the troops from Lee, which reinforced Washington; Williams's Olney. There is a contemporary "Relation of the Engagement at Trenton and Princetown on Thursday and Friday the 2d and 3d of January, 1777, by Mr. Wood, 3d Battalion", in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., x. 263.

A journal of Sergeant William Young is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., Oct., 1884, vol. viii. 255. A little chapbook, Narrative of events in the Revolutionary war; with an account of the battles of Trenton, Trenton-bridge and Princeton (Charlestown [1833]), by Joseph White, an orderly-sergeant of artillery, gives some personal experiences.

[896] C. C. Haven's tracts: Washington and his army in New Jersey (Trenton, 1856), Thirty days in New Jersey ninety years ago (1867), Annals of the City of Trenton (1867), and Historic Manual concerning Trenton and Princeton. (Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., iii. 335.) Joseph F. Tuttle's papers: Annals of Morris County (187-), Revolutionary forefathers of Morris County (Dover, 1876), "Washington in Morris County", in Hist. Mag., June, 1871. E. D. Halsey's Hist. of Morris County (N. Y., 1882). W. A. Whitehead's Perth Amboy (p. 329), and Penna. Hist. Coll., i. 223. Hatfield's Hist. of Elizabeth (ch. 20). A paper, "Washington on the west bank of the Delaware", by Gen. W. W. H. Davis, giving local details, in Penna. Mag. of Hist. (iv. 133). Historical Mag., xix. 205. Harper's Mag., July, 1874. Potter's Amer. Monthly, Jan., 1877. Johnston's Campaign of 1776 (ch. 8).

[897] Gordon (vol. ii.); Bancroft (orig. ed. ix. ch. 12; final revision, v. ch. 6, 7, 8); Irving's Washington (vol. ii.); Gay, Pop. Hist. U. S. (iii. 520).

[898] Bancroft, ix. 218; Reed's Reed, i. 270.

[899] Other contemporary American accounts are by Major Morris (Sparks MSS., no. liii.; Chalmers's MSS. in Thorpe's Catal. Suppl., 1843, no. 632); by R. H. Lee (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., 1878, xix. 109); by Sullivan (N. H. State Papers, viii. 492); in Stirling's letter (Dec. 28, 1776) (Sedgwick's Livingston, 211). The order of march to Trenton is in Drake's Knox, 113. Capt. Wm. Hull's letter, Jan. 1, 1777, is in Bonney's Legacy of Hist. Gleanings, 1875, i. p. 57. (Cf. Hull's Rev. Services, ch. 5.) See also Greene's Greene (book ii. ch. 13); Reed's Reed (i. 273); Wilkinson's Memoirs (ch. 3); Smith's St. Clair; Stone's John Howland (p. 72); Marshall's Washington (ii. ch. 8); Drake's Knox (p. 37); Memoirs of Tench Tilghman (p. 148); Journals of Samuel Shaw; Capt. Thomas Rodney's letter in Niles's Principles (1822, p. 341); Force's Amer. Archives (5th, iii.); Freeman's Journal in Moore's Diary (p. 364). The account in the Penna. Evening Post, Dec. 28, 1776, is copied in Penna. Mag. of Hist., July, 1886, p. 203.

Local publications are: Raum's Trenton (1866); C. C. Haven's Annals of Trenton; Henry K. How's Battle of Trenton (N. Brunswick, 1856).

Of the more general accounts, Bancroft (ix. 218) is the best. Cf. Hist. of First Troop of Pa. Cavalry, p. 7. Cf. also Gordon (ii. 393); Irving's Washington (ii. 449); Dawson (i. 196); Carrington (ch. 39); Johnston's Campaign of 1776 (p. 288, with docs. pp. 151, 153). Also articles in Godey's Mag. (xxxii. 51) and Harper's Mag. (vii. 445), and details in Lossing's Field-Book.

[900] Cf. Lowell's Hessians, ch. 8; Eelking's Hülfstruppen, i. 113, 132. The oft-printed letter of the Prince of Hesse-Cassel to Baron Hohendorf or Hozendorf is a forgery (Kapp's Soldatenhandel, 2d ed. 199). A court-martial of the Hessian officers was held at Cassel in 1782, and the report of it is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., vii. 45 (April, 1883), a paper of much use to the writer of the preceding narrative.

The battle is the subject of one of Trumbull's pictures. On a Hessian flag captured, see Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 413. Moore, Songs and Ballads, 150, 156, 165, gives some of the current verses.

The movements of Washington after Trenton in recrossing the Delaware, are easily followed in Washington's letters to Congress, in Reed's narrative (Penna. Mag. Hist., viii. 391); in Sergeant William Young's Journal (Ibid. viii. 255); in Reed's Reed (i. 277); and in Wilkinson's Memoirs (i. 133).

[901] Gordon (ii. 398); Bancroft (ix. 248); Dawson (ch. 17); Carrington (ch. 41); Irving's Washington (ii. 477); Johnston's Campaign of 1776 (p. 293,—quoting from a Rhode Island officer's statement in Stiles's diary). G. W. P. Custis's Recollections (ch. 3).

[902] The narrative of George Inman is in the Pa. Mag. of Hist., vii. 240; and he tempers on some points the assertions of Stedman.

Upon Howe's evacuation of New Jersey and the sluggishness of his subsequent movements, see Sparks's Washington (iv.); Bancroft (ix. ch. 20); Graydon's Memoirs; Green's Greene: Graham's Morgan; Life of Timothy Pickering, i.; Irving's Washington, iii. ch. 8; Eelking's Hülfstruppen; Lecky, iv. 58. Cf. Journal of Capt. Rodney in Campaign of 1776, Doc. 158, and the Journal of Capt. John Montresor (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1881, p. 420; and in part in Pa. Mag. of Hist., v. and vi.). Howe's losses, Aug.-Dec., 1776, are tabulated in the War in America (Dublin, 1779). The campaign is examined in Gen. Carrington's Strategic Relations of New Jersey to the War of Amer. Independence (Newark, 1885).

[903] The principal controversial tracts upon the charges of incompetency preferred against Howe are these: The Narrative of Lieut.-Gen. Howe relative to his Conduct during his late command in North America (London, 1780, several eds.). Letters to a nobleman on the Conduct of the War in the middle Colonies, (London, 1780, various eds.). Howe replied in Observations; and this led to a Reply to the Observations (London, 1781). Another severe critic appeared in Two letters from Agricolas to Sir William Howe (London, 1779). Galloway was sharp in his Examination. The loyalists felt Howe's shortcomings poignantly, as they prolonged, as was thought, their exile (Life of Peter Van Shaack, 167). The contemporary historians, like Murray and Gordon, did not spare him. The later ones, like Andrews (ii. ch. 26), Adolphus (ii. ch. 31), Smyth (Lectures, no. 34), were quite as severe. The American historians have not disputed the adverse conclusion (Marshall, Bancroft, Irving, etc.). Cf. Sargent's André, ch. 7, and a note in his Stansbury and Odell, 137. The current story that the charms of Mrs. Loring paralyzed the English general finds occasional record (John Bernard's Recoll. of America, N. Y., 1887, p. 60). On General Howe's lineage, as affecting his characteristics, see General Sir William Howe's Orderly-Book, 1775-1776, etc., collected by B. F. Stevens, with hist. introd. by Edw. E. Hale (London, 1884); also Dawson's Westchester, p. 217.

[904] Jones, i. 187, 252, 256, 714; ii. 431.

[905] The charge of treason is also disputed (Hist. Mag., v. 53). Cf. G. W. Greene's Gen. Greene, i. 385; his Historical View, 62, 265; Lossing in Mag. of Amer. Hist., July, 1879, p. 450.

[906] Cf. W. T. Read in the Hist. Mag., July, 1871, p. 1. Cf. Gordon; Penna. Archives, 1st and 2d series; Reed's Reed, i. ch. 15, 16; Drake's Knox, 43; Greene's Greene; Irving's Washington, iii. ch. 18, 19; Hamilton's Republic, i. ch. 10; Mahon, in the main just; histories of Pennsylvania; McSherry's Maryland, ch. 11; Quincy's Shaw, ch. 3; Evelyns in America, 302. For political aspects, Wells's Sam. Adams, ii. ch. 44; Lee's R. H. Lee; Adams's John Adams.

[907] Hutchinson, in London, seems to have thought Boston the object of the campaign (Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 165; Adams's Familiar Letters, 286; Hutchinson's Diaries, ii. 152). James Lovell writes from Philadelphia, July 29, 1777, that Howe seems bound up the Delaware; but he warns his friends in New England that his present movements may be undertaken to cloak an ultimate design upon the New England coast (Charles Lowell MSS.).

[908] J. F. Tuttle's Washington at Morristown, in Harper's Mag., xviii. 289; Potter's Amer. Monthly, v. 665.

[909] There are in the Persifer Frazer papers (Sparks MSS., xxi.) some letters from the Mount Pleasant camp, near Bound Brook and Morristown, in June and July, 1777. For the British movements at this time, cf. the journal in Scull's Evelyns in America, p. 328.

[910] Sparks, iv. 442, 453, 501, 505; v. 42; Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv.; Greene's Greene, i. 400, 429; N. H. State Papers, viii. 620.

[911] N. H. State Papers, viii. 652, 653; Adams's Familiar letters, 294; Heath Papers in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., p. 71. Howe's Narrative gives his reason for not going up the Delaware.

[912] Various papers relating to the raid and the inquiry are in the Sparks MSS., no. liv. For the inquiry, see also the N. H. State Papers, viii. 704. A diary of Andrew Lee is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., iii. 167. The current American and British accounts are in Moore's Diary, i. 482.

[913] Hamilton's Works, vii. 519; N. H. State Papers, viii. 673; Jones's New York, ii. 431. His advance is followed in Futhey's Paoli address, and in his notes as printed in the Penna. Mag. of Hist. Cf. also Montresor's journal.

[914] The orders of march are recorded in W. T. R. Saffell's Records of the Rev. War (p. 333), and John Adams's account of the march through Philadelphia is in his Familiar Letters. A sermon preached on the eve of the battle of Brandywine, by Rev. Jacob Trout, Sept. 10th, is given in L. M. Post's Personal Recoll. of the Amer. Rev. (1839,—App.) Penna. Hist. Soc. Coll., i.; Mag. Amer. Hist., March, 1885, p. 281 (fac-simile). Confidence prevailed in Philadelphia that Howe could be beaten. Shippen letters in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1864, p. 32.

[915] Washington, vol. v. App. p. 456. Some confusion has arisen from the fact that the ford called Buffenton's at a later day was not the one so known at the time of the battle, and there are in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. iii.) some letters upon this point from William B. Reed (with a small pen-map) and Alfred Elwyn.

There has been some question upon the responsibility of Sullivan for the defeat; but Washington asked to be allowed to suspend the execution of the orders of Congress, withdrawing Sullivan from the army. Bancroft (ix. 395) has been the chief accuser of late, and T. C. Amory, in his Mil. Services of Gen. Sullivan (pp. 45, 50), the principal defender. Sullivan's letter to Congress, Sept. 27th, which Bancroft (ix. 397) considers "essential to a correct understanding of the battle", is in N. H. Hist. Coll., ii. 208; Dawson, i. 279; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1866, p. 407; his letter of vindication, Nov. 5th, is in N. H. State Papers, viii. 743. A copy of Sullivan's defence (Nov. 9, 1777) is among the Langdon Papers, and is copied in the Sparks MSS. (lii. vol. ii. p. 199). The counter-arguments of the case are examined in the Penna. Hist. Soc. Bulletin, vol. i. Read's George Read, 273, questions Sullivan's vigilance. Cf. Sparks's Washington, v. 108, 456, for the charges against Sullivan. Bancroft also criticises the conduct of Greene, and Geo. W. Greene (Life of Greene, i. 447, 453; ii. 460) defends that general.

[916] Cf. Reed's Reed, i. ch. 15; Read's George Read; Lee's War in the Southern Dep't., 16; Muhlenberg's Muhlenberg, ch. 3, and the Bland Papers. For special treatment, see Carrington, ch. 50; Dawson, ch. 24; the account by Joseph Townsend, and the sketch by J. S. Bowen and J. S. Futhey, in Penna. Hist. Soc. Bull., i., where various essential documents are printed; H. M. Jenkins in Lippincott's Mag., xxx. 329; Potter's Amer. Monthly, vii. 94. There are local aspects in Smith's Delaware County, p. 305, and Lewis's Chester County. The services of John Shreve, of the New Jersey line, are told in Mag. Amer. Hist. (1879), iii. 565. The widow of a wounded guide, Francis Jacobs, applied for a pension as late as 1858 (Senate Repts., no. 213, 35th Cong., 1st sess.). Washington's headquarters are shown in Smith's Del. County, p. 304, and Penna. Hist. Soc. Proc., i.; and Lafayette's in Smith, 310. A view of the field is given in Day's Hist. Coll. Penna., p. 213.

Accounts more or less general are in Gordon, Irving (iii. ch. 18), Lossing, Gay (iii. 543), Thaddeus Allen's Origination of the Amer. Union; Hollister's Conn., ii. ch. 16; Mag. Amer. Hist., ii. 310. Washington seems to have been poorly informed about the country, and to have relied on false intelligence.

[917] The Journal of Capt. John Montresor, July 1, 1777, to July 1, 1778, edited by G. D. Scull, is in Penna. Mag. Hist., v. 393; vi. 34, 189, 284, 295, with corrections, 372. There are letters in Scull's Evelyns in America, 244; Moore's Laurens Correspondence, 52; and others from Gen. Fitzpatrick in Walpole's Letters.

[918] Cf. Eelking, ch. 6, and Du Portail in Mahon, vi. App. 27.

[919] Bisset's George III., ch. 19, 25; N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., April, 1879, p. 240, and July, p. 351; J. Watts de Peyster in Scribner's Monthly, April, 1880, p. 940.

[920] Cf. also Moore's Diary, 498; Pennypacker's Phœnixville, 101; Bell's address in Hazard's Register; Laurens Correspondence, 53; Hist. Mag., iii. 375; iv. 346; J. W. De Peyster in United Service, 1886, p. 318; and lives of Wayne by Armstrong and Moore.

[921] Howe's Narrative; the Conduct of the War; Ross's Cornwallis; papers on the war in Penna. Archives, 1st, v., and 2d, iii.; Thomas Paine's letter to Franklin (Penna. Mag. Hist., ii. 283); Penna. Evening Post; Watson's Annals of Philad.; Drake's Knox; Greene's Greene; Mem. of B. Tallmadge; Bancroft, ix. ch. 23, etc. Howe's proclamations during this period are noted in the Catalogue Philad. Library, p. 1553; Hildeburn's Issues of the Press (under 1777).

Congress fled to York, and occupied the old court-house, of which a view, in fac-simile of an old print is given in Mag. Amer. Hist., Dec., 1885, p. 552.

[922] Washington, v. 463; Dawson, 326; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Dec., 1866, p. 418; Amory's Sullivan, 57; and in part in N. H. State Papers, viii. 705.

[923] Sparks, v. 78, 86, 102; Dawson, i. 325; Heath Papers, Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xliv. 76. Other contemporary evidence is in the letters of Wayne (Dawson, i. 328; cf. lives of Wayne); Gen. Adam Stephen (Sparks, v. 467): Gen. Armstrong (Dawson, 329); Knox (Drake, 52); William Heth (Leake's Lamb, 183). Other contemporary statements and documents are in Moore's Diary, 504; Penna. Archives, v. 646; Pa. Mag. of Hist., i. 13, 399, 400, 401; ii. 283; Tilghman's Memoirs, 160; Davis's Lacey, 48; Watson's Annals of Philad., ii. 67; Hist. Mag., xi., 82, 148; Moore's Laurens, Corresp., 54. Accounts of participants given at a later day are by C. C. Pinckney (1820), who was on Washington's staff (Hist. Mag., x. 202), and Col. J. E. Howard, who addressed a letter to Pickering in 1827, a copy of which in his own hand, with a rude plan, is in the Sparks MSS., no. xlix. vol. i., and it is printed in Sparks, v. 468.

[924] Cf. No. Amer. Rev., April, 1825, p. 381; Oct., 1826, p. 414; National Intelligencer, Dec. 5, 1826, and Jan. 27, Feb. 24, 1827. Cf. Hazard's Register, i. 49. On the 21st November, 1777, James Lovell at York expressed the discontent with Washington in a letter to Joseph Whipple at Portsmouth. He complained that the naval force at Fort Mifflin was not properly seconded by the land force; and adds: "I have reason to think the battle of Germantown was the day of salvation offered by Heaven to us, and that such another is not to be looked for in ten campaigns."

[925] Lives of Washington by Sparks (vol. i.), Irving (iii. ch. 23); of Greene by Johnson and Greene; Muhlenberg's Muhlenberg; the collated narrative in Dawson (i. 318); the military criticism in Carrington (ch. 51), and accounts in Bancroft (ix. 424,—controverted in Amory's Sullivan); Reed's Reed (i. 319); Sargent's André (p. 112); Lossing, Gay, etc. Cf. Lowell's Hessians (p. 197); notes in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc., ix. 183; Harper's Mag. (i. 148; vii. 448); Potter's Amer. Monthly (vii. 81); T. Ward on the Germantown Road, in Penna. Mag. Hist., v. p. 1, etc. At the centennial ceremonies in 1877 there were addresses by Judge Thayer and by A. C. Lambdin (Penna. Mag. Hist., i. 361).

[926] Cf. Stedman (i. ch. 15); Mahon (vi. 163); Hamilton's Grenadier Guards (vol. ii.). Also see Wilkinson's Memoirs, i. 369, for Howe's orders; Hunter's diary in Moorsom's Fifty-second Reg., 20; Lord Lindsay in Memoirs of Admiral Gambier (Hist. Mag., v. 69); Harcourt in Evelyns in America, 244.

[927] Wallace's Col. Wm. Bradford, the patriot printer of 1776 (Philad., 1884), ch. 30; Bancroft, ix. ch. 25.

[928] Local details are in Smith's Delaware County, p. 289. Washington was opposed to trying to match an inferior navy with the British (Wallace, p. 271), and Wallace weighs the advantages (p. 296). There are some current observations in Adams's Familiar Letters, p. 257. The ultimate destruction and scuttling of the American vessels is described by Wallace (p. 247), referring in connection to the Universal Mag., vol. lxii. Cf. Hist. Mag., iii. 201. The principal loss of the British fleet was the blowing up of the frigate "Augusta" (Wallace, P. 187; United Service, May, 1883, p. 459).

[929] For other contemporary records see 2 Penna. Archives, v.; Moore's Diary, 514; Pickering's in Life of Pickering, i. 174; Joseph Reed's letter, Oct. 24, to President Wharton (cf. Reed's Reed, i. 336); Jones (i. 193) gives the accredited British reports. The best later narrative is in Wallace's Bradford (p. 183). Cf. Bancroft, ix. 430; Smith's Delaware County, p. 321.

[930] Varnum's and Angell's letters in Cowell's Spirit of '76 in R. I., 296; Col. Laurens' diary in the Army papers of Col. John Laurens, p. 74, and his letter to Henry Laurens in Moore's Laurens Correspondence (1861), p. 63; Major Fleury's diary in Marshall and in Sparks (v. 154); Robert Morton's diary in Penna. Mag. of Hist. (i. 28); Bradford's letter in Force (vi. p. 11). The story as given in the United States Mag., May, 1779 (p. 204), used by Bancroft (ix. 434), is reprinted in the Penna. Mag. Hist., App. 1887, p. 82. Moore (Diary, i. 520) reprints the account in the N. Jersey Gazette. Washington's instructions and his report to Congress are in Sparks (v. 100, 112, 115, 151, 154; Dawson, i. 364).

Other details are found in Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., ii. 3, 7, 12, 18, 20, 42; Penna. Archives, v. and vi.; Chastellux's Travels, Eng. tr., i. 260; Hist. Mag., xxi. 77; Tuckerman's Com. Talbot; Hamilton's Repub. U. S., i. 297; Life of Pickering, i. 174; Greene's Greene, i. 501; Potter's Amer. Monthly, Feb., 1877.

[931] There is some confusion in the accounts of the grounds given for the defence (Arnold's Rhode Island, ii. 410).

[932] Pickering's Journal in his Life (i. 180); Knox's letters in Drake's Knox, 135, and in Leake's Lamb, 192; the account in Williams's Olney; and further in Gordon, Marshall (i. 178), Henry Lee's Memoirs; Reed's Reed (i. ch. 16); Almon, v.; Stone's Invasion of Canada (p. 75); Hist. Mag., Feb., 1872; Dawson, i. ch. 29, 30; Carrington (ch. 52); Lossing, etc.

[933] The broadside orders of the British commanders can be found in Sabin, xv. p. 577, etc.; Hildeburn's Issues of the press, under 1777 and 1778; some of them are in fac-simile in Smith's Hist. and Lit. Curios., 2d series.

[934] Those of Christopher Marshall; James Allen (Penna. Mag. of Hist., Oct., 1885, p. 278; Jan., 1886, p. 424); Robert Morton (Ibid., i. p. 1); Miss Sally Wister (Ibid., 1885 and 1886; Howard Jenkins' Hist. Coll. relating to Gwynedd; extracts in Watson's Annals); Margaret Morris, Private journal kept for the amusement of a sister, Philadelphia, 1836, p. 31,—(also copy in Sparks MSS., no. xlviii.); notes in Evelyns in America (also in Penna. Mag. Hist., 1884, p. 223). Cf. also a letter, Oct. 23, 1777, in Lady Cavendish's Admiral Gambier (also in Hist. Mag., v. 68); the letters of Samuel Cooper in Penna. Mag. Hist., April, 1886; the account of a Hessian captain, Henrich, is in the Schlözer Correspondenz, vol. iii.,—translated in Penna. Mag. Hist., vol. i. 46; cf. Lowell's Hessians, p. 100.

[935] Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia; Sargent's André, p. 119; Penna. Mag. Hist., iii. 361, by F. D. Stone; Life of Esther Reed, p. 278, by W. B. Reed; United Service Journal, 1852. The house in Market Street, occupied successively by Washington and Howe as headquarters, is depicted in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 302; Scharf and Westcott, i. 351; Brotherhead's Signers (1861), p. 3.

[936] The contemporary accounts of it are in the Annual Register, 1778, p. 264; Gent. Mag., August, 1778; Moore's Diary, ii. 52; Bland Papers, i. 90; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 242, 718. André played a conspicuous part and described it (Sargent's André, 168; Lossing's Two Spies, 46). Israel Mauduit made it the occasion of a severe condemnation of Howe in his Strictures on the Philadelphia Mischianza, or Triumph upon leaving America unconquered (London, 1779,—Sparks Catal., no. 2,550). Later accounts will be found in the Lady's Mag. (Philad., 1792); Anna H. Wharton's Wharton Genealogy, and her paper in the Philadelphia Weekly Times, May 25, 1878; Watson's Annals, vol. iii.; Egle's Penna., 185; Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Rev., i. 182, and Domestic Hist., etc., ch. 12; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 303. Views of the Wharton house and other illustrations are in Smith and Watson's Lit. and Hist. Curiosities; Lossing; Scharf and Westcott (i. 377-380).

[937] Sparks's Washington, i. 276; v. 240, 522; Corresp. of the Rev., ii.; Custis's Recollections, ch. 9.

[938] Henry Dearborn's, the original of which is in the Boston Public Library, is printed in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1886, p. 110; Surgeon Waldo's, in Hist. Mag., May, 1861, vol. v. p. 129; of John Clark, in N. Jersey Hist. Soc. Coll., vii. There is illustrative material among the John Lacey papers in the N. Y. State Library, and various letters from the camp in the Trumbull MSS. (vol. vi. pp. 46, 50,—from Jed. Huntington, speaking of their "shameful situation"); others in Hist. Mag., April, 1867; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., July, 1860 (v. 48), and Feb., 1874 (xiii. 243),—the last from Col. John Brooks. More or less of personal experience and observation of the suffering will be found in Greene's Greene (i. ch. 24, 25); Reed's Reed (i. ch. 17); Pickering's Pickering (i. 200); Read's Geo. Read (326); Hull's Rev. Services (ch. 12).

General treatment will be found in Bancroft (ix. ch. 27); Egle's Penna., 955; Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 27, 31); T. Allen's Origination of the Amer. Union (vol. ii.); Lossing's Field-Book (ii. 331); Mrs. Ellet's Domest. Hist.; T. W. Bean's Washington and Valley Forge; Potter's Amer. Monthly, May, 1875, and July, 1878.

[939] Col. H. A. Dearborn's, Jan. 12-Feb. 4, in J. H. Osborne's collection at Auburn, N. Y.; of a German battalion of Continentals, Jan., 1777-June, 1781, in the Penna. Hist. Society. General Wayne's was sold in the Menzies sale, no. 2,095 ($100); it covered Feb. 26-May 27, 1778, and had been used by Sparks, Irving, and Bancroft. One covering May-June is in the Boston Athenæum, extracts from which are in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (vii. 133), which speaks of the mud being removed towards spring from the chinks of the huts, to increase the fresh air. Records of some courts-martial are in the Moses Greenleaf MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc.). Cf. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vii. 133.

[940] Cf. further, on this reorganization of the army, Hamilton's Works, ii. 138; Bancroft, ix. ch. 27. In the spring (May 5th) a new impulse was given in this direction by the appointment of Steuben as inspector-general (Journals of Congress, ii. 539; Sparks's Washington, v. 349, 526; Greene's Hist. View, 233; Kapp's Steuben; Greene's German Element; Wells's Sam. Adams, iii. 2).

[941] Cf. Washington at Valley Forge, together with the Duché Correspondence (Philad., 1858?); Graydon's Memoirs, 429; Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia; Wilson's Memoir of Bishop White.

[942] Cf. Simcoe's Journal; Reed's Reed, i.; Greene's Greene, i. ch. 24; Pickering's Pickering, i. 193; Graham's Morgan.

[943] Moore's Songs and Ballads, 209; Lossing's Field-Book, ii.; Mag. Amer. Hist., April, 1882, p. 296; Moore's Diary, ii. 5.

[944] Cf. Simcoe; Stedman, ii.; Dawson, i. ch. 33, 34; Lossing, ii. 344; Johnson's Salem, N. Jersey.

[945] Dawson, i. 386; W. W. H. Davis's John Lacey, Doylestown, 1868; Hist. Mag., vi. 167; Moore's Diary, ii. 41.

[946] Sparks, v. 368, 378, 545; Sparks MSS., xxxii., for Lafayette's narrative given to Sparks; Wilkinson's Memoirs, i. 822; Irving, iii. 33.

[947] Sparks, v. 320; Sparks MSS., lii. vol. iii.; Muhlenberg's Muhlenberg, chap. 5.

[948] Wayne's letter, May 21st, in Penna. Mag. Hist., April, 1887, p. 115; journal by Andrew Bell, Clinton's secretary, of the march through New Jersey, in N. Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., vi., and journal of Joseph Clark in Ibid., vii. 93; Eelking, ch. 10; Mag. Am. Hist., Jan., 1879, p. 58. A British orderly-book, Philad., April-June, 1778, is in the Amer. Antiq. Society. The American vessels scuttled above the city were raised (Wallace's Bradford, 292).

[949] Sparks, v. 422, 431; Dawson, i. 412; Lee Papers, N. Y., 1872, p. 441. Cf. Recollections by Custis, ch. 5.

[950] Lee Papers, p. 467; Pa. Mag. Hist., ii. 139; Hamilton's Works, ed. Lodge, vii. 550; Hamilton's Repub. U. S., i. 468, 478.

[951] Sparks MSS., xxxii., printed in Sparks's Washington, v. 552, and his letter in Marshall's Washington, i. 255.

[952] By Col. John Laurens (Lee Papers, pp. 430, 449); by W. Irvine (Penna. Mag. Hist., ii. 139); by Colonel Richard Butler, July 23, 1778, to General Lincoln, in Sparks MSS., lxvi., and other light in the Lincoln papers as copied in Ibid., xii.; by Generals Wayne and Scott (Sparks's Corresp. of the Rev., ii. 150; Lee Papers, 438); by Wayne to his wife (Ibid., 448); by Knox (Sparks MSS., xxv.; Drake's Knox, 56); by Persifer Frazer (Sparks MSS., xxi.); the account in the N. Jersey Gazette, June 24, 1778 (Lee Papers); the narrative from the N. Y. Journal (Moore's Diary, ii. 66); the journal of Dearborn (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Nov., 1886, p. 115); diary of John Clark (N. Jersey Hist. Soc., vii.). Cf. James McHenry in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. 355.

[953] Other editions: Cooperstown, 1823; N. Y., private ed., 1864; Sabin, x. nos. 39,711, etc. It is reprinted in the Lee Papers (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 3 vols., 1873), as is also (iii. 255) Lee's vindication, printed in the Penna. Packet, Dec. 3, 1778. Cf. also Langworthy's Lee, p. 23; Sparks's Lee; Davis's Burr; Reed's Reed, i. 369; and the correspondence of Washington and Lee after the battle, in Sparks, v. 552, etc.

The Sparks MSS. contain various papers, including the statement of John Clark, who bore Washington's orders to Lee (dated Sept. 3, 1778), and a statement of John Brooks, who had personal knowledge of Washington's treatment of Lee in the field.

Sargent (André, 188) is inclined to acquit Lee of blame for his retreat at Monmouth.

Colonel Laurens called Lee out for using language disrespectful to Washington, when Lee was slightly wounded (account by the seconds in Hamilton, Lodge's ed., vii. 562).

The more general accounts, early and late, are in Marshall (iii. ch. 8,—who was present); Heath's Memoirs (p. 186); Hull's Rev. Services (ch. 14); Reed's Reed (i. ch. 17); Williams's Olney (p. 243); Armstrong's Wayne; Washington, by Sparks (i. 298), and Irving (iii. ch. 34, 35); Drake's Knox; Kapp's Steuben (p. 159); Quincy's Shaw (ch. 4); Hamilton's Hamilton (i. 194), and his Repub. U. S. (i. 471); Bancroft (ix. ch. 4); Gay (iii. 603).

Henry Armitt Brown delivered the oration in the Centennial ceremonies (Memoir with orations, edited by J. M. Hoppin, Philad., 1880).

Critical examinations of the battle have been made by Gen. J. W. De Peyster in the Mag. Amer. Hist., July and Sept., 1878; March and June, 1879; cf. 1879, p. 355 (by J. McHenry); by Dawson (ch. 37, praised by Kapp); and by Carrington (ch. 54-56).

Cf. for various details, C. King in N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., iv. 125; Amer. Hist. Rec., June, 1874; Barker and Howe's Hist. Coll. N. J.; Linn's Buffalo Valley, 159; the Moll Pitcher story in Mag. Amer. Hist., Sept., 1883, p. 260, and Penna. Mag. Hist., iii. 109. For a visit to the field a few days after the battle, U. S. Mag., Philad., 1779, by H. H. Brackenridge, reprinted in Monmouth Inquirer, June, 1879. For landmarks, Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 356, and Harper's Mag., vii. 449, lvii. 29.

[954] Cf. further Simcoe's Journal; Stedman (ii. ch. 22); Murray (ii. 448); Mahon (vi. ch. 58).

[955] Vol. v. 483-518; cf. also Ibid., i. 266; v. 97, 390; and his Gouverneur Morris, i. ch. 10.

[956] Hamilton's Works, i. 100; J. C. Hamilton's Repub. U. S., i. 339; Irving's Washington, iii. ch. 25.

[957] Vol. i. 311; v. 530 (App.); vi. 106, 114, 149. There are extracts from the Lafayette papers in Sparks MSS., no. xxxii. Cf. Marshall, iii. 568; Irving, iii. 334; Jay's Jay, i. 83; Stone's Brant, ch. 14.

There is a good account of the conspiracy in Greene's Greene (ii. p. 1; also see i. 22, 34, 483). The account in the Memoirs of Wilkinson (i. ch. 9) is called grossly inaccurate in Duer's Stirling (ch. 7). Cf. Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 390); Kapp's De Kalb; Hamilton's Hamilton (i. 128-163); Reed's Reed (i. 342); Wirt's Patrick Henry (p. 208); Stone's Howland (ch. 5); Marshall's Washington (iii. ch. 6); Irving's Washington (iii. ch. 25, 28, 29, 30); Bancroft (ix. ch. 27); Lossing's Field-Book (ii. 336); the account of Col. Robert Troup, written for Sparks in 1827 (Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. i. no. 3); Dunlap's New York, ii. 131, and a note in Sargent's Stansbury and Odell, p. 176.

[958] Vol. x. 378.

[959] It was at this time, Feb., 1779, that a story reached Christopher Marshall, in Lancaster, Pa., that Arnold had gone over to the British. Hist. Mag., ii. 243.

[960] Report to Germain.

[961] Life and Treason of Arnold.

[962] Life of André.

[963] Clinton says Arnold "found means to intimate to me", etc.

[964] The question of Mrs. Arnold's privity to her husband's plot has been much discussed, but most investigators acquit her. Her innocence is maintained by Irving (Washington, iv. 151), Isaac N. Arnold (Arnold ch. 17), Sargent (André, p. 220), and Sabine (Loyalists, i. 122). The chief accusations are in Leake's General Lamb, 270, and in the Lives of Aaron Burr by Davis (i. 219) and Parton (p. 126). Cf. Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Rev., ii. 213; Stone's Brant, ii. 101; Reed's Joseph Reed, ii. 373. The scene in which she showed disorder of mind, when she accused Washington of attempting to kill her child, is held by some to have been mere acting. (Cf. Jones, N. Y. during the Rev., i. 745.) It seems clear that she did not wish to join her husband when the authorities of Pennsylvania drove her to New York.

[965] He wrote to Gates, "By heavens! I am a villain if I seek not a brave revenge for injured honor!" Bancroft, ix. 335.

[966] Sparks's Washington, iv. 344, 351, 408.

[967] Irving's Washington, iv. 96.

[968] Sparks's Washington, v. 529; Austin's Gerry, i. 356.

[969] The writing in which Washington conveyed this reprimand is about the most adroit piece of literary composition which we have from his pen, and he contrived, while complying with the sentence of the court, to signify his estimate of the venial character of the offences, and to pronounce what some have considered a practical eulogy on a brilliant soldier. (Isaac N. Arnold's Arnold, Irving's Washington.) The former book gives a full examination of Arnold's career during his command in Philadelphia (chapters 12-14). For the trial, see Sparks's Washington, vi. 231, 248, 261, and App. p. 514. The trial closed Jan. 26, 1780. Congress ordered the report of the trial to be printed: Proceedings of a general Court-Martial for the trial of Benedict Arnold. Philadelphia, 1780. It was reprinted in a few copies for presentation, with introduction, notes, and index, by F. S. Hoffman, in New York in 1865. A letter of Arnold, transmitting the report to President Weare of New Hampshire, dated March 20, 1780, is in MS. Miscell. Papers, 1777-1824, vol. i. p. 156 (Mass. Hist. Soc. library).

[970] It is believed that the writer of this letter was Beverley Robinson, a loyalist in the British service. The letter is only known through the French version in Marbois' Complot, and it has not passed without some suspicion of its genuineness. (Cf. Arnold's Arnold, p. 275; Sargent's André, 446; Mag. of Amer. Hist., Sept., 1878, p. 756; Reed's Jos. Reed, ii. 54, etc.)

[971] Several attempts at invasion from Canada are supposed to have been timed in unison with Arnold's plot (Hough's Northern Invasion, New York, 1866; Lossing's Schuyler, ii. 407.)

[972] Sparks's Washington, iii. 2; Irving's Washington; Lossing's Schuyler, ii. 52; Arnold's Arnold.

[973] For views of this house, see Boynton's West Point; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 140; his Hudson, 236; his Two Spies, p. 95; Harper's Mag., iii. 827. Cf. Sargent's André, 263; Mag. of Amer. Hist. (Feb., 1880), iv. 109, by C. A. Campbell.

[974] Johnson says (Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii. 731) that Varick's papers show that Arnold's letter to Anderson of Aug. 30th never reached André, though Sparks and Sargent print it as having been received. This is the letter which Sargent supposes may have been conveyed to André by Heron. This and Arnold's of Sept. 15th are the only ones of "Gustavus" preserved. Fac-similes of a part of one of these letters, with a portion of one of "Anderson's", are given in Sparks's Arnold; in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 146; in the Cyclop. of U. S. Hist., ii. 1410, etc. Cf. Harper's Monthly, lii. 825. Fac-similes of Arnold's passes are in Lossing, ii. 155. These passes are printed in Dawson's Papers, 60; H. W. Smith's Andreana; McCoy's edition of the Proceedings, etc., and in other places.

[975] There are views of this house in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., i. 25; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 152; Harper's Mag., iii. 829; his Two Spies, 82; his Cyclop. U. S. Hist., ii. 1411.

[976] This view is given in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 185.

[977] Percy Greg, in his History of the United States (London, 1887), vol. i. p. 304, thinks Joshua Smith was in the pay of Washington, and persuaded André to put on a disguise in order that he might be condemned as a spy if caught! This opinion is of the character of most of the speculations in the book; of course it condemns the execution.

[978] Sargent's André, p. 306.

[979] These papers, having been used in André's trial, were passed over to Governor Clinton to be used in the civil trial of Smith, and from Clinton's descendant Sparks procured them when he was writing his Life and Treason of Arnold. Lossing also got them from the same source, and collated them with Sparks's copies before he printed them in his Field-Book, ii. 153. They were subsequently bought by the State of New York, and are now in the State library at Albany. They have since been printed by McCoy in his edition of the Proceedings of André's examination; by Boynton in his West Point, ch. 7; by Dawson in his Papers ("Gazette series"), 51; in the Appendix of his edition of Smith's trial, and in Revolutionary Relics or Clinton Correspondence, comprising the celebrated papers found in André's boots, etc., published originally in the N. Y. Herald, N. Y., 1842 (Menzies, no. 1,687); and in Cent. Celeb. of the State of N. Y. (1879).

[980] There is a view of his quarters in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 188.

[981] View of the breakfast room in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 158.

[982] Some memoranda of his aide, Colonel Varick (Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii. 727) show that Arnold's movements were hastened by the arrival of Washington's servant at this moment, announcing the near approach of his master.

[983] They were subsequently released in New York. Dr. William Eustis's account of this flight to the "Vulture", written May 8, 1815, is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet (Letters and Papers, 1777-1824, vol. ii. 206), and is printed in their Collections, xiv. 52. Its purport is to emphasize the patriotic resistance of the boatmen to Arnold's offers for their desertion. He says some of them were sent ashore in an inferior boat, Arnold keeping the barge. Cf. Heath's Memoirs.

[984] The Varick memoranda (Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii.) would seem to indicate that Varick, Franks, and Dr. Eustis had already begun to be suspicious, and Arnold's barge had been observed by some one to go down stream and not to West Point.

[985] Arnold had, before leaving, cautioned this messenger to keep quiet, and this also becoming known increased the suspicion of his aides (Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii.).

[986] These aides were Colonel Richard Varick and Major David S. Franks. Henry P. Johnston, in a paper, "Colonel Varick and Arnold's Treason", printed in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1882 (viii. p. 717), has thrown some new light, from papers of Colonel Varick, on the life at Robinson's house previous to the flight of Arnold, and on the evidence, both of Varick, Franks, and Dr. Eustis, brought out before a board of inquiry, Nov. 2, which acquitted these officers of any complicity in the plot. On the night when Smith had been dragged from his bed and put in confinement, Arnold's aides had been put under arrest. This paper also shows, from a deposition of General Knox, that Varick had found in one of Arnold's trunks, after his desertion, some plans and profiles of the West Point works.

[987] These orders are in Dawson's Papers, p. 63. Colonel Lamb had command of the immediate works at West Point at the time; but being absent, Col. Nathaniel Wade had temporary charge (Ipswich Antiq. Papers, ii. no. 19). Lamb's orderly-book, July-Dec., 1780, is owned by the Cayuga County Hist. Society.

St. Clair succeeded Arnold in command of the post, and his instructions from Washington are in the St. Clair Papers, i. 528.

[988] There are views of the De Wint house at Tappan, occupied by Washington as headquarters, in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. (v. 105; cf. p. 21), with a paper by J. A. Stevens. Cf. also Irving's Washington, 4^o ed., vol. iv.; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 196, etc., his Hudson, p. 336, and his Two Spies, 100; Ruttenber's Orange County (1875), p. 215.

The house in which André was confined, known as the "Seventy-six Stone House", is described, with a plan of its rooms and the village, and a view of the building, in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., (Dec., 1879), iii. p. 743, etc. Cf. Lossing's Two Spies, 97. The earliest description was written in 1818, and is cited in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., v. 57.

[989] It is only within a few years, and since the publication of Clinton's record of the secret service of headquarters, that it has been known that Gen. S. H. Parsons, of Connecticut, was at this time acting as a spy for the British general. André, who saw him in the court, may have known this.

[990] Proceedings of a board of General Officers, by order of General Washington, ... respecting Major John André, ... Sept. 29, 1780; to which are appended the several letters which passed to and from New York on the occasion. Published by order of Congress (Philad., 1780). There is a copy in Harvard College library, and others are noted in Menzies (no. 63, $63); Morrell (no. 20, $26); Brinley (ii. no. 3,937); John A. Rice (no. 45, $67.50). There were editions the same year at Hartford (Brinley, ii. 3939) and at Providence (no date; Cooke, iii. 91, now in Harvard College library). Cf. also N. Y. Gazette, Nov. 6, 1780, and Political Mag., i. 749. It was reprinted in London, 1799, in conjunction with Dunlap's Tragedy of André. Later reprints are:—

Proceedings, etc., A Reprint with additional matters (Philad., 1865; 50 copies in quarto, 100 in octavo). Andreana: containing the trial, execution, and various matters connected with the history of Maj. John André (Philad., 1865), with an introduction by Horace W. Smith (Brinley, ii. 3943; Cooke, iii. 94). Minutes of a Court of Inquiry upon the case of Maj. John André, with accompanying documents and an Appendix (Albany, 1865; privately printed, 100 copies, for John F. McCoy; Brinley, ii. 3941; Cooke, iii. 92).

Sargent, in printing it in his André, collated the original MS., which is preserved at Washington. It is also to be found in Boynton's West Point, 127; in Dawson's Papers (Gazette series). The Cooke Catalogue (iii. 92) gives an edition, New York, 1867.

The original edition (1780) contains: Washington's letter, Sept. 26th, to the president of Congress; André's letter to Washington, Sept. 24th; Arnold's letter to Washington, Sept. 25th; B. Robinson's to Washington, Sept. 25th; Clinton to Washington, Sept. 26th; Arnold to Clinton, Sept. 26th; and the award of the court. The appendix has André's letter to Clinton, Sept. 29th; Washington to Clinton, Sept. 30th; Arnold's commission left at West Point; Arnold to Washington, Oct. 1st; André to Washington, Oct. 1st.

André's statement is not given in full, but only in substance, in this volume, but it is included as written by him in Sargent, p. 349; Boynton's West Point; Dawson's Papers. (Cf. Amer. Bibliopolist, 1870, p. 15.)

[991] By Clinton and Capt. Sutherland of the "Vulture", dated Oct. 4th and 5th. They are in the Sparks MSS., vol. lviii. Cf. Sargent, p. 385.

[992] One of these is preserved in the Trumbull gallery at New Haven. It represents André himself sitting in a chair at a table on which is an inkstand and pen. It has been engraved in fac-simile in Sparks's Arnold, 280; in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 203; in George C. Hill's Arnold, etc. Another is a sketch of the landing by boat from the "Vulture", showing André rowed ashore. An aquatint engraving from it was published in New York in 1780, of which there is a reproduction in Harper's Mag., lii. p. 835, and Lossing's Two Spies. Cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist., vol. xiii. (Feb., 1885), p. 173, for a paper by L. Wilson on André's landing-place at Haverstraw.

[993] An engraving of the scene is given in Barnard's History of England (p. 694), which is reproduced in H. W. Smith's Andreana.

[994] The amount of the removal by James Buchanan, who effected it, is in the United Service Journal, Nov., 1833. Cf. for other details W. Sargent's André; Stanley's Westminster Abbey; Penna. Hist. Soc. Mem., vi. 373; N. Y. Evangelist, Jan. 10 and Feb. 27, 1879; Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. 319; L. M. Sargent's Dealings with the Dead, i. 58.

[995] This monument has been often represented in engravings (for the first time in The Universal Mag., 1782; cf. Lossing's Field-Book; Cyclo. U. S. Hist., i. 46; Two Spies; and guide-books to the Abbey). Germain informed Clinton, Nov. 28, 1780, that a pension had been bestowed on André's mother, and the offer of knighthood made to his brother, "in order to wipe away all stain from the family."

Col. John Trumbull, who had been Washington's aide, was arrested in London with threats of retaliatory treatment; but he was released at the intercession of Benjamin West, the painter. Trumbull tells the story in his Autobiography. Cf. Walpole's Last Journal, ii. 434, 436.

[996] View of it in Lossing's Two Spies, 109; his Field-Book, ii. 204. It was placed there in 1847.

[997] View and account in Lossing's Two Spies, 110.

[998] The amount received was £6,315 (Sargent's André, 450). He issued an address of exculpation to the inhabitants of America, dated New York, Oct. 7, 1780, which is printed by Isaac N. Arnold (p. 330) from the original MS. in a text varying slightly from other printed copies, as in the Political Mag., i. 734. A fortnight later (Oct. 20th) he issued a proclamation to induce defection among the officers and soldiers of the army, the original draft of which is among the Force Papers in the library of Congress. It is printed in I. N. Arnold, p. 332; in Polit. Mag., i. 766, etc.

Sargent thinks that a vindication of Arnold which appeared in Remarks on the Travels of M. de Chastellux, London, 1787, was instigated by Arnold himself.

[999] Cf. "Arnold at the Court of George III.", by I. N. Arnold, in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1879, and in his Life of Arnold. Cf. Sargent's André, App. i.; and Walpole's Last Journal, ii. 493, 494, 501, 511.

[1000] Mag. of Amer. Hist., Oct., 1883, p. 307; Amer. Hist. Record, iii. 495; N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., xxxiv. 196.

[1001] The original records of this trial are said to have disappeared from the State archives at Albany, but they had been printed in the New York Herald. Dawson reprinted this Herald text in the Historical Mag., vol. x., July-Nov., 1866, and issued it separately as Record of the trial of Joshua Hett Smith, Esq., for alleged complicity in the treason of Benedict Arnold, 1780, Ed. by H. B. Dawson (Morrisania, 1866). Sparks made use of the record; and the evidence has been examined in P. W. Chandler's American Criminal Trials, ii. 155, 183. The Gentleman's Mag., 1780, Supplement, p. 610, gave an account of the trial and printed the chief documents.

[1002] Sargent's André, p. 281.

[1003] Smith published in London in 1808, and there was reprinted in N. Y. in 1809, A Narrative of the causes which led to the death of Major André (Cooke, iii. 101; Brinley, ii. 3,954). Sargent found that it must be used with caution. Sparks says (p. 298) that as "a work of history this volume is not worthy of the least credit, except where the statements are confirmed by other authorities."

[1004] Sargent, 266; George W. Greene, Hist. View. Marbois was translated by Walsh in the Amer. Register, vol. ii. Cf. a French view in Léon Chotteau's Les Français en Amérique, p. 199.

[1005] There are in the Sparks MSS., xlix., no. 14, various papers used by Sparks in writing his life of Arnold, including the action of Congress on the seizure of Arnold's papers, and copies of the papers; letters written in 1833-1834 to Sparks and others, by David Hosack, Benj. Tallmadge, James Thacher, Nathan Beers, Professor Woolsey, John D. Dickinson, Samuel Eddy, James Lanman, James Stedman, J. Bronson, and William Shimmin,—mainly reminiscences. Cf. for some of these letters, the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Dec., 1879. Copies of Arnold's letters from Philadelphia in 1779-1780 are in Ibid., lii. vol. ii. no. 3. There is a "Genuine history of Arnold by an old acquaintance" in the Political Mag., i. 690.

[1006] Duyckinck's Cyclo. Am. Lit. Suppl., p. 130.

[1007] André had been a prisoner at Lancaster, Pa., after his capture at St. John, Nov. 2, 1775, to Dec., 1776, when he was exchanged. He was paroled in Feb., 1776 (Penna. Mag. of Hist., i.). Afterwards he served with General Grey, and in 1780 was placed on Clinton's staff. There are contemporary accounts of him by "intimate friends" in Political Mag., i. 688; ii. 171. His lineage is traced by J. L. Chester in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., March, 1876 (xiv. 217). His will is in the N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., vi. 63, and in Dawson's Papers, 241. For bibliography, see Sabin, i. no. 1,449, and Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii. pp. 61, 145, 149. A daily record of his life from Sept. 20 to Oct. 2, 1780, is Ibid., iii. 157 (1879). On his career in general, see articles in No. Amer. Review, vol. xxxviii., by Bancroft and Bigelow; vol. lxxx., by Sargent; vol. xciii., by C. C. Smith; Harper's Mag., 1879, p. 619; N. Y. Semi-weekly Evening Post, March 3, 1882; Earl Stanhope's Miscellanies; Atlantic Monthly, Dec., 1860; L. M. Sargent's Dealings with the Dead; Sabin's Amer. Bibliopolist, 1869-1870; N. Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., 1876; Poole's Index, p. 38.

The Monody on Major André by Miss Seward, to which are added letters addressed to her by Major André in 1769, was published at Lichfield, Eng., in 1781, and reprinted in New York in 1792; in Boston, 1798 (fourth Amer. ed.); in Smith's Narrative, London, 1808; in Lossing's Two Spies, N. Y., 1886. Cf. The Galaxy, Feb., 1876.

His fate has been the subject of several tragedies: by William Dunlap (1799); by W. W. Lord (1856); by George H. Calvert (1864), etc. W. G. Simms has examined the story as a subject for fiction in his Views and Reviews.

[1008] It passed to a second edition in 1871. A company orderly-book showing the disposition of troops at West Point on the discovery of the plot is in the Mass. Hist. Soc. (Proc., xix. 385).

[1009] Orig. ed., x. 395; final revision, v. 438, where, contrary to his custom, he retains a part of his note.

[1010] Isaac N. Arnold was of very remote kin to Benedict. He had access to the Shippen Papers, the papers owned by Arnold's descendants in England and in Canada, and used the letters of Arnold, his wife and sister, in the Department of State. His praise of Arnold's "patriotism" in the earlier years of the war, which he thought was evinced by his brilliant acts in the field, induced a paper by J. A. Stevens on "Arnold and his Apologist" (Mag. of Amer. Hist., March, 1880), who contended that there was "no evidence that the heart of Arnold ever beat with one patriotic thrill." The biographer, while condemning the treason, makes the best show which he can of the provocations which led Arnold to be false. He adds considerable that is new to Arnold's story. Mr. I. N. Arnold died in 1884, and addresses upon him before the Chicago Hist. Society were printed.

Lossing has written much on the subject of Arnold's treason: Field-Book, ii. ch. 6, 7, and 8; Harper's Monthly, iii., xxiii., and liii.; Two Spies (Hale and André), N. Y., 1886. Cf., on these two spies, Hull's Rev. Services.

Other American treatments of the subject are in the lives of Washington by Marshall (iv. 274) and Irving (iv. ch. 9-11); Greene's Greene (ii. 227); Leake's Lamb, ch. 19 and App. D; Reed's Reed, ii. 252 Hamilton's Hamilton, i. 262; Quincy's Shaw, 77; Dunlap's New York, ii. ch. 13; E. G. Holland's "Highland Treason", in his Essays; Winthrop Atwill's Treason of Arnold, Northampton, 1837; Niles's Register, xx.

[1011] There remained for a long time no doubt as to the unalloyed patriotism of the three men who captured André. Washington praised their resistance to bribes, and Congress gave them a medal (figured in Loubat's Medallic Hist. U. S., and in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 205). Some of those who came in close contact with André after his capture, and heard his account of the arrest, were convinced that André felt that if he could have made any considerable sum certain to them they would have let him go. This belief, on their part, of these keepers of André did not come to public notice till, in 1817, John Paulding, one of the captors, and the leader of them, petitioned Congress for an additional pension. This gave occasion to Benj. Tallmadge, who had been André's chief-keeper, and who was then in Congress, to oppose the bill on the grounds of André's statements. The Journals of the House of Representatives show the debate, which is reprinted in Dawson's Papers, 127. A letter of Gen. Joshua King, also in André's confidence at the time, confirms Tallmadge's view, and there is also a similar statement by Bowman, one of André's guards (Sparks's Arnold; Notes and Queries, ix.; Niles's Register; Hist. Mag., i. 204, 293; iii. 229; Dawson's Papers, 45; Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., i. 733; Boston Sunday Herald, Sept. 14, 1879).

The captors did not want for friends. Judge Egbert Benson published a Vindication of the Captors of Maj. André, 1817 (cf. Analectic Mag., x. 307), which was reprinted in N. Y. in 1865, in two editions, with additional matter, one by Sabin, the other by Hoffman. John Paulding, the son of one of the captors, published a paper in their defence (Hist. Mag., i. 331). The three captors were then all living, and each made statements and affidavits respecting the event. These can be found, whole or in part, in Benson; in the Hist. Mag., ix. 177, xviii. 365; in Dawson's Papers, 119, 123, 182; in H. J. Raymond's Address (N. Y., 1853) at Tarrytown; in Cent. Celebrations of N. Y. (1879); in Sabin's Amer. Bibliopolist, 1869, p. 335; in Simms's Schoharie County, 646. Sargent thinks that Paulding (of whom there is a portrait in H. W. Smith's Andreana) was the one of the three that most firmly resisted André's bribes.

A monument was erected at Tarrytown in 1853, when Henry J. Raymond delivered an address; it was remodelled in 1883, and capped with a statue of a captor, when Chauncey M. Depew spoke in defence of the good names of the captors; and a Centennial Souvenir was prepared by Nathaniel C. Husted (N. Y., 1881). Monuments have been erected at the graves of the three captors: for Paulding's and Van Wart's, see Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 171, 192; for Williams's, erected at Old Fort Schoharie in 1876, when addresses were given by Daniel Knower and Grenville Tremain, see Centennial Celebrations of the State of N. Y. (Albany, 1879). For memorials of Williams, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., Feb., 1887, p. 168.

A letter of Maj. Henry Lee describing the capture is in the Penna. Mag. of Hist. (1880), iv. 61. Cf. Amer. Hist. Rec., Dec., 1873; Potter's Amer. Monthly, vii. 167; Bolton's Westchester, i. 213.

Respecting André in confinement, Major, later Colonel, Tallmadge has left several statements,—letters, Sept. 23, 1780 (Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii.); to Heath, Oct. 10, 1780 (Heath MSS., printed in Dawson, 194, and in Sargent, 469); his letters to Sparks in 1833-4 (Mag. of Amer. Hist., 1879, pp. 748, 752); his Memoir, privately printed by his son, F. A. T., and the extracts from it (Hist. Magazine, Aug., 1859; and Dawson's Papers).

Washington gave his version of the conspiracy at a dinner-table in 1786, which is contained in Richard Rush's Washington in Domestic Life, being letters addressed to his secretary, Lear, 1790-97 (also in Dawson, 139). There are many references in the letters of 1780 in Sparks's Washington (vii, 205, 212-222, 235, 241, 256, 260-65, 281, 296, and in the App. pp. 520-552, most of the documentary proofs), and in his Letters to Washington (iii. 101-111), much of which is given in Dawson.

Several letters of Hamilton, contained in his Correspondence, are of interest: one to Greene; one to Miss Schuyler, usually dated Oct. 2, but Bancroft says it is without date and must have been written later, and, as usually printed, has omissions and interpolations. Of particular value is a letter of Hamilton's to Henry Laurens, in which he wished André's desire for a soldier's death could have been gratified (Lodge's ed. Works, viii.; Dawson; H. W. Smith's Andreana; McCoy's ed. Proceedings. Cf. Pennsylvania Packet, in Moore's Diary, ii. 333).

Lafayette's account is in his Memoirs, Eng. trans., N. Y., i. 253-56, 349, as well as letters to Luzerne and others (Dawson, 204, etc.). Sparks held various conferences with Lafayette in later life, and his notes are in the Sparks MSS., xxxii. J. F. Cooper, in his Notions of the Americans picked up by a travelling Bachelor, has an account which he says he derived from Lafayette in later years and from a British officer who had heard Arnold tell his story at a dinner.

In Dawson's Papers are included various other contemporary accounts: letters of Alex. Scammell (Oct. 1st, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet; Misc. Papers, 1777-1824, i. 192; Oct. 3d, in Hist. Mag., xviii. 145; and Farmer and Moore's Hist. Coll. N. H.); of Anthony Wayne, Sept. 27 and Oct. 1, 1780 (Amer. Bibliopolist, 1870, p. 62); extracts from the Bland Papers, ii. 33-38; and Maj. Samuel Shaw to the Rev. Mr. Eliot, in Shaw's Journals, 77-82.

Some papers of Timothy Pickering, formerly possessed by the Hon. Arad Joy, of Ovid, N. Y., and now in the War Department, were printed in the N. Y. Tribune. Letters of General Greene are in Greene's Greene, ii. 227-40, and in the R. I. Col. Records, ix. 246, and in the R. I. Hist. Coll., vi., and one of R. R. Livingston in the Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii. Moore's Diary (ii. 323, etc.) gives various contemporary newspaper reports.

The records of observers of André's last hours and execution have been precise: Dr. Thacher's Military Journal, 274 (Dawson, 130; McCoy; Smith's Andreana, 58), and his additional statements, together with Maj. Benjamin Russell's account in the N. E. Mag., vi. 363 (also in Dawson and Andreana); letter of Col. Van Dyk in 1821 (Hist. Mag., Aug., 1863, vol. vii. 250); Todd's Joel Barlow, 35; the Military Journal of Gen. Henry Dearborn, a MS. (J. W. Thornton's sale, no. 284, bought by Dr. T. A. Emmett); Mag. of Amer. Hist., 1879, p. 574; Amer. Whig Rev., v. 381; Southern Lit. Messenger, vii. 856; xi. 193; Sparks's Arnold (p. 255); Irving's Washington (iv. 149, 157); Sargent's André, 395; and others cited by Dawson.

[1012] In a letter by Clinton, Oct. 11, 1780, to Germain, he details in an accompanying narrative the rise of the correspondence with Arnold, which began eighteen months before. Sargent notes it as being in the State Paper Office, "America and West Indies, vol. cxxvi.", and says it has not been printed. The Sparks MSS. (no. xxxii.) has a copy, where is his next letter of the 12th, telling the story of André's execution, which is printed in the Remembrancer, vii. part 2, p. 343, and in Dawson, p. 240. Clinton also wrote to Lord Amherst on the 16th; and on the 30th he wrote a secret letter to Germain, in which he says that he has paid £6,315 to Arnold (Sparks MSS., xxxii. and xlviii.). Germain's letters to Clinton and Arnold of Nov. 28th and Dec. 7th are in Sparks MSS., xlviii. On a fly-leaf of Stedman's History of the Amer. War, Clinton, having dissented to that writer's narrative (vol. ii. p. 249,—given in Dawson, 196), wrote what he called an extract from his MS. History of the War, no other portion of which is known. This is printed in Mahon, vii. App.; Sargent's André; Dawson, p. 177, and Jones's N. Y. during the Rev., vol. i. App. p. 737. Washington in this extract is severely criticised, and this is also the case in a pamphlet, The Case of Major John André, who was put to death by the Rebels, Oct. 2d, 1780, candidly represented, with remarks on said case (pp. 28), New York, Rivington, 1780,—a copy in proof-sheets in the Carter-Brown library, being the only one known, and it has been supposed that it was prepared under Clinton's supervision and suppressed (Sargent, 274; Mag. of Amer. Hist., Dec., 1879, iii. 739). The introduction is dated N. Y., Nov. 28, 1780.

Cf. also Simcoe's Mil. Journal of the Queen's Rangers, pp. 150, 292 (in Dawson, 149, 151). Simcoe offered to try to rescue André. Mahon's England, vii. ch. 62; journal of Gen. Matthews, cited in Balch's Les Français en Amérique. A long letter on the conspiracy and events attending it, varying in some ways from the American account, and possibly furnishing Arnold's story, was written by Andrew Elliott to William Eden, Oct. 4 and 5, 1780, and is among the Auckland MSS. in the Cambridge University library (England). Mr. B. F. Stevens has furnished to me a printed copy of it. The account in Jones's N. Y. during the Rev. (i. 370) misses or perverts the story throughout, and gives that writer the occasion to abuse Clinton, which he does not fail to use. Any opinion of Jones is liable to be confused by his cynical and misplaced irony, which singularly accords with the countenance of the man as portrayed in his picture.

[1013] The questions at issue were these: Was André protected by a flag? Arnold says Yes, and André himself says No. They were the principal parties who could know the fact. If there was a flag, does such use of a flag come within the purport of the military law which defines flags? Is the question of good faith in flags one only between the giver and the receiver of a flag, and can the giver of a flag act in good faith to the receiver and with perfidy to his own principal, with that perfidy known to the receiver? Can the passport of a general engaged in treasonable correspondence with the enemy protect an officer of that enemy when clothed in a disguise and bearing papers to the enemy, such as might give that enemy an unfair advantage?

These are questions which Washington and the board of inquiry and all American writers have decided in the negative. Clinton, in his notes on Stedman already referred to, Cornwallis (Corresp., i. 78), Simcoe (Mil. Journal, pp. 152, 294), and other British military writers then, as well as historians like Adolphus (Hist. England, iii. ch. 39) and Mahon (both in his History, vii., and his Miscellanies), have supported the affirmative view. The most conspicuous dissent to the general English opinion at the time was Sir Samuel Romilly, in a letter to Roget, Dec. 12, 1780 (Memoirs, i. 140, quoted in P. W. Chandler, Amer. Crim. Trials). The more reasonable among the Tories, like Curwen (Journal, p. 323), defended the sentence. Later English military writers like Mackinnon (Coldstream Guards), and historians like Massey (England, iii. ch. 25) and Lecky (England, iv. 155), have held that "the justice of the sentence cannot be reasonably impugned;" and this seems to be the drift of the best current English opinion to-day (cf. Dawson's Papers, 211, etc.; Sargent, p. 413, who in chapter 22 gives the characters of the members of the board, which English writers have attacked), though there is an occasional exception. The Saturday Review, for instance, in 1872 (Amer. Bibliopolist, Oct., 1872), contended that a technical construction of the law should not have guided Washington. The last considerable discussion of the case was raised by Mahon, whose views were controverted in Chas. J. Biddle's Case of Major André (Penna. Hist. Soc. Mem., vi. 317-416, Philad., 1868; Hist. Mag., i. 193), and in Arnold's Life of Arnold. Irving (Washington, iv. 101) is the most signal instance among American writers of the power to hold the judgment apart from sympathetic emotion, when he pronounces André's exploits are "beneath the range of a truly chivalrous nature." (Cf. Bancroft, x. 393, and Mag. Amer. Hist., Dec., 1885, p. 620.) There is some evidence to show that André in the spring of 1780 had been a deliberate spy at Charleston.

If there are any aspects of the circumstances attending the discovery of the plot with which one would willingly dissociate the name of Washington, it is the countenance which he gave to the proposition to Clinton to exchange André for Arnold, and his encouragement of the attempt of Sergeant Champe, a little later, to abduct Arnold from New York. Henry Lee (Memoirs of the War in the Southern Department, ii. 159-187; R. E. Lee's ed., p. 394) gives the most detailed account of Champe's connived-at desertion, but he evidently mixes together the later with the earlier incident, and has brought the story in some minds into the category of myths. Lee's story appeared in New York in 1864 in a separate brochure as Champe's Adventures in attempting to capture Gen. Arnold (pp. 48). The House Reports, no. 486, Twenty-seventh Congress, 2d session, ii. (1842), show a petition of "Sergeant-Major Champe" for reward for services. Cf. Sparks's Washington, vii. 546; Niles's Principles, etc. (1876), p. 307; Arnold's Arnold, 336; Sargent's André, 451; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 207.

[1014] Lincoln's order-books bear witness to the seriousness of the trouble. Even Moultrie became alarmed, and wrote to C. C. Pinckney that he was afraid lest by straining after too much liberty they might lose all.

[1015] A court-martial, presided over by Moultrie, censured Ashe for his lack of the proper precautions, while acquitting him of the charge of cowardice on the field of battle.

[1016] Curry, the deserter, was taken at Hobkirk's Hill by his former friends and hanged.

[1017] The Santee in its upper course as far as the line separating the two Carolinas is known as the Catawba; thence to its junction with the Congaree it is called the Wateree. The three names should be borne in mind.

[1018] It seems, however, tolerably certain that he had greatly overestimated the size of his army, rating it at seven thousand, while in reality the returns showed an effective force of only "three thousand and fifty-two, rank and file." When Williams explained this to Gates, the latter replied: "Sir, the number of the latter (privates) are much below the estimates formed this morning; but these are enough for our purpose." It seems never to have occurred to Gates that Cornwallis would attempt to bring him to action.

[1019] What brought these men together is not certainly known; but a determination to keep the war away from their homes seems to have been the main cause of their action. Probably the threats which Ferguson made, in the vain hope of intimidating them, may have had a good deal to do with it.

[1020] The court of inquiry into Gates's conduct was never convened; at first, because it was impossible to get it together without injury to the service, since Steuben's presence was necessary. Later, when Greene became cognizant of the whole affair, he became convinced that Gates was the victim of circumstances, and advised against holding the court.

[1021] Afterwards, when his attention was called to this hazardous position, Morgan declared that had he passed the Broad River his militia would have left him. As to the unprotected condition of his flanks, he asserted that had there been a swamp in the neighborhood the militia would have taken refuge in it. He added that he should have viewed the surrounding of his army with unconcern, as then his men would have been obliged to fight it out. In fact, like his great chief, Morgan had a very poor opinion of the militia. He placed them in the front rank with orders to fire at least two shots, and then to retire behind the regulars, who were posted on a slight eminence in their rear. A skirmish line of militia sharpshooters protected the front, while the cavalry remained in reserve. The best proof of the excellence of these dispositions is to be found in the results of the encounter.

[1022] Tarleton had some "grasshoppers" at the Cowpens, but they did little execution. For grasshoppers, cf. Stone's Brant, ii. 106, and Centennial Celebration of Sullivan's Expedition, p. 109, note.

[1023] In numbers the two commands were about equal,—not far from one thousand on either side, excluding detachments. In discipline and equipment the British were far superior. Their defeat was mainly due to the rash impetuosity of their young commander, to his unwise dispositions, and especially to his unmilitary conduct in leading his men into action before the formation was complete. Above all, however, their defeat was due to the confidence of Morgan's men in their leader, to his admirable tactics, and to the splendid behavior of the Maryland line. The "unaccountable panick", as Tarleton calls it, which seized the British infantry, and the poor use the "Legion" commander made of his horse contributed in no small degree to the result which was probable whenever Tarleton should meet with a real soldier.

[1024] A court of inquiry, summoned at Gunby's request, found that his order "was extremely improper and unmilitary, and, in all probability, was the only cause why we did not obtain a complete victory." At the same time the court declared that Gunby's spirit and activity were unexceptionable. This court was presided over by Huger, or Hugee, as his name is not infrequently spelled in the old books.

[1025] This seizure of Fort Granby greatly displeased Sumter, who had marked it for himself. He tendered his commission to Greene, who returned it with such an effusion of compliments that Sumter could not refuse to keep it. But his conduct at a time when it was especially important for the patriots to act in concert was a good illustration of the way in which he systematically thwarted Greene. Before the Cowpens he had ordered his subordinate to obey no orders coming from Morgan. And now, instead of coming to the aid of Greene, when hard pressed, he contented himself with desultory operations of no utility in the campaign. They secured to himself, however, a separate command.

Even Marion, that most steadfast and gallant leader of Southern militia, was impatient at the way in which he was treated by the commander-in-chief. It seems that Greene thought Marion might easily spare a few horses in order that Washington's men could be mounted. It will be remembered that Greene had before this taken occasion to declaim against the practice of the Southern irregulars in always wishing to serve mounted, as it added greatly to the expense. Marion took the implied censure to himself, and wrote that as soon as the siege of Motte's was over he wished to give up his present command and go to Philadelphia. Greene induced him to give over his contemplated retirement, and Marion's reply to Greene's urgent letter furnishes the real reason for his wish to attain to some other command than that of "Marion's men", for whom he appears to have had any but the kindest feelings. Indeed, the popular idea of "Marion's men" seems to be far from correct, for his band was composed largely of renegades, drawn together by the hope of booty. They deserted their leader when anything serious was to be attempted, and this "infamous behavior", as Marion rightly terms it, was very distressing to him. However, for a time the storm blew over, and for the future Lee was regarded as under Greene's own immediate orders.

[1026] It was at this time that Grierson himself was shot by one of the militia after he had surrendered. Lee asserts that the murderer could not be discovered, though a large reward was offered for his apprehension; but Brown has declared that his name was well known, and that he was purposely shielded by the American commanders

[1027] That chieftain showed at this time a disregard for the orders and wishes of Greene which counterbalanced whatever good his former vigorous though unfortunate conduct may have produced. Instead of acting in harmony with Marion, and delaying Rawdon by every means within his reach, Sumter by contradictory letters neutralized Marion's force, and rendered his own quite harmless by shutting himself up in Fort Granby and allowing the British to march by unopposed. Greene seems never to have forgiven Sumter for his behavior at this time; and, indeed, it cannot be too warmly censured.

[1028] He then went to Charleston, and soon after the hanging of Hayne sailed for home.

[1029] Four cruisers had been sent out by the Americans to give them warning of the English fleet then in the neighborhood. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xii. 229. Cf. letters of Gerry in Letters of Washington to Langdon (1880), p. 111.—Ed.

[1030] Ternay was buried in Newport. Cf. N. E. Hist. and Genial. Reg., 1873, p. 409, and Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xiii. 105; and Anthony's speech on a bill to repair the tomb (H. B. Anthony's Memorial Addresses, Providence, 1875).—Ed.

[1031] The Marquis of Rochambeau, in his Memoirs, took to himself the credit of appointing the Chesapeake as a rendezvous for the fleet. He also claims to have intimated to De Grasse that perhaps it would be best to attack the English in Virginia. At all events, the French admiral sent word that he should go into the Chesapeake, and he hoped, as his stay on the coast would be short, that the land forces would be ready to coöperate with him. This decided the matter. There is in print (dated Mount Vernon, July 13, 1788; Carey's Museum; also in Niles, Principles and Acts, 1st ed, p. 273) a letter from Washington to the effect that, although the point of attack was not decided on at the outset, the movement against New York was a feint.

[1032] The documents recently printed by the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts convey the impression that Rodney preferred not to act in conjunction with Sir Henry Clinton.

[1033] It was while reconnoitring on the morning of this day that Col. Alexander Scammel, of the New Hampshire line, was captured by a party of Legion dragoons, and mortally, though accidentally, wounded after he had surrendered.

[1034] History of the Revolution of South Carolina from a British Province to an Independent State, Trenton, 1785,—cited in this chapter as Rev. in S. C.

[1035] There is no formal biography of Moultrie. Brief sketches of his career may be found in Hartley's Heroes of the South, 231-268, and in A New Biographical Dictionary or Remembrancer of Departed Heroes, compiled by T. J. Rogers, Philadelphia, 1829, pp. 317-322. Cf. also ante, p. 171, 229.

[1036] Memoirs of the American Revolution, so far as it related to the States of North and South Carolina, and Georgia. By William Moultrie. New York, 1802. This work, though written long after the event, consists so largely of letters and other original material that it may be regarded almost as a contemporary work.

[1037] Memoirs of the War in the Southern Department, by Henry Lee, lieutenant-colonel commandant of the Partisan Legion during the American War, Philadelphia, 1812; reprinted in 1819. In 1827 appeared A New Edition, with corrections left by the author, and with Notes and Additions by H. Lee, the author of the Campaign of '81. Many years later, in 1869, A New Edition, with Revisions, and a Biography of the Author, by Robert E. Lee, was published in New York. This is the best memoir of "Legion Harry" that has yet appeared. Cf. also G. W. P. Custis's Recollections, p. 354, and Rogers, Biog. Dict., p.271. There are portraits of Henry Lee as a young man in Continental uniform in the Penna. Hist. Society. Cf. Irving's Washington, quarto ed., iii. 197; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 591; R. E. Lee's ed. of the Memoirs. Cf. C. C. Jones, Last days, death, and burial of General Lee (Albany, 1870).—Ed.

[1038] And the same criticism applies with still greater force to the writers who have based their narratives on this work.

[1039] Cf. Charles C. Jones, Reminiscences of the Last Days, Death, and Burial of General Henry Lee, Albany, 1870.

[1040] For Washington's opinion of Lee, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. 81.

[1041] H. E. Turner's Greenes of Warwick (Newport, 1877).

[1042] See especially Greene's Greene (all references in this chapter are to the three-volume edition, unless otherwise stated), iii., Appendix, pp. 541-547; Johnson's Greene, i. 218-221 and 326; Sparks, Correspondence of the Revolution, iii. 118-189; Reed's Reed, ii., passim and App.; Maryland Papers; Charleston News and Courier for May 10th, 1881; Rhode Island Colonial Records, vol. ix., and R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. vi. Many of these letters will be referred to in the notes. In two letters from Knox to Greene (Drake's Knox, 67 and 68) the lighter side of Greene's character appears.

[1043] Caldwell sought interviews with Greene's relatives, and says that his sources were "as ample and authentic as any now existing;" and he represents that his account of the fight at Ramsour's Mill is the only event of moment in which he differs materially from other writers.—Ed.

[1044] Sketches of the Life and Services of Nathanael Greene, Major-General of the Armies of the United States, in the War of the American Revolution. Compiled chiefly from original materials. By William Johnson of Charleston, South Carolina, 1822. Two volumes, folio. A good review of this work is in the United States Magazine and Literary Repository for January, 1823, pp. 3-23.

[1045] This of course provoked the reviewers, and especially Jared Sparks,—then editor of the North American Review,—though his criticisms are for the most part directed against portions of the work that do not concern us here.

[1046] The Campaign of 1781 in the Carolinas, with remarks, historical and critical, on Johnson's Life of Greene, to which it added an Appendix of original documents, by H. Lee, Philadelphia, 1824.

[1047] The Life of Nathanael Greene, ... by George Washington Greene, N. Y., 1871. The life intermediate between these two was written in Rome, far away from the proper materials. It therefore is of little value compared with the larger work. It forms volume xx. of Sparks's American Biography. In 1877 appeared A Biographical Discourse delivered at the unveiling of the statue ... to the memory of Major-general Nathanael Greene, by his Grandson, G. W. Greene. But the address, owing to the ill-health of the author, was not delivered. It contains a good short summary of the Southern campaign. Cf. an Eulogium on Major-general Greene, delivered before the Society of the Cincinnati by Alexander Hamilton, July 4, 1789, in Hamilton's Works, ii. 481; and Lodge's ed., vol. vii.; see also Headley's Washington and his Generals, ii. 7-77; Lives of the Heroes, 27-75; Wilson, Biography, 278-286; Rogers, Biog. Dict., 170-185; American Biography (1825), pp. 158-182, etc., etc.

On the grant to Greene for his services, see the paper on the sea-islands, in Harper's Mag., Nov., 1878. Cf. B. P. Poore, Desc. Catal. of gov't publ., p. 1293. Recently published personal detail is in Providence Plantations (Providence, 1886), p. 62; John Bernard's Retrospections, p. 103.—Ed.

The place of Greene's burial has aroused some controversy. Cf. C. C. Jones, Sepulture of Greene and Pulaski (1885). A description of the monument to his memory at Savannah is in Mag. of Amer. Hist., xvi. 297. Cf. Hist. Mag., iii. 369.

[1048] The Life of General Daniel Morgan, with portions of his correspondence, compiled by James Graham, N. Y., 1856. Besides this there is a sketch of Morgan's career in Lee, Memoirs, i. 386. Cf. also Lives of the Heroes, 76-89; Wilson, Biography, etc., 31-38; Rogers, Biog. Dict., 309-316; Headley, ii. 366-372. The Hero of Cowpens, A Centennial Sketch by Mrs. McConkey, N. Y., 1881, is of no value. Am. Hist. Record, i. 111, contains an account of The Grave of Daniel Morgan, with illustrations.

Portraits of Daniel Morgan were painted by C. W. Peale (engraved by David Edwin) and John Trumbull (engraved by J. F. E. Prud'homme). Cf. Dennie's Portfolio, viii.; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 637 (also, Cyclo. U. S. Hist., p. 920, etc.). The picture (Mag. Amer. Hist., April, 1884), representing him sitting on a chest, and dressed in a hunting-shirt, is no further a likeness than his features are preserved. There is a statue of him by Ward. Morgan lived after the war in the Shenandoah Valley, and a view of his house, "Saratoga", is given in Appleton's Journal, 1873, July 16, p. 67; Mrs. Lamb's Homes of America; Mag. of Amer. Hist., x. 455.—Ed.

[1049] The Life of General Francis Marion, by Brig.-gen. P. Horry, of Marion's Brigade, and Mason L. Weems, Baltimore, 1815. This volume went through many editions. (Cf. Sabin.) The Sketch of the Life of Brig.-gen. Francis Marion, and a History of his Brigade, by William Dobein James (Charleston, 1821), is now very rare. John James based on it a Life of Marion (N. Y., 1856). For an appreciative sketch of the noted partisan, see Lee, Memoirs, i. 394. Cf. also The Life of Francis Marion, by W. G. Simms, N. Y. (1846 and 1860); Headley, ii. 225; Lossing, in Harper's Monthly, xvii. 145; P. D. Hay, The Swamp Fox, in Ibid., lxvii. 545,—especially valuable as containing some original entries from the general's order-book; Hartley, Heroes, 1-212; Wilson, Biography, 82; Rogers, Biograph. Dict., 284; Charleston Year Book (1885, p. 338), where Marion's epitaph is given, etc. For portraits of Marion, see Irving's Washington, quarto ed., iv. 196; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 684.—Ed.

[1050] Documentary History of the American Revolution, consisting of letters and papers relating to the contest for liberty, chiefly in South Carolina, by William Robert Gibbes. There are three volumes with titles not unlike the above. The first relates to events not touched on in this chapter, the second (N. Y., 1855-57) covers the period 1776-1782, while the third volume (Columbia, 1853) relates more especially to the years 1781-1782. Many of the documents are of interest to local readers only, and as a whole the volumes are of less value than their titles would indicate.

[1051] Hartley, Heroes, 269-290; Dawson, Battles, i. 487; and Lee, Memoirs (2d ed.), App. p. 442. Some autographic letters of Pickens are in the Sparks MSS., lix. 24.

[1052] In Sparks, American Biography, xxiii. pp. 205-434. Cf. also Notices of the Life of Major-General Benjamin Lincoln, by "P. C." in Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., 2d series, iii. 233-255,—pp. 238-244 deal with his Southern campaigns; Thacher, Military Journal, 504-517; J. T. Kirkland, Notices of the Life of Benjamin Lincoln; Headley, Washington and his Generals (N. Y., 1847), ii. 104; Rogers, Biog. Dict., 276, etc., etc.

[1053] There are among the Lincoln Papers (copied in the Sparks MSS., xii.) a considerable mass of documents relating to Lincoln's service in Carolina in 1779-1780; his correspondence with Marion, Pinckney, Rutledge, Pulaski, Moultrie, Horry, John Laurens, Commodore Whipple, etc., and the public authorities of Congress and the Assembly of Georgia. His Journal, Sept. 3—Oct. 19, 1779, covers his plans of normally coöperation with D'Estaing. There are records of the councils of war in Charleston, April 20, 21, 26, May 11,—the latter advising him to capitulate. Letters of Adj.-Gen. Ternant recount the strength and losses of the garrison during the siege. Various letters between Clinton and Lincoln concern the provisions and interpretation of the terms of surrender. A proclamation of Clinton and Arbuthnot to the South Carolinians is dated June 1, 1780.—Ed.

[1054] There is a Life of Anthony Wayne by John Armstrong in Sparks, Amer. Biog., iv. pp. 1-84. See especially pp. 56-71 for his Southern campaigns.

[1055] General Joseph Graham contributed many of these articles in vols. i., iii., iv., and v. He took part in many of the operations. Cf. N. C. Univ. Mag., iii. 433; Wheeler's North Carolina, ii. 233, and Foote's Sketches of Western North Carolina, 251. There are sketches of Caswell's life in the above-mentioned magazine, vols. vii. pp. 1-22, and iv. 68. For a loyalist's view of the war in general, see Col. Robert Gray in Ibid., viii. 145. Hugh Williamson collected material for N. C. revolutionary history. Cf. Pennsylvania Magazine of Hist., vii. 493. Cf. Harper's Mag., xv,. 159.

[1056] Interesting Revolutionary Incidents and Sketches of Character, chiefly in the "Old North State", by the Rev. E. W. Caruthers, D. D., second series, Philadelphia, 1856. The title of the first series, which relates to the Camden campaign, wants the word "Interesting." Cf. the same author's Sketch of the Life and Character of the Rev. David Caldwell, ... with Account of the Revolutionary Transactions and Incidents in which he was concerned, etc. (Greensborough, N. C., 1842), and W. A. Graham's British Invasion of N. C., in W. D. Cooke's Rev. Hist. of N. C. (1853).

[1057] Traditions and Reminiscences chiefly of the American Revolution in the South, by Joseph Johnson, M. D., of Charleston, S. C., Charleston, 1851.

[1058] The best biography of Steuben is the life by Friedrich Kapp, 2d ed., N. Y., 1859. But Kapp is often ridiculously partial to his hero. In the Magazine of American History, viii. pp. 187-199, is a valuable and graphic account of Steuben, written in 1814 by his former aide, William North. See also Thacher, Military Journal 517-531; Professor Ebeling in Amerikanisches Magazin, 1797, iii. 148; G. W. Greene, German Element in the War of American Independence, N. Y., 1876, pp. 11-87; Francis Bowen, Life of Baron Steuben, in Sparks, Am. Biog., ix. pp. 1-88; Headley, Generals, i. 293; Rogers, Biog. Dict., 370; and his character, by Richard Peters in Mag. of Western Hist., 1886, p. 680.

[1059] Light-Horse Harry Lee in his Memoirs was especially severe on Jefferson's actions at this time, and later during Cornwallis's campaign. To this Jefferson replied in a letter to the younger Henry Lee, dated May 15, 1826, in Lee's Memoirs (2d edition), p. 204. In his Notes on Virginia, Jefferson attempted a defence of his conduct, and in his Writings (ix. 212 and 220) there appeared an attack on the elder Lee. This brought forth a pamphlet entitled Observations on the Writings of Thomas Jefferson, with particular reference to the attack they contain on the memory of the late Gen. Henry Lee, by Henry Lee, New York, 1832. This was suppressed (cf. Sabin, x. 172), but in 1839 a second edition, "with an introduction and notes by Charles C. Lee", was published. See especially pp. 119 to 141 of the 1st ed., and pp. 129 to 147 of the 2d. See also Randall's Jefferson, i. 291-343; Giradin, Continuation of Burk, iv. 452-470; and, on the other side, Howison, ii. 251-265.

[1060] Parton in his interesting life of the Virginia statesman, pp. 224-256, gives a lifelike picture of Jefferson's share in the war. He dwells on the more picturesque incidents, like Tarleton's raid, which, though giving a pleasant color to the story, had little influence on the course of events.

[1061] The History of Virginia, commenced by John Burk, and continued by Skelton Jones and Louis Hue Giradin, Petersburg, 1816. What part Jones took in the work is not clear. Volume iv. relates to the Revolution. The editors of Jefferson's Works (i. 41) say of Giradin: "Mr. Jefferson supplied him with a large amount of manuscript matter which greatly enriched his volume. His admiration for Mr. Jefferson sometimes approaches the ludicrous." Cf. also Howison, ii. 278. The volume closes abruptly after the capitulation of Yorktown. Further publication seems to have been suspended on account of what M. Giradin terms in his preface "typographical difficulties."

[1062] Calendar of Virginia State Papers and other Manuscripts preserved in the Capitol at Richmond, 1652-1781. Volume i., arranged and edited by Wm. P. Palmer. Volume ii. prepared for publication by Sherwin McRae (Richmond, 1875 and 1881). Volume ii. deals almost entirely with the period covered by this chapter.

[1063] Letters of Thomas Nelson, Jr., Governor of Virginia, Richmond 1874; (No. I. of the New Series of the Publications of the Va. Hist. Soc.)

[1064] Mémoires Militaires, Historiques, et Politiques de Rochambeau, Paris, 1809, vol. i. pp. 237-330, relating to his share in this war. This portion was translated by M. W. E. Wright, Esq., and printed as Memoirs of the Marshall Count de Rochambeau relative to the War of Independence of the United States, Paris, 1838. It is generally thought that the portion of Soulés' Troublés dealing with Yorktown was the work of Rochambeau, or written by his inspiration.

[1065] See also appendices to the Third and Fifth Reports for other papers of interest in the present examination. Some notes in the Westmoreland Papers (Tenth Report, App., iv. 29) supplement the Sackville Papers.

[1066] Volume xxv. pp. 88 et seq., Hansard, xxii. 985 et seq., contains the debates in the "Lords", but no documents. Abstracts of the important papers are in the Political Magazine.

[1067] For some account of the career of Cornwallis, see Correspondence of Charles, First Marquis Cornwallis. Edited with Notes by Charles Ross, Esq., London, 1859 (ably reviewed by C. C. Smith in North American Review, lxxxix. 114). Most unfortunately, many of the letters are printed in extract without any indication being made of the fact. Several of the most important documents in the book are printed in the appendix. Cf. also Lives of the Most Eminent British Commanders, by the Rev. G. R. Gleig, iii. 115, being vol. xxxvi. of Lardner's Cabinet Cyclopædia; G. W. Kaye's Lives of Indian Officers, i. 1; the contemporary Political Magazine, ii. 450; Jesse's Etonians; E. E. Hale in Christian Examiner, lxvii. p. 31; and Poole's Index, p. 303.

[1068] Cf. Cornwallis to Clinton, dated New York, Dec. 2, 1781, in Parliamentary Register, xxv. 202; Political Magazine, iii. 350; Germain Correspondance, 269; and Cornwallis's Answer, App., p. 228. This was followed by The Narrative of Lieutenant-general Sir Henry Clinton, K. B., relative to his conduct ... particularly to that which respects the unfortunate issue of the campaign in 1781, with an appendix containing copies and extracts of his correspondence with L^d G. Germain, Earl Cornwallis, etc. (London, 1783, several editions. Reprinted in Philadelphia (1865) as Narrative of the Campaign of 1781 in America (250 copies).) Next came A Reply to Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative ... by Themistocles (Cornwallis?) (London, 1783, two editions), and An Answer to that part of the Narrative of Lieutenant-General Sir Henry Clinton, K. B., which relates to the conduct of Lieutenant-general Cornwallis during the campaign in North America in the year 1781, By Earl Cornwallis (London, 1783, and Philad., 1866). In reply to this appeared Observations on some parts of the answer of Earl Cornwallis to Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative by Lieutenant-general Sir Henry Clinton, K. B. (London, 1783). In Notes and Queries, Oct. 28, 1882, mention is made of a copy of the Correspondence between Clinton and Cornwallis, July-Dec., 1781, with marginal MS. notes by Clinton. Cf. On this controversy Jones's New York during the Rev., ii. 464, 466.—Ed.

[1069] Cf. Ninth Report of the Royal Commissioners, as above, App., iii. p. 100. Soon after his arrival at New York, Clinton demanded that either the admiral or himself should be relieved (see Eden to Germain, enclosing letters from Clinton, in Ibid., p. 106). Arbuthnot asking to be relieved on account of his advanced age, the command of the fleet was given to Graves. Soon, however, Clinton found himself involved in a similar dispute with a more influential man. The Seventh Report of the Commissioners appointed to examine, take, and state the Public Accounts of the Kingdom appeared in 1782 (also printed in Parliamentary Register, xxiv. pp. 517-622). In his evidence before this board (cf. above, p. 537) Cornwallis repeated Arbuthnot's charge, and plainly implied that the final cessation of the plundering was due to his own efforts. To this Clinton replied in a Letter from Lieut.-gen. Sir Henry Clinton, K. B. to the Commissioners on Public Accounts, relative to some observations in their Seventh Report (London, 1784). The order of Cornwallis, on which so much emphasis was laid, is in Parliamentary Register, xxiv. 617. Stedman, as commissary under Cornwallis, had excellent facilities for observation. He repeated the old accusations in a note to his History. Clinton deemed the attack worth noticing. Cf. his Observations on Mr. Stedman's History of the American War (London, 1794; reprinted, New York, 1864). It is but fair to say that Cornwallis seems to have done everything in his power to prevent plundering during his march through North Carolina. Cf. his "Order-Book" in Caruthers' Incidents, 2d series, App. Cf. further, Clinton's Memorandum respecting the Unprecedented Treatment which the Army have met with respecting Plunder taken after a Siege and of which Plunder the Navy had more than ample share (privately printed, 1794).—Ed.

[1070] A History of the Campaigns of 1780 and 1781 in the Provinces of North America, by Lieutenant-colonel Sir Banastre Tarleton, Commandant of the late British Legion (London, 1787). There is in the Boston Public Library a copy of this book which has bound with it a MS. diary of Lieutenant Eld, of the Coldstream Guards, from his arrival at New York, in the summer of 1779, to March, 1780, at the South (Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xviii. 70). There is a statement of Tarleton's losses in the Sparks MSS., lvi.—Ed.

Tarleton rose to the rank of lieutenant-general. He was a member of the House of Commons, 1790-1806, and again 1807-1812. Ross, the editor of Cornwallis's Correspondence, says (note to p. 44) that "in the House of Commons he [Tarleton] was notorious for his criticisms on military affairs, the value of which may be estimated from the fact that he almost uniformly condemned the Duke of Wellington." Cf. also a sketch of his career in Political Magazine, ii. 61.

There is a well-known portrait of Tarleton by Reynolds (1782), representing him in uniform, with hat, and his foot on a cannon. It was engraved in mezzotint by J. R. Smith. Cf. E. Hamilton's Catal. raisonné of the engraved works of Reynolds (London, 1884), p. 67, and John C. Smith's Brit. Mez. Portraits, iii. 1305. It is engraved on wood in Harper's Mag., lxiii. 331. Cf. also London Mag., 1782; Johnston's Yorktown Campaign, p. 41; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 607.—Ed.

[1071] Strictures on Lt.-Col. Tarleton's History, &c., by Roderick Mackenzie, late Colonel of the 7th Regiment (London, 1787). This in turn called forth An Address to the Army; in reply to the Strictures ... by Roderick M'Kenzie, by George Hanger, Tarleton's second in command. Hanger, afterwards Lord Colerain, also wrote or inspired a work entitled The Life, Adventures, and Opinions of Col. G. Hanger, Written by himself (London, 1801). As to the authorship of this, see Gentleman's Magazine, vol. xxxvii.

[1072] A Journal of the Operations of the Queen's Rangers, From the end of the year 1777 to the conclusion of the late American War, by Lieut.-colonel Simcoe, commander of that corps (Exeter, "printed for the author", 1787). Reprinted, with some slight alterations and additions, as A History of the Operations of a Partisan Corps called The Queen's Rangers, commanded by Lieut.-col. J. G. Simcoe, during the War of the Revolution. Now first published. With a memoir of the author and other additions (New York, 1844). The memoir is by an unknown hand.

[1073] Memoir of General [Samuel] Graham, edited by his son Colonel J. J. Graham, "privately printed" (Edinburgh, 1862). The portions of this book dealing with America were reprinted in a condensed form in The Historical Magazine for August and November, 1865.

[1074] An Original and Authentic Journal of Occurrences during the late American War, By R. Lamb—late Serjeant in the Royal Welsh Fuzileers (Dublin, 1809).

[1075] The Origin and History of the First or Grenadier Guards, By Lieut.-Gen. Sir F. W. Hamilton (London, 1874).

[1076] Major Weemys, who commanded in the night assault on Sumter at Fishdam Ford, was unfortunate in his later career, and died in poverty in the city of New York. His manuscripts came into the possession of the Massachusetts Historical Society. Among them is one entitled Sketches of Characters of the General Staff Officers ... in the British Army. It is the work of a disappointed man, but probably reflects the opinions of many officers in the British army.

[1077] The number of men nominally under Howe's orders cannot be stated. He probably had not over 700 in action. Cf. Huger in Moultrie's Memoirs, i. 251. Campbell had with him 3,500 men. Of these 2,500 were in the fight. The total American loss in this preliminary campaign was not far from 900 killed, wounded, and missing; while the British do not seem to have lost more than 40 men. Probably many of the Americans missing sought safety on their plantations. See further returns annexed to the official reports as above; Gordon, iii. 218; and Proceedings of the Robert Howe Court-Martial, passim.

[1078] C. C. Jones has a description of Sunbury in his Dead Towns of Georgia (Ga. Hist. Soc. Coll., iv.).

[1079] Portrait in London Mag., 1781.—Ed.

[1080] Cf. also Moultrie, Memoirs, i. 252.

[1081] For some account of Howe, see Charleston Year-Book for 1882, p. 359, and Dawson's Battles, i. 479. There is a "Sketch of Gen. Robert Howe", by Archibald M. Hooper, in North Carolina University Magazine, ii. 209-221, 305-318, 358-363, and iii. 97-109, and 145-160. The first number of this magazine was printed in March, 1844, and it was continued to 1860. L. C. Draper writes to me that of vol. vi. he has "only one number, issued in March, 1857." He adds: "I have been told that none others appeared of that volume." This statement is confirmed by K. P. Battle, the present head of the university. Mr. Draper tells me also that "there are some valuable Revolutionary papers in the Magnolia, a magazine published in Georgia, and then in Charleston in ante-war times; some in the Orion, a Georgia magazine; some, I think, in Russell's Magazine, published at Charleston."

[1082] For other accounts, see Dawson, Battles, i. 472; Marshall, Washington, iv. 62; F. D. Lee and J. L. Agnew, Historical Record of the City of Savannah, Savannah, 1869, p. 45; T. S. Arthur and W. H. Carpenter, Georgia, Phila., 1853, p. 134; Stevens, Georgia, ii. 160; Eelking, Die deutschen Hülfstruppen, ii. 23; Lowell, Hessians, 239; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 524; Beatson, Military Memoirs, iv. 371; James Grant, British Battles on Sea and Land, ii. 156-160; Allen, American Revolution, ii. 214; An Impartial History (Bost. ed.,) ii. 361; Botta (Otis's trans.), iii. 15; and Andrews' History, iii. 63.

This attack on Savannah is illustrated in the Faden map (1780) called Sketch of the Northern Frontiers of Georgia, from the mouth of the River Savannah to the Town of Augusta, by Lieut.-Col. Archd. Campbell.—Ed.

[1083] Cf. Moultrie's Memoirs, i. 241, and Remembrancer, viii. 177. An abridgment is in Dawson, Battles, i. 482. There is an interesting account of the affair in Johnson's Traditions, p. 211. See also Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 12, and Gordon, iii. 230. The numbers given in the text are derived from Moultrie's "Orders" of February 7th (Memoirs, i. 296), and from a letter written by General Bull to Moultrie (Memoirs, i. 312). Des Barres published a large map of this region under the title of Port Royal in South Carolina, taken from surveys deposited at the Plantation Office, 1777. Cf. Neptune Americo-Septentrional (1778), no. 23, and N. Amer. Pilot (1776), nos. 30, 31.

[1084] Georgia, ii. 192. See also Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 14; Gordon, ii. 230; Stedman, ii. 106; White, Hist. Coll., p. 683; and Stevens, Georgia, ii. 188. In the Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1st ser., vol. ii. pp. 41-240, there is a valuable "Historical Journal of the American War." Pp. 178-234 relate to the events described in this chapter.

[1085] This is given entire by Moultrie, who presided over the court (Memoirs, i. 337-354. The finding of the court is on p. 353). The assertion of Lossing that Ashe was acquitted "of every charge of cowardice and deficiency of military skill" is not correct, as the court expressly stated that it was of the opinion that "Ashe did not take all necessary precautions." There is a "Sketch" of Ashe's career in North Carolina University Magazine, iii. pp. 201-208 and 366-376.

[1086] Accounts of varying degrees of excellence are in McCall, Georgia, ii. 206; Moultrie, Memoirs, i. 310-330; Gordon, iii. 232; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 16; Stedman, ii. 107. See also Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 507; Marshall's Washington, iv. 23; C. C. Jones, Georgia, ii. 346, etc.; Stevens, Georgia, ii. 180; Moore's Diary, ii. 138; Penna. Mag. of Hist., 1880, p. 249.

[1087] Cf. Prevost to Lord G. Germain in The London Gazette, April 17-20, 1779; reprinted in Remembrancer, viii. 168; and in Gentleman's Magazine (1779), p. 213.

[1088] Prevost had about three thousand men, but of these only two thirds were fit for duty when he retired from Charleston. Moultrie (Memoirs, i. 430) gives his own force at three thousand one hundred and eighty, including eight hundred Continentals. According to Prevost, Maitland had at Stono not far from eight hundred men, though Lowell (Hessians, 241) gives him only five hundred. The attacking party numbered twelve hundred. The American loss was one hundred and sixty-two; that of the British one hundred and thirty-one.

[1089] See also Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 23; Gordon, iii. 254; Stedman, ii. 109, 120 (115-120 deal with Stono); Johnson's Greene, i. 271; Johnson's Traditions, 217; Flanders's Rutledge, in his Lives of the Chief Justices, ii. 358-365. Something has also been gleaned from Eelking, ii. 24; Lowell, Hessians, 240 (giving June 19 instead of 20 as the date of the attack on Stono); Marshall's Washington, iv. 28; and P. J. S. Dufey, Résumé de l'histoire des Revolutions de l'Amérique Septentrionale, depuis les premières découvertes jusqu'au voyage du Général Lafayette, Paris, 1826, i. 293-312. The British are supposed to have carried away a large amount of plate and more than a thousand slaves. The terror they inspired in the souls of the fair Carolinians is well set forth in the Letters of Eliza Wilkinson during the invasion and Possession of Charleston, S. C., by the British in the Revolutionary War. Arranged by Caroline Gilman, N. Y., 1839.

[1090] Life of Lincoln in Sparks's Am. Biog., xxiii. 285.

[1091] Judge Johnson, in his Greene, went out of his way to assert that Pulaski slept at his post just before the battle at Germantown. In a defence of his former commander, Paul Bentalou put forth the claim that the retreat of Prevost was due to Pulaski. Unless the documents (cited above) are untrustworthy this claim cannot be maintained. On the contrary, a gallant charge that the brave Pole made had no other effect than to dispirit the garrison. Cf. Pulaski Vindicated by Paul Bentalou, a captain in his "legion", Baltimore, 1824, p. 27; Jared Sparks in the North American Review, xx. 385; Remarks, etc., on the above article, by Judge Johnson, Charleston, 1825; Bentalou's Reply to Judge Johnson's Remarks; and another article by Sparks in the North American Review, xxiii. 414.

[1092] There are two editions of this book in the Harvard College library bearing the same date. One contains 158 pages, the other 126, but in other respects they seem to be the same. The portion dealing with Savannah, which Mr. Jones has translated (Siege, pp. 57-76), runs from page 128 to 158 in one edition, and from page 101 to 126 in the other. In Sabin this journal is attributed to D'Estaing. (Cf. Sabin, under Estaing.) There seems to be no authority for this, and it would certainly be astonishing for an officer to speak of his own conduct as the writer of this journal constantly speaks of D'Estaing's motives and actions.

[1093] In F. B. Hough's Siege of Savannah by the combined American and French forces, in the Autumn of 1779, Albany, 1866, p. 171, it is reprinted from the New Jersey Journal, June 21, 1780, as a Summary of the Operations of the King's squadron commanded by the Count D'Estaing, Vice Admiral of France, after the taking of Grenada, and the Naval Engagement off that Island with Byron's Squadron.

[1094] Reprinted in Remembrancer, ix. 71; Gentleman's Magazine, 1779, p. 633; and, in an abridged form, in Political Magazine, i. 50, also 106; and Historical Magazine, viii. 290.

[1095] It usually precedes Prevost's report, and may also be found in Hough, Savannah, 134, and in White, Hist. Coll., 343. T. W. Moore, one of Prevost's aides, wrote a long letter to his wife, which was printed in Rivington's Royal Gazette, Dec. 29, 1779; reprinted by Hough in his Savannah, p. 82. Governor Tonyn, of Florida, inclosed some interesting letters to Clinton bearing on the siege (Remembrancer, ix. 63, and elsewhere).

[1096] The first (pp. 25-52, with some "additions" running from p. 52 to p. 56) is by an unknown hand. It was copied from Rivington's Royal Gazette, Dec., 1779. The second journal, which he for convenience calls "Another Journal" (cf. his Savannah, pp. 57-79), was also copied from Rivington. It appears, however, to be identical with the "Journal" (Sept. 3d-Oct. 20th) which E. L. Hayward sent to John Laurens in December, 1779,—reprinted in Moore's Materials for History, N. Y., 1861, pp. 161-173, and in Historical Magazine, viii. 12-16. It is interesting, but hardly worth so many repetitions.

[1097] To this should be added an extract from a letter of Anthony Stokes, the colonial chief justice of Georgia to his wife, which Moore found in Orcutt's Collection of Newspaper Scraps in the library of the N. Y. Hist. Soc., and printed in his Diary, ii. 223.

[1098] Cf. Garden, Anecdotes of the American Revolution (Brooklyn ed.), iii. 19, and Hough, Savannah, 157. It was not written till long after the event, and has no value for fixing dates, as Pinckney confesses to having relied on Moultrie for the dates he gives.

[1099] The French, in Mag. of Amer. Hist. (1878), P. 548, where it is stated that they were "translated from an original MS. in the possession of Mr. Frank Moore." Lincoln's orders, as then given, are stated to be on the same sheet and in the same handwriting as those of the French, though in English. A somewhat different and more accurate copy of Lincoln's orders is printed in Moultrie's Memoirs, ii. 37. Cf. Lincoln's MS. order-book.

There has been much dispute as to the size of the opposing armies. In the report which I have somewhat incautiously attributed to D'Estaing, the French army actually on shore is given at 2,823 Europeans, 165 volunteers from Cape François, and 545 "volunteer chasseurs, mulattoes, and negroes newly raised at St. Domingo." The American force is rated at 2,000, or 5,524 men in all. Cf. Hough, Savannah, 173, and Jones, Savannah, p. 40, note. Moultrie (Memoirs, ii.) increases the number of the Americans to 4,000, while lowering that of the French to 2,500. Stedman (Am. War, ii. 127) is even wilder when he says that the combined armies numbered more than ten thousand men, of whom about five thousand were French. In this he is followed by Mackenzie (Strictures, p. 12), and as both were officers in the force which came South with Clinton, it is probable that that was the impression prevalent in the British army. Chief-Justice Stokes (View of the British Constitution, etc., Lond., 1783, p. 116) estimates the Americans at 2,500 and the French at 4,500, while Jones (Savannah, p. 39) rates the French at 4,456, and the Americans at 2,127. This is probably as accurate an estimate as can now be made.

The writer of the so-called D'Estaing report says that the force in Savannah was composed of 3,055 English European troops, 80 Cherokee savages, and 4,000 negroes, or 7,155 men in all. Stedman gives the garrison at 2,500 "of all sorts", while T. W. Moore says that there were but 2,000 in the town. The legend on Faden's Plan gives the number at 2,360, while the writer of the first journal in Hough (p. 43) says that there were but 2,350 "effectives" in the place.

The Allies lost in the sortie of the 23d, 24th, or 25th of September—for the journals differ as to the date—from 70 to 150 in killed, wounded, and missing. Cf. Jones, Savannah, 22, 53. The writer of the Extrait, ec. of 158 pages, p. 141, says that this great loss was due to the fact that M. O'Dune, who had the immediate command at the time, was intoxicated, and pursued the assaulting column too far. The assault of Oct. 9th cost D'Estaing, according to the Extrait (as above, p. 148), 680 men, while the author of the other journal translated by Jones gives it as high as 821. The American loss was not far from 312, though Moultrie rates it at 457, or a total loss of about 1,133 in killed, wounded, and missing. The French suffered severely from sickness,—malaria on shore and scurvy in the fleet. So that Captain Henry, when he wrote (Remembrancer, ix.) that "we have every reason to believe that this expedition cost the enemy two thousand men", was probably not far from correct. In the document which I have called the D'Estaing report the French losses are given as follows (Hough, Savannah, p. 174): "Killed, 183; wounded, 454." But the figures have not been verified by a comparison with the original Gazette.

The English loss in the sortie was very slight,—not more than twenty-one. Repelling the assault on the 9th cost Prevost 16 killed and 39 wounded. But to these numbers should he added those picked off from time to time, which swelled the total to 103 in killed and wounded (Prevost's report in Remembrancer, iv. 81). He lost, in addition, 52 in missing and deserters, or 155 in all. But this was more than counterbalanced by desertions from the French ranks. It should be stated, however, that T. W. Moore, Prevost's aide, gave the loss of the garrison in killed and wounded alone at 163.

[1100] C. C. Jones, Georgia, ii. 375-416; Lee and Agnew, Historical Record, 50-64; Arthur and Carpenter, Georgia, 174-193. Cf. also Allen, History, ii. 264; An Impartial History, p. 605; Andrews, iii. 309-318; and Beatson, Memoirs, iv. 516-534. The most inaccurate account known to the present writer is in E. Ryerson, The Loyalists of America and their Times, Toronto, 1880, vol. ii. p. 22.

[1101] Dufey, Résumé, i. 312-321; François Soulés, Histoire des Troublés de l'Amérique Anglaise, Paris, 1787, iii. 211-219. See also Botta (Otis's trans.), iii. 66-75; and Giuseppe Colucci, I casi della Guerra per l'Independenza narrati dall' ambasciatore della Republica di Canova presso la corte D'Inghilterra nella sua corrispondenza officiale inedita, Genoa, 1879, ii. 536.

[1102] Eelking, Hülfstruppen, ii. 57, and Lowell, Hessians, 242. Major-General John Watts De Peyster has an article on the siege in the New York Mail for Sept. 24, 1879. Something may also be found in Lossing, Field-Book; Stone, Our French Allies, etc. A description of Ebenezer, a town which constantly figures in this campaign, is in C. C. Jones, Dead Towns of Georgia, p. 183; also in Ga. Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. iv.; while the experience of the Salzburg settlers of that region is well set forth in P. A. Strobel's The Salzburghers and their Descendants, Balt., 1855, pp. 201-211.

[1103] Cf. A Journal, in Hough, p. 46; Another Journal, in Ibid. 79; and the other original sources as above.

[1104] As to the sufferings of the sailors and the lack of energy displayed by the officers of the fleet, see Extrait du Journal (158 page edition), p. 138 et seq. This part is translated in Jones, Savannah, p. 61.

[1105] The verses of the royalist wits are in Moore's Songs and Ballads, 269, 274.

[1106] The former had come into notice during the gallant defence of Fort Moultrie. Later he rendered important service, and was wounded in the lungs while carrying off the colors from the deadly Spring Hill redoubt at Savannah. There is no doubt of the truth of this intrepid bravery of Sergeant Jasper. Cf. McCall, Georgia; Horry, Life of Marion, p. 66; Stevens, Georgia, ii. 217. Cf. especially C. C. Jones, Serjeant William Jasper, An Address delivered before the Ga. Hist. Soc. in 1876.

The "impetuous Polander" was mortally wounded while making some kind of a charge in the rear of the enemy's line on the right. As to Pulaski, see, beside the general accounts and C. C. Jones's Address in Georgia Hist. Coll., iii., the Life of Count Pulaski by Sparks, in his American Biography, xiv. 365-446; pp. 431-443 relate to the Southern campaign. Cf. also an article in American Historical Record, i. 397-399; and note in Hough, Savannah, p. 175, abridged from Stevens, Georgia, ii. According to Paul Bentalou, who claimed to have been with him when he died, his body became so offensive immediately after his death that it was thrown overboard from the vessel which was bearing the wounded to Charleston. Nevertheless, at the laying of the corner-stone of a monument to his memory in Savannah, a metallic box supposed to contain his remains was placed within the plinth alongside the corner-stone. With regard to his place of burial, see Bentalou, Pulaski Vindicated from a charge in Johnson's Greene (Balt., 1824), p. 29; C. C. Jones, Sepulture of Major-General Nathanael Greene and of Brigadier-General Count Casimir Pulaski, Augusta, Ga., 1885; and a letter from James Lynch, of South Carolina, to the editor of the New York Herald, Jan. 7, 1854,—reprinted in the Hist. Mag., x. 285; Johnson, Traditions, note to p. 245, where another Pole, who claimed to have been aide-de-camp to Pulaski, and to have supported him in the death struggles, says that he was buried under a large tree, about fifty miles from Savannah.

The Maryland Historical Society has the banner presented to Pulaski by the Moravian Sisters of Bethlehem in 1778. It was saved when Pulaski fell at Savannah in 1779, and came into the possession of the society in 1844 (Penna. Archives, 2d ser., xi.). There is a portrait of Pulaski, engraved by H. B. Hall in Jones's Georgia, ii. 402. (Cf. Lossing, ii. 735.) The history of efforts to establish Pulaski's service and recompense by the United States Government is traced in Senate Exec. Doc. 120, 49th Cong., second session (1887).—Ed.

[1107] Printed in various places,—as, for example, in Hough, Charleston, p. 173; Remembrancer, x. 140. Other letters from Lincoln to Washington are in Corresp. Rev., ii. 344, 385, 401, 403, 418, and 433, etc. Some of them, especially one of April 9th, are of considerable value. Among Lincoln's MSS. is a long letter from Lincoln to Washington, dated Hingham, July 17, 1780, defending his conduct. It is of value, but, if sent, has never, to my knowledge, been printed. The reasons for abandoning the defence of the bar are given in a letter from Captain Whipple and other commanders and pilots to Lincoln, dated Charleston, Feb. 27, 1780, in Ramsay, Rev. S. C., ii. 397. See Lincoln MS. defence as above. There are also several papers relating to this portion of the siege in the third volume of the Commodore Tucker Papers in the Harvard College library. But see Moultrie (Memoirs, ii. 50) for his strictures on the giving up the position near Fort Moultrie. It is probable that, had the British fleet been kept out of the Cooper River, the surrender would have been long deferred, perhaps even until the hot season and the arrival of the French at Newport had compelled its abandonment.

[1108] There are several other descriptions from American sources. The most valuable, so far as it goes, is the report of Du Portail to Washington (Corresp. Rev., ii. 451). It relates, however, to a limited period. The same must be said of a few letters from the younger Laurens and from Woodford, the commander of seven hundred Virginians who arrived on the 21st of April. Laurens's first letter, bearing date of Feb. 25th, is in Moore's Materials for History, p. 173. The second, written on March 14th, is in Corresp. Rev., ii. 413. The third, which bears date of April 9th, is in Ibid. 435. Woodford's letter of April 8th is in Ibid. 430. Cf. also Ibid. 401, 420, and Moore's Materials, 175.

The contemporary journals of value are: Diary of Events in Charleston, S. C., from March 20 to April 20, 1780, by Samuel Baldwin, in New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., 1st series, vol. ii. pp. 78-86,—Baldwin was a schoolteacher in Charleston; cf. Ibid. p. 77; Journal of the Siege of Charleston in 1780, by De Brahm (Feb. 9, 1780-May 12, 1781), in Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1776-82), p. 124; and Memoirs of Andrew Sherburne, written by Himself (a "boy" on the American ship "Ranger"), first printed at Utica in 1828, and reprinted in an "enlarged and improved" form at Providence, in 1831. His curious journal begins on p. 24 of the 1st ed., and on p. 27 of the 2d. Maj. Wm. Croghan's journal at Charleston, S. C., Feb. 9-May 4, 1780, etc., is copied in the Sparks MSS., vol. lx. There are two journals in The Siege of Charleston by the British Fleet and Army, which terminated in the surrender of that place May 12, 1780, with notes, etc., by Franklin B. Hough (Albany, 1867). The first is contained in two letters by an unknown hand, and relates to the operations on Lincoln's line of communications. The author was not present at the siege itself. The other journal relates to the operations against the town, but it has little value. Indeed, this volume of Hough's is not so interesting as the similar work on Savannah. Another journal, which relates more especially to the movements in the country, is the Diary of Anthony Allaire, a lieutenant in Ferguson's corps, printed by Draper in his King's Mountain and its Heroes, p. 484. Allaire corroborates in a most striking manner the accuracy of the charges of cruelty and outrage made by the author of the "Notes" in Stedman's American War. The account of the defence in Johnson's Traditions was written by an eye-witness, though long after the event. It is often very inaccurate, but nevertheless interesting. The assertion therein made that Gadsden signed the capitulation, and that therefore all of South Carolina was included in its terms, cannot be substantiated.

[1109] According to Lincoln's official report, the Continental troops, "including the sick and wounded", surrendered prisoners of war at Charleston numbered 2,487. Adding to this the 89 Continentals killed, we have 2,576, or within five of the number of the garrison as given in the New Jersey Gazette for June 23, 1780 (Hough, Charleston, 198). Lincoln says further that at the time of surrender the militia "effectives" did not exceed 500 men (Lee, Memoirs, i. 141), in all not over 3,000. Clinton, in his report as usually printed, gives the total as 5,612, or 5,618, "together with town and country militia, French and seamen, make about six thousand men in arms." In Beatson, Memoirs, vi. 209, the number of seamen is printed as 100 instead of 1,000—a considerable reduction, and perhaps nearer the mark. Clinton's estimate was further increased in the royalist newspapers of the time to "between seven and eight thousand men." Lincoln's figures are probably the nearest to the truth, as all the contemporary writers on the American side insisted that Clinton counted among his prisoners every man capable of bearing arms in Charleston. At any rate, whatever their number, the militia, excepting the artillery company, seem to have been of but little service, as their loss in killed and wounded was not over forty, and in this estimate is included the total loss to those inside the lines not otherwise accounted for. Lincoln stated his killed at 89, and wounded at 140. But both Ramsay and Moultrie say that from five to six hundred Continentals were in the hospital at the time of the surrender.

In Beatson's Memoirs (vi. 204) there is a List of the different regiments and corps selected by Sir Henry Clinton to accompany him on the expedition against Charlestown. It gives the total, exclusive of staff, at 7,550. There were in Savannah at the time about 2,000 more, and the reinforcement which arrived in April numbered about 3,000 men. Clinton therefore had about 13,000 men at his disposal in May, 1780. Of course, a large proportion of this force was employed in detachments,—guarding Savannah, breaking up Lincoln's communications, and the like; so that it is impossible to say how many men Lincoln had in his front at any one time.

Clinton's loss from Feb. 11th to May 12th is given by himself at 76 killed and 189 wounded. To this should be added the loss of the sailors, who seem to have participated in a good many land expeditions,—23 seamen killed and 28 wounded, or a grand total of 316. None of these figures include the losses and numbers engaged in the minor actions. But there is so little data with regard to them that it has seemed best to omit them in these estimates.

[1110] It was widely reprinted, as, for instance, in The New Annual Register for 1780, under Principal Occurrences, p. 55; Pol. Mag., i. 455; Remembrancer, x. 41; Tarleton, 38, etc., etc. An abstract under title of A memorandum, etc., is given in the Ninth Report of the Hist. MSS. Commission, App. ii. p. 109. A previous report, bearing date of March 9th, has been found,—London Gazette for April 25-29, 1780; Pol. Mag., i. 397; Tarleton, 34; and Hough, Charleston, p. 190. The gap between March 9th and 29th must be filled from other sources. The instructions as to reducing South Carolina to obedience, from Germain to Clinton and Arbuthnot, are dated Whitehall, 3 Aug., '79 (Charleston Year-Book for 1882, p. 364). Clinton issued in all six proclamations, including the one signed by him conjointly with Arbuthnot, as commissioners. The first was dated at James's Island, March 3, 1780. It promised protection, etc., to all who should take the oath of allegiance. These protections were given in a most indiscriminate fashion, and caused the complaint of Cornwallis above noted. The paper was reprinted by Hough in his Charleston, p. 24. Next came the "Handbill", without date, but sent out soon after the capitulation (Remembrancer, x. 80). The proclamation of May 22d threatened vengeance on all who should prevent the loyalists from coming in (Remembrancer, x. 82; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 435; and Tarleton, 71). The most important proclamation, however, and the one to which Cornwallis took such violent exception, pardoned all not included in a few specified classes (June 1st), and was signed by the two chief commanders (Remembrancer, x. 85; Hough, Charleston, 178; Ramsay, Rev. S. C., ii. 438; Tarleton, 74, etc.). A fac-simile is in Charleston Year-Book (1882), p. 369. The proclamation of June 3d called upon those on parole, with a few exceptions, to give up their paroles, take the oath of allegiance, and thereby secure "protections" (Remembrancer, x. 82; Hough, Charleston, 182; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 441; Tarleton, 73; Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 384, etc.). The Address of divers Inhabitants of Charleston to Sir Henry Clinton, June 5, 1780, is (Remembrancer, x. 93; Ramsay, ii. 443; Moultrie, ii. 386, etc.) without names, which are appended to the copy in Hough, Charleston, 148, where it is stated to be reprinted from Rivington's Royal Gazette of June 21, 1780. The names, however, are from the Gazette of June 24th. The letters of Cornwallis on this subject are in his Correspondence, i. 40, 46, and 48. There is a very striking passage in Moultrie, i. 276, with regard to this business. Cf. also Ibid. 314, and Johnson's Greene, i. 279.

[1111] Hough in his Charleston (p. 50) has reprinted a despatch purporting to have been written by Clinton and addressed to Lord George Germain. It was dated Savannah, Jan. 30, 1780; reprinted in Hough, Charleston, p. 50; and was said to have been captured by a privateer. In it Clinton described the dispiriting effect on the royalists of Georgia of D'Estaing's attack on Savannah. It has been regarded as a forgery, partly on this very account. It probably was a forgery. But it is curious to observe that the opening pages of Tarleton contain the same statement, and he repents the despatch without a hint as to its being a forgery. And this forms the ground of Mackenzie's first stricture.

[1112] Moore, Diary, ii. 269; "Allen", Hist. Am. Rev., ii. 296; An Impartial History (Bost. ed.), ii. 386; Beatson, Memoirs, v. 8; Soulés, Troublés, iii. 259; Johnson's Greene, i. 274; Sargent, Life of André, p. 225; Marshall's Washington, iv. 135; Sparks's Washington, vii. 92; Wilmot G. De Saussure in Charleston Year-Book (1884), p. 282; Eelking's Hülfstruppen, ii. 59; Ewald, iii. 252; and Lowell, Hessians, 243.

A good account of this and the other operations in South Carolina is in Mills's Statistics of South Carolina, while Mrs. Ellet, in her Domestic History of the American Revolution (pp. 151-290), has well set forth the services of the women of the South. Cf. the Letters of Eliza Wilkinson, during the invasion and possession of Charleston, S. C., by the British in the Revolutionary War. Arranged from the original manuscripts, by Caroline Gilman (New York, 1838). The articles of capitulation are in Tarleton, p. 61, and R. E. Lee's ed. Lee's Memoirs, p. 158. The correspondence of the commanders is in Polit. Mag., i. 454. The abject condition of South Carolina after the reduction of Charleston is set forth in Ardanus Burke's Address to the Freemen of South Carolina, Phil., 1783. The British exhilaration is shown in Moore's Songs and Ballads, 293. The Memoirs of Josias Rogers, Commander of H. M. S. "Quebec", by Rev. Wm. Gilpin (London, 1808), is said to have passages concerning the siege.—Ed.

[1113] Reprinted in Polit. Mag., i. 513; Remembrancer, x. 76; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 432; Tarleton, Campaigns, 83; Cornwallis Correspondence, i. 45, etc. It is often accompanied by two letters: one from Cornwallis, approving his conduct; the other from Clinton to Germain, calling the latter's attention to the fact that "the enemy's killed and wounded and taken exceed Lieutenant-Colonel Tarleton's numbers with which he attacked them."

[1114] There are good descriptions in Lee, Memoirs, i. 148; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 108; Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 203; Gordon, iii. 360; and Stedman, ii. 192; though all these writers obtained their information from others.

[1115] Good accounts of this affair are in Marshall's Washington, iv. 208, and Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 458.

[1116] It was reprinted by Wheeler in his North Carolina, ii. 227, and in an abbreviated form in Hunter's Sketches of Western North Carolina, p. 206. It forms the basis of the account in Dawson, Battles, i. 592. See also Historical Magazine, xii. 24.

[1117] They can also be found in full in the Ninth Report of the Royal Commission on Historical MSS., Appendix, iii. p. 103; Cornwallis Correspondence, i. 488 and 492; Tarleton, 128; Annual Register (1780), under Principal Occurrences, p. 72; and Political Magazine, i. 675, 678. The second one is in the Remembrancer, x. 267; Tarleton, 128; Gentleman's Magazine for Oct., 1780; and in many other places. Not long before the battle, Gates supposed himself to be at the head of 7,000 men,—Williams in Johnson's Greene, i. 493,—while an estimate found in De Kalb's pocket (Remembrancer, x. 279) gives the size of the American army at some day before the battle at 6,000, less 500 deserters. In this estimate the Virginians were reckoned at 1,400,—twice their real number. Jefferson in "Memoranda" (Giradin, iv. 400) gives the total at 2,800,—the North Carolina militia being rated at 1,000, far below their real strength. Williams (Narrative, in Johnson's Greene) gives the "rank and file present and fit for duty" as 3,052. Gordon gives the total, including officers, as 3,663. If we add to this number the light infantry and cavalry we get a total of 4,033 men of all arms. This is probably as correct an estimate as can be made. Cf. J. A. Stevens in Mag. Am. Hist. (v. 267), where the subject is fully discussed.

Cornwallis had in the engagement itself 2,239 men, of whom 500 were militia. Cf. Field Return of the troops under the command of Lieutenant-general Earl Cornwallis, on the night of the 15th of August, 1780, in Remembrancer, x. 271, etc. This is given by Beatson, Memoirs, vi. 211, as Return of troops ... at the Battle of Camden.

As to the American loss, it appears that Cornwallis, without taking much pains to inquire, wrote to Germain that between 800 and 900 of the enemy were killed and wounded, about 1,000 being prisoners. Even supposing the wounded to have been counted twice, this is too high. Only three Virginia and sixty-three North Carolina militiamen are anywhere reported as wounded, while none were killed. In fact, from their speedy dispersal the militia loss must have been very slight. In any correct return they would have appeared as missing. But no attempt at such a return was made. The nearest approach to it is A List of Continental Officers, killed, captivated, wounded, and missing in the actions of the 16 and 18 August, 1780. This is signed by Otho H. Williams, and is in Remembrancer, x. 338; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 454. It is erroneously printed in the N. E. Hist. Geneal. Reg., xxvii. 376, as a Return of the Killed, wounded, captured, and missing at the Battle of Camden, which it certainly is not. There were between ten and twelve hundred Continentals present. They bore the brunt of the action and suffered nearly all the loss. Yet Gates wrote on the 29th of August that "seven hundred non-commissioned officers and men of the Maryland division have rejoined the army." See, also, Williams in Johnson's Greene, i. 505. In view of this it seems that even Gordon's estimate of 730 is too high, while Cornwallis's figures are simply ridiculous. He certainly did not overstate his own loss when he gave it as 68 killed, 245 wounded, and 11 missing, or 324 in all. Cf. return usually annexed to his report, and printed separately by Beatson in his Memoirs, vi. 211.

[1118] A mystery surrounds the life of De Kalb. But he died as became a man of worth and honor. The fullest account of his career is The Life of John Kalb, Major-general in the Revolutionary Army, by Friedrich Kapp, "privately printed" in New York in 1870. In 1884 there seemed to be a revival of interest in the hero of Camden, and the volume was published. It is a translation of Kapp's Leben des Amerikanischen Generals Johann Kalb, Stuttgart, 1862. An earlier notice was the Memoir of the Baron de Kalb read at the meeting of the Maryland Historical Society 7 January, 1858, by J. Spear Smith. Both Kapp and Smith, from whom Kapp quotes, are unwarrantably severe on Gates, as, too, is G. W. Greene in his German Element in the War of American Independence, N. Y., 1876, pp. 89-167. See, also, Thomas Wilson, The Biography of the Principal American Military and Naval Heroes, N. Y., 1817; Headley, Generals, ii. 318; Lee, Memoirs, i. 378, etc. For an account of the monument to De Kalb, see H. P. Johnston in Mag. Amer. Hist., ix. 183.

[1119] The whole letter is interesting,—Third Report of Hist. MSS. Com., Appendix, p. 430; a portion was reprinted in Mag. Amer. Hist., vii. 496, and copied thence by Kapp in his Life of John Kalb, p. 322.

[1120] Printed under the title of Gates's Southern Campaign in Hist. Mag., x. 244-253.

[1121] There is an extract in the Mag. Amer. Hist., v. 258. The whole is copied in the Sparks MSS., xx., from the Gates Papers.

[1122] The editors of Jefferson's Works (q. v. i. 249) omitted this on the ground that the "circumstances of the defeat of General Gates's army near Camden" are of "historical notoriety." Cf. Giradin's Continuation, iv. 398, where an account probably identical with this is given. It is one of the best descriptions.

[1123] The best of this class, perhaps, is that of Colonel Senff, an engineer officer who was with Sumter at the time. The original is among the Steuben Papers, a portion being printed in Mag. Amer. Hist., v. 275. See also two letters written by Governor Nash of North Carolina (Tarleton, 149, and Corres. Rev., iii. 107). The latter is especially valuable as showing the effects of the disaster on the public mind. Marion also announced the defeat to P. Horry (Gibbes, Doc. Hist., 1776-1782, p. 11).

In a letter dated Kennemark, Sept. 5, 1780, Greene describes the defeat from Gates's despatches, which had not then been made public (R. I. Col. Rec., ix. 243; R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 265; and Mag. Amer. Hist., v. 279). A more valuable letter on the same subject is one to Reed, written after his arrival in the South (Reed's Reed, ii. 344). But the most important of these Greene letters is one dated High Hills of Santee, Aug. 8, 1781 (quoted by Gordon, iv. 98), in which Greene declares that Gates did not deserve the blame with which his career in the South was so unhappily closed. Moore (Diary, ii. 310) gives several extracts from accounts of the affair which appeared in Rivington's Royal Gazette. Another contemporary account from a British source is in Lamb's so-called Journal, pp. 302-307. Lamb was a standard-bearer in a British regiment at the time, and his narrative seems to have been written while details were still fresh in his mind.

[1124] Remembrancer, x. 276; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 456, etc. Important letters of Gates as to his dispositions after the action are in Mag. Amer. Hist., v. 308; Remembrancer, x. 338; Corres. Rev., iii. 66; Maryland Papers, 128, etc., etc.

The charges of undue haste and refusal to take the advice of others, so recklessly heaped on Gates by Bancroft and the writers who have copied him, appear to be without foundation. After a careful examination of the field, in company with Otho H. Williams, Greene advised against making an inquiry into Gates's conduct, while "Light-Horse Harry" Lee wrote to Wayne (R. E. Lee's edition of Lee's Memoirs, p. 32) that Gates "has been most insidiously, most cruelly traduced.... An action took place on very advantageous terms; we were completely routed." In his Memoirs, Lee censured Gates for not using cavalry. But this, too, seems undeserved, as a note to page 394 of Giradin's Continuation contains evidence to the effect that Gates could not get—though he made every effort—the cavalry he was blamed for not employing. The most exhaustive article in his defence is The Southern Campaign, 1780: Gates at Camden, by John Austin Stevens, in Mag. Amer. Hist., v. 24-274. It is wholly in favor of Gates, and is so one-sided that it should be read with the greatest caution. Singularly enough, when he wrote this article, Mr. Stevens, as he acknowledges (p. 424), did not know of the existence of the Pinckney letter noted above. For the other side, perhaps, nothing is better than a short, carefully written article by Henry P. Johnston, entitled De Kalb, Gates, and the Camden Campaign, in Mag. Amer, Hist., viii. 496, and reprinted without map in Kapp's Kalb, Appendix, p. 322. Of the more popular accounts, that in Marshall's Washington (iv. 169) is still one of the best. Mention should also be made of the description in McRee's Life and Correspondence of James Iredell, N. Y., 1857, i. 456-461. Accounts of more or less value will also be found in Greene's Greene, iii. 17; Johnson, Greene, i. 296; Harper's Monthly, lxvii. 550; Botta (Otis's trans.), iii. 206; Soulés, Troubles, iii. 285; Allen, Hist. Amer. Rev., ii. 318; Andrews, iv. 27; J. C. Hamilton, Hist. of the Republic, ii. 120; Sparks, Washington, vi. 214; Irving, Washington, iv. 91; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 459; Carrington, Battles, 513; Dawson, Battles, iii. 613, etc., etc.

[1125] There is some detail in Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Amer. Rev., iii. App. The best known portrait of Sumter is by C. W. Peale. It is engraved in the quarto edition of Irving's Washington. Cf. Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 651.—Ed.

[1126] The first, dated Camden, July 7, 1780, is in Remembrancer, xi. 156, and Pol. Mag., ii. 339. The more famous letter, without date, but containing the offer of a reward for the head of every Irish deserter, is in Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 132; Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 215; and Washington's Writings, vi. 554. See also Sparks, Corres. Rev., iii. 77 (note). The extract of the letter to Balfour or Cruger, which aroused the ire of Washington, is in Washington's Writings, vii., Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 157, and Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 240. Cornwallis's own version is in his Correspondence, i. 56, and Draper's King's Mountain, p. 140. A proclamation embodying the British commander's ideas as to confiscation was issued on either the 6th or 16th. of September, 1780 (Tarleton, 186; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 460; and Remembrancer, xi. 25). Clinton's reply to Washington is in Cornwallis Correspondence, i. 60, with Cornwallis's and Rawdon's explanations (pp. 72, 501).

[1127] Ramsay was a prisoner at the time, and what he says (Rev. in S. C., ii. 158-173, 288-303) has a considerable value. A large portion of Moultrie's second volume (pp. 117-201) is taken up with the same subject. Both of them relied on a letter written to Ramsay by Dr. P. Fassoux, surgeon-general in the hospital at Charleston. Moultrie declares that the letter "is an exact statement of their conduct in our hospital at that time." The letter is in Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 397,—the indorsement is on p. 277; Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), p. 116; and Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 527. If a tithe of this statement is true, the conduct of the British officers in charge at Charleston was simply brutal; but the British surgeon denied most of the statements. It will do no harm to contrast this with the treatment of those taken at Yorktown, as told by one of their own number, Gen. Graham. Cf. his Memoirs, 66 et seq., and App. p. 306. English writers have asserted that papers implicating the Charleston prisoners in a conspiracy to overthrow the government were found in the pockets of those taken at Camden; but no proof of this has ever been produced. In fact, in his letter of Dec. 4th Cornwallis alleged as a reason for their removal to St. Augustine that they were so insolent in their behavior they could not be allowed to go at large in Charleston. Indeed, the prisoners seem to have been treated with increased harshness after Camden. Before that time everything had been done to induce them to enlist in the British army. A regiment had been raised, and the command offered to Moultrie, and refused by that sturdy patriot in a letter which has been printed over and over again. Cf. Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 166; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 289; Charleston Year-Book for 1884; and reprinted as The Correspondence of Lord Montague with General Moultrie, 1781 (Charleston, 1885).

[1128] Hayne's letters to the British authorities are in Gibbes, i. p. 108; Remembrancer, xiii. 121; Ramsay, 508-520.

[1129] Greene waited till Gadsden and his fellow-prisoners were safe within the American lines; and his officers, in ignorance of his purpose, remonstrated, Aug. 20, 1781, against this delay (Ramsay, ii. 521; Moultrie, ii. 414; Greene's Greene, iii. 558; Gibbes, i. 128). Greene's formal proclamation, Aug. 26th, declared that the first regular British colonel captured should suffer (Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 524; Moultrie, ii. 417, Remembrancer, xiii. 125, etc.). Cf. also Greene to Washington, Aug. 26, 1781, in Corres. of Rev., iii. 393; Balfour to Greene, Sept. 3, 1781. The letter to which this is an answer I have not found in Ramsay, U. S., 520, extract; and Gibbes (1781-82), 168. And see also Greene to Balfour, Sept. 19, 1781, in Gibbes, 168. Before this threat could be carried out a new commander arrived at Charleston, and the war took on humaner methods.

[1130] Cf. Hansard, xxii. 963; Parl. Reg. (Debrett), xxv. 81; Polit. Mag., iii. 45, 73, 237, 383; Lee's Memoirs (2d edition), 326; Hist. Mag., x. 269.

[1131] Lee's Campaign of 1781, App.; R. E. Lee's ed. of Lee's Memoir, p. 613.

[1132] Cf. Lieut. Hatton in Mackenzie's Strictures.

[1133] Pickens to Greene in Johnson's Greene, ii. 135, and Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), 91. On the other hand, Browne, the British commander at Augusta, in a letter to Ramsay, dated Dec. 25, 1786 (White's Hist. Coll.), asserts that James Alexander, a captain in Pickens's militia, was the murderer whom Pickens shielded. It would seem that such was the case. See further Johnson's Traditions; McCall's Georgia; Jones's Georgia, ii. 455; Stevens's Georgia, ii. 247; White's Hist. Coll. of Georgia, 210; Lee's Memoirs, ii. 204; and Stedman, American War, ii. 219.

[1134] There is an account of this author's life in Mag. Western History, Jan., 1887.

[1135] He gives portraits of John Sevier, Shelby, Samuel Hammond, Joseph McDowell, and De Peyster; and a view of Ferguson's headquarters. W. E. Foster, in his review of Draper, gives references (N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Jan., 1882, p. 92).

[1136] See the "report" in Draper, 522; Foote's Western North Carolina, 126; Moore's Diary, ii. 338; and the newspapers of the time. As to the opposing numbers, Ferguson had when attacked from nine to eleven hundred men; the Americans numbered a little over nine hundred. But as to the losses, it is within the truth to say that the British loss was not under seven hundred and fifty in killed, wounded, and prisoners; and it has been given as high as eleven hundred and three in the official report. There is every reason to suppose that this was an overestimate. The killed and wounded on the American side did not exceed one hundred, and may be stated at ninety. This is supposed to have resulted from the fact that the fire of the Tories, being down-hill, was not so effective as the fire of the patriots in the opposite direction. Draper (King's Mountain, 297) has said all that can be said on this subject. There is an account of Campbell in the Mag. of Western Hist., Jan., 1887.

[1137] Draper, 546; Foote's Sketches of Western North Carolina, 264; and Southern Literary Messenger, xi. 552. It forms the basis of the account in Ramsay's Annals of Tennessee, 225. On the whole, this account is very favorable to Shelby.

[1138] Many years before this, a dispute had broken out between the descendants of Campbell and Shelby himself. The portions of the papers which this brought forth, so far as they relate to King's Mountain, are reprinted in Draper, 540. What was in some sort a last word was said by John C. Preston, Campbell's descendant, in his Address delivered at the Celebration of the battle of King's Mountain (printed separately at Yorkville, S. C., 1855).

Charges of cowardice were also made on the British side. In February, 1781, a writer in the Political Magazine accused De Peyster of surrendering too soon; but in the same magazine (iii. 609) are documents vindicating his character. Ferguson's death deprived Cornwallis of a most valuable officer. For Ferguson, see Biographical Sketch or Memoir of Lieutenant-Colonel Patrick Ferguson, by Adam Ferguson (Edinburgh, 1817). Cf. also Political Magazine, ii. 60; Mackenzie, Strictures, 63; Foote, Sketches of Virginia, 2d series, 129.

[1139] This was given to Draper by Allaire's grandson, J. De Lancey Robinson, of New Brunswick. The part relating to this campaign is in Draper, 505-515. The British Museum has recently acquired a MS. narrative of one Alexander Chesney, who describes the partisan warfare in Carolina during the Revolution. He was wounded at King's Mountain.—Ed.

[1140] There are good accounts in the contemporary books, especially in Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 178; Gordon, iii. 462; Moultrie, ii. 242; Lee, Memoirs, i. 207; Stedman, ii. 220; and Tarleton, 164. Tarleton's account of Ferguson's campaign was displeasing to Mackenzie; cf. Strictures, 58. It was also very distasteful to Cornwallis, whom his former subordinate censured. Much can be gleaned from the local histories: W. B. Zeigler and B. S. Crosscup, The Heart of the Alleghenies or Western North Carolina (Raleigh, N. C., and Cleveland, Ohio, 1883, p. 219); Hunter, Sketches of Western North Carolina, 300; J. H. Logan, History of the Upper Country of South Carolina (Columbia, 1859), vol. i., all ever published, p. 68. Cf. also J. W. De Peyster in Historical Magazine, xvi. 189-197, and Magazine of American History, v. 401-424; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 624, and American Historical Record, i. 529; Marshall, Washington, iv. 397; J. C. Hamilton, Hist. of the Republic, ii. 161; Am. Whig Rev., 2d series, ii. 580. Bancroft was present at the celebration in 1855, and made a speech. Cf. Celebration of King's Mountain, p. 75; Moore's Life of Lacey, etc. For poetry we have a rude ballad by an unknown author,—cf. Draper, 591; a poem by Paul H. Hayne in Harper's Monthly, lxi. 942; by W. G. Simms in Ibid. xxi. 670; and a stirring ballad, written shortly after the action, by an anonymous author in Moore, Songs and Ballads of the American Revolution, p. 335, and Draper, 592.

There is no good plan of this action. Foote (Sketches of Western North Carolina) says that Graham made "several plots of the ground showing the position of the different bands at different times." One of these, depicting the situation at the time of the surrender, has been printed. It should have accompanied the original publication of Graham's account in the Southern Literary Messenger (xi. 552), but was omitted. What I take to be the same is given by Major-General John Watts De Peyster in the Historical Magazine (xvi. 192), who says that it was first printed in the Southern Lit. Messenger, but when he does not say. He adds that it was copied in the University of North Carolina Magazine. A plan closely resembling it in general features is in Ramsay's Annals of Tennessee, p. 238. A fac-simile of this last is in Mag. of Am. Hist., v. 414. Draper (page 236) gives a Diagram of the Battle of King's Mountain, in which the corps are arranged to suit his ideas, together with a map of the neighboring region. There seems to be little doubt but that Graham's arrangement is faulty, and too favorable to Shelby. As to this officer, cf. Mag. of Western Hist. (Jan., 1887). Lossing gives views of the field (Field-Book, ii. 629, 634).

[1141] Cf. Ninth Report of Hist. MSS. Commission, App. iii. p. 109. The second of these is also in Cornwallis Cor., p. 495, and Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, etc., App., 32.

[1142] Cf. Parl. Reg., xxv. 124; Fifth Report of Hist. MSS. Comm., 236; Political Mag., ii. 339; and Germain Cor., 10.

[1143] London Gazette, Feb. 13-17, 1781; Annual Register, 1780 (Principal Occurrences, p. 17); Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, etc., App. p. 45; and Cornwallis Corres., i. 497. A short extract is in Tarleton, p. 203.

[1144] Cornwallis Corres., i. 57-74, and Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, etc., pp. 29, 35.

[1145] Cf. also Marshall, Washington, iv. 336; G. W. Greene, Historical View of the American Revolution (Boston, 1865), pp. 265-281,—very laudatory. McRee, Life of Iredell (i. 481-565), contains, besides many interesting letters from and to the subject of the book, an explanatory text, in which the author endeavors to defend North Carolina from various charges that have been brought against her people and militia. Reminiscences of Dr. William Read in Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1776-82), 270 et seq.; Randall, Life of Jefferson, i.; Kapp's Steuben, Am. edition, pp. 344-369; Le Boucher, i. 280, and ii. 17; Allen, Hist. Am. Rev., ii. 369-392; Caldwell's Greene, pp. 150-388; Reed's Reed, ii. 339-381; J. C. Hamilton, Life of A. Hamilton, i. 308, and History of the Republic, ii. 41, 133; Irving's Washington, iv. There is an interesting article in Harper's Monthly, xv. 159, on the first part of the campaign, and a good account of the later portion from the British side in the Political Mag., iv. 25-36.

Various letters of Greene after assuming command are in the Steuben Papers (copies in Sparks MSS., xv.). Washington's instructions are in Sparks, vii. 271. He reached Charlotte in December (Corresp. of Rev., iii. 165); Mag. of Amer. Hist., Dec., 1881; by Lewis Morris in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1875, p. 473; by C. W. Coleman in Mag. of Am. Hist., vii. 36, 201.

[1146] For a brief and appreciative notice of Williams, see Lee, Memoirs, i. 410. Cf. also A Sketch of the Life and Services of Gen. Otho Holland Williams, read before the Md. Hist. Soc. by Osmond Tiffany (Baltimore, 1851).

[1147] There is a short notice of William Washington in Lee, Memoirs, i. 399. See also Wyatt, 79-83.

[1148] Carrington was less known, but Hartley in his Heroes, p. 318, has devoted a short space to him.

[1149] Cf. Memoirs of Generals ... who were presented with medals by Congress, by Thomas Wyatt (Phila., 1848), pp. 70-78; Mag. of Am. Hist., vii. 276-282,—with portrait; Hartley, Heroes, 317; Rogers, Biog. Dict., 228, etc.

[1150] Davie, however, rose into prominence. Cf. Frances M. Hubbard, Life of William Richardson Davie, in Sparks, Am. Biog., xxv. pp. 1-135. Pages 13-177 relate to his military career. Cf. also Lee, Memoirs, i. 381; Lives of the Heroes, 134; and Rogers, Biog. Dict., 114.

[1151] Cf. Greene's Greene, iii. ch. 1. The earliest general map of the Southern campaigns from American sources appeared in David Ramsay's Hist. of the Rev. in So. Carolina (vol. i., Trenton, 1785). Gordon, in 1785, sent this Ramsay map to Greene, asking him to correct it, and lest it should not answer he sent other maps of the Southern States for Greene to amend (Hist. Mag., xiii. 24, 25). Gordon's own map is in his third volume, and is reduced in Greene's Greene. Other early American maps are those in Marshall's Atlas to his Washington, and in Johnson's Greene, vol. ii.

The English maps are A new and accurate map of North Carolina and part of South Carolina, with the field of battle between Earl Cornwallis and General Gates (London, 1780), and Faden's map of Feb. 3, 1787, showing the Marches of Lord Cornwallis in the Southern provinces, comprehending the two Carolinas, with Virginia and Maryland and the Delaware Counties (20 × 26 inches), which is the one also used in Tarleton's Campaigns. Cf. those in the Political Mag., Nov., 1780, and Kitchen's Map of the Seat of War, in London Mag., 1781, p. 291. There are later eclectic maps in Carrington, 556; Harper's Mag., lxiii. 324; and in such lesser works as Ridpath's United States, 342, and Lowell's Hessians, 265. There are French maps in Hilliard d'Auberteuil's Essais, ii.; Balch's Les Français en Amérique, etc.

There was a map of South Carolina published in nine sheets (London, 1771,—King's maps, Brit. Mus., i. 209). That by James Cook was engraved by Bowen in 1773 (Brit. Mus. Catal. Maps, 1885, col. 699). Other maps antedating the active hostilities in the South were those in the Amer. Military Pocket Atlas (1776); the large sheet (56 × 40 inches), with considerable detail, called Map of North and South Carolina, the work of H. Mouzon and others (London, Sayer & Bennett, 1775); and upon this and Cook's the map in B. R. Carroll's Hist. Coll. of So. Carolina is based. Sayer & Bennett (London, 1776) published a smaller map, 19 × 25 inches, called A general map of the southern British colonies in America, comprehending North and South Carolina [etc.] with the Indian countries. From the modern surveys of de Brahm & others & from hydrographic survey, by B. Romans, 1776. It has marginal plans of Charleston and St. Augustine.

In 1777 there was published both in London and Paris a large map of South Carolina and Georgia, after surveys by Bull, Gascoigne, Bryan, and De Brahm. The Paris publisher was Le Rouge, and it was included in the Atlas Amériquain, which also reproduces the Mouzon map and the English map of the Carolina coasts, by N. Pocock (1770).

The Bull, etc., map of 1777 was reissued by Faden in 1780 as a Map of South Carolina and a part of Georgia. Cf. the map of Parts of South Carolina and Georgia in the Political Mag., i. 454. The Brit. Mus. Catal. Additional MSS., no. 31,537, shows four plans, giving positions of the British in South Carolina from May to September, 1779.

North Carolina alone was not so well mapped as South Carolina at the outbreak of the war. There was a map published in London in 1770, after surveys by Collet, governor of Fort Johnson (King's maps, Brit. Mus., i. 208), and in the same library is a drawn map, also by Collet, of the back country, made in 1768, in twelve sheets. E. W. Caruthers' Interesting Revolutionary incidents chiefly in the old North State, second series (Philadelphia, 1856), has a folding map, with the marches of Greene and Cornwallis, from the Cowpens till the separation at Ramsey's Mill.

The standard map of Virginia at the outbreak of the war was that by Fry and Jefferson (see Vol. V. p. 273), originally issued in 1751, but reproduced by Jefferys in 1775, and included in his American Atlas (1775, no. 31). In 1777 Le Rouge reproduced it in Paris, and included it in the Atlas Amériquain. Cf. the map of Virginia and Maryland in Hilliard d'Auberteuil's Essais; and the maps in Political Mag., i. 787, and Mag. of Amer. Hist., vi. 25; and for details those in Simcoe's Journal (giving various skirmishes, etc.), Sparks's Washington, viii. 158; and Carrington's Battles, p. 616. There is among the Rochambeau maps (no. 51) a Plan du terrain à la rive gauche de la rivière de James, vis-à-vis Jamestown, en Virginie, où etait le Combat du 6 Juillet, 1781, giving the first and second positions of the troops in the engagement between Lafayette and Cornwallis. It is a colored map, 18 × 18 inches, with a good key. Cf. map on the operations in Virginia in Mémoires of Lafayette (Paris, 1837), vol. i.—Ed.

[1152] Pp. 258-329; 290-312 dealing more especially with this engagement. See also Johnson's Greene, vol. ii. pp. 346, 370, 372, and 410, and Charleston News and Courier for May 10, 1881. Some part at least of the correspondence of General Morgan is in the collection of Theodorus Bailey Myers (Johnson's Orderly-book, p. 211). There are a few letters in the Correspondence of the Revolution, iii. 217, with Greene's official announcement of the victory to Washington (pp. 207, 214). Greene's letter to Marion is in Gibbes, Doc. Hist., 1781-82, p. 16.

[1153] The London Gazette, March 27-31, 1781, reprinted either in whole or in part in Remembrancer, xi. 272; Pol. Mag., ii. 221; Tarleton, 249; Cornwallis, Answer to Clinton's Narrative, App. 1; Cornwallis, Corr., i. 81. Balfour, then the commander at Charleston, also reported the particulars to Germain. Cf. London Gazette, as above, etc. Cornwallis's order to Tarleton to "push Morgan to the utmost" is in Graham's Morgan 227, and in Tarleton, Campaigns, 244.

[1154] Mention should also be made of Lee, Memoirs, i. 252-266, and R. E. Lee's ed., 229; Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 252; Gordon, Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii.,—all at second hand. See also Johnson's Greene, i. 368; Greene's Greene, iii. 139; Travels in North America in the years 1780, 1781, and 1782. By the Marquis de Chastellux—translated from the French by an English Gentleman (London, 1787), ii. 60. The marquis claimed to have derived his account from Morgan, but he probably did not understand him, as his description is at variance with the best authorities. There are accounts of more or less value in McSherry, Maryland, 276; Memoir of General Graham, p. 38; Marshall, Washington, iv. 342; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 636; Carrington, Battles, 546; Historical Magazine, xii. 356 (Dec., 1865), a "traditionary account;" Harper's Monthly, xxii. 163, etc. Probably as good an estimate as can be formed of Morgan's force is that contained in a letter from Greene to Marion of January 23, 1781. He there gives it at 290 infantry and 80 cavalry of the line, and about 600 militia; total, 970. The estimate of the militia is too high, and might be reduced by 100. Then, too, there were a few small detachments. So that Morgan's assertion in his official report, that he fought with only 800 men, is not incompatible with this statement of Greene's. The British brought, or should have brought, into action at least 1,000 men, including 50 militia and a baggage-guard, which made off, without striking a blow, as soon as the news of the defeat reached it. Greene rates Tarleton's force at 200 more. But 1,000 was probably not far from his number of "effectives" on the morning of Jan. 17, 1781, as opposed to Morgan's 800.

In his official report Morgan gave his loss as 12 killed and about 60 wounded. He states, however, that he was not able at the time of writing to ascertain the loss of the militia in the skirmish and front lines. It must have been very small, however. The British loss he gives as more than 110 killed, more than 200 wounded, and between 500 and 600 prisoners. Morgan states, however, that, as he was obliged to move off the field so quickly, the estimate of killed and wounded was very imperfect. The loss of the British in officers was very large, and it is safe to follow Graham (Life of Morgan, p. 308) and place the killed at 80, the wounded at 150, and the prisoners at 600. The important fact is the deprivation to Cornwallis of his light infantry at a time when he was sorely in need of such.

A good plan will be found in Johnson's Greene, i. 378, of which a reduced fac-simile is given by Graham (p. 297). A more valuable plan as coming from an actual observer, Colonel Samuel Hammond, is in Johnson's Traditions, pp. 529, 530. The best plan is in Carrington's Battles, p. 547. The medals given to Morgan, Colonels Washington and Howard are figured in Loubat's Medallic Hist. of the U. S., and in Lossing's Cyclop. U. S. Hist., p. 341. Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 637, gives a view of the field.—Ed.

[1155] Those from Morgan are in Graham's Morgan, 328 et seq. The most interesting letter from Greene is one that he wrote to Reed (March 18), in Reed's Reed, ii. 348. A letter to Washington (Irwin's Ferry on Dan, Feb. 15, 1781) may be regarded as his official report. Cf. Corres. Rev., iii. 233. It should be read in connection with one of six days earlier, in the same volume, p. 225. Cf. also a letter to Lieutenant Lock as to militia in Hist. Mag., v. 86; Caruthers' Incidents, p. 195; originally printed in Tarleton, 252. Lee's description of the retreat after the union of the two wings at Guilford is admirable (Memoirs, i. 267-298).

[1156] London Gazette for June 2-5, 1781; Annual Register for 1781 (Principal Occurrences, p. 62); Cornwallis, Answer to Clinton, Appendix, p. 23; Cornwallis, Corres., i. 502; Tarleton, 259, etc. For a less official account, see Cornwallis to Rawdon, Feb. 4 and Feb. 21, in Cornwallis, Corres., 83, 84.

[1157] Cf. also British Invasion of North Carolina in 1780 and 1781. A Lecture, by Hon. Wm. A. Graham, delivered before the N. Y. Hist. Soc. in 1853. This short and interesting account of the campaign is printed as part iii. of Revolutionary History of North Carolina (Raleigh and N. Y., 1853), pp. 180-187. General Joseph Graham also presented the local idea of this campaign in the University of North Carolina Magazine, vol. iii.

[1158] See also Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 203; Greene's Greene, iii. 148-175; Johnson's Greene, i. 387. Johnson thinks that too much credit has been given to Cornwallis. Lamb's Journal, 343; Marshall's Washington, iv., etc.

[1159] The map is on p. 245. Stedman also gives a plan in Amer. War, ii. 328. The whole march can be traced on the general maps, especially the map in Caruthers' Incidents, second series. Cf. Lossing, ii. 598.

[1160] See also Seymour's "Journal" (Penna. Hist. Mag., vii.) for another contemporary account.

[1161] North Carolina University Magazine, vol. vii. 193. This was written in 1824 and cannot be regarded as authority of the first importance. The passage relating to this affair is quoted by Caruthers, Incidents, 76. That author's own account is derived to a great extent from tradition (Incidents, 71 et seq.). In the above letter Graham asserted that he saw Eggleston—the leader of Lee's rear troop—strike a Tory with the butt of his pistol, and that the blow brought about the conflict. The different narratives cannot be reconciled. Very likely Lee had forgotten the exact details. It is certain that Stedman (Amer. War, ii. 333), in his estimate of the Tory loss in killed alone at between two and three hundred, more than doubled the actual number; but it was a murderous business at best.

[1162] There are three letters from Greene to Washington in Sparks, Corr. Rev., iii. 224, 259, 266. The second of these (March 10) was also printed in Remembrancer, xii. 37; Pol. Mag., ii. 380; and Tarleton, 258. Greene's official report to the President of Congress may be found in Caldwell's Greene, p. 432; Ann. Reg. for 1781, Principal Occurrences, p. 148; Remembrancer, xii. 37; Tarleton, 313; Lee, Memoirs, i. 414, etc. Cf. also a letter to Morgan in Graham's Morgan, 372, and to Reed, in Reed's Reed, ii. 348. As to the proper dispositions to make in engagements where much reliance must be placed on militia, see Morgan to Greene, Feb. 20, in a note to Johnson's Greene, ii. 6. As to events subsequent to the battle, see Nash, governor of N. C., to Washington in Sparks, Corres. Rev., iii. 282; Greene to same in Ibid. 277; Johnson, Greene, ii. 37; and Remembrancer, xii. 116. Greene also wrote to Greene, governor of R. I., on the same subject. Cf. R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 284, and R. I. Col. Rec., ix. 380.

[1163] Cornwallis's report to Germain (London Gazette, June 2-5, 1781) was widely reprinted (Corn. Corr., i. 506; Cornwallis, Answer to Clinton's Narrative, App. p. 35; Remembrancer, xii. 21, etc., etc.). He also wrote a friendly note to Rawdon, in which he says that after a very sharp action he had routed Greene (Corn. Corr., i. 85; Remembrancer, xi. 332; Polit. Mag., ii. 329, etc.). Balfour communicated the news of the "victory at Guilford" to Germain in two letters, dated respectively March 24 and 27. These last three letters arrived in London in season to be published in the Gazette Extra for May 11, 1781,—nearly a month before the official report was given to the world. Cf. also Remembrancer, xi. 329. Cornwallis's Order-book is very valuable for this period, although it is often hard to reconcile the dates as there given with the accepted accounts,—in Caruthers, Incidents, 2d ser. pp. 391-442. See also St. George Tucker to Fanny (his wife) under date of March 18, 1781, in Mag. Amer. Hist., vii. 40; viii. 201; and Seymour's "Journal" in Penna. Mag. Hist., vii. 377. Major Weemys gives the supposed strength of Cornwallis's army before the action at Guilford, March 15, 1781, as, in the field with him, 2,700; in his department, 6,000 in all (Sparks MSS. xx.).—Ed.

[1164] Good descriptions are in the Memoirs of the British Graham (pp. 41-46), in Gordon (iv. 53), and in Stedman (ii. 337). Lamb in his so-called Journal (pp. 348-362) follows Stedman, but he added several interesting anecdotes, which it must be remembered are related by an actual actor in the battle.

[1165] Another apologetic description is that in McSherry's Maryland (p. 286). The plain fact is that the 2d Maryland broke and contributed materially to the defeat of the Americans. The Grenadier Guards (Hamilton, ii. 247) did excellent work on the British side, and the account in the history of that corps is good. The Hessians, too, once more appeared on the Southern fields (Eelking, Hülfstruppen, ii. 101, and Lowell, Hessians, 268). Other accounts may be found in Marshall's Washington, iv. 336; Greene's Greene, iii. 176; Johnson's Greene, ii. 4; Allen, Hist. Amer. Rev., ii. 393; Andrews, iv. 100; Botta (Otis's trans.), iii. 263; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 599 and 608; Mag. Amer. Hist., vii. 38; Harper's Magazine, xv. 158; Dawson, Carrington, etc.

A narrative of subsequent events in North Carolina, with a loyalist's sympathies, is in The Narrative of Colonel David Fanning ... as written by himself, Richmond, 1861. "Printed for private distribution only." A small edition (50 copies) was brought out by Sabin in 1865.

[1166] Greene to Huntingdon (President of Congress) in Caldwell's Greene, p. 435; Remembrancer, xii. 126; Pol. Mag., ii. 547; Tarleton, 467, etc. See also letters to Lee and Marion in Gibbes, Doc. Hist., 1781-82, 60. Cf. also Sparks, Corres. Rev., iii. 299, and Reed's Reed, ii. 351, 361.

[1167] Rawdon's order which brought on the battle is in Pol. Mag., ii. 340. The British commander reported to Cornwallis (Corn. Corr., i. 97, and Remembrancer, xv. 1); Balfour to Germain (London Gazette, June 2-5, 1781; reprinted in Annual Register for the same year under Principal Occurrences, p. 71; Pol. Mag., ii. 380; Remembrancer, xii. 27; Tarleton, p. 465; etc.). On the 6th Balfour wrote to Clinton, giving a very gloomy account of affairs (Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, etc., App. p. 97). Clinton enclosed several letters of about this time to Germain (Remembrancer, xii. 151). In a letter to Cornwallis, dated Monk's Corner, May 24, Rawdon describes his movements after the fight. It is a valuable letter (London Gazette, July 31-Aug. 4, 1781; Remembrancer, xv. 4, while extracts are in Ibid. xii. 151; Pol. Mag., ii. 482; Tarleton, 475; Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, etc., App. p. 91; Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), p. 77, etc.).

[1168] Cf. also Gordon, iv. 81; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C.; Stedman, ii. 324; Lee, Memoirs, ii. 57 (he always spells the name of the battle-ground Hobkick's Hill); Lee, Campaign of 1781, 264; Balch's Maryland Line, 143. As to numbers, Greene thought that the two armies were about equal,—one thousand on each side. This is probably nearly correct; for Rawdon gave his own number at 960, and Gordon, on the authority of returns not now accessible, rated Greene's force at 1,194 men of all arms. This included 254 North Carolina militia who had just arrived. They were not included in the battle line. Williams reported the American loss at 268; but 133 of these are given as missing, with the remark that they probably had mistaken the order as to a place of rendezvous. Rawdon reported his own loss at 220 men. But Tarleton, on the authority of a return in the Annual Register, gives it at 258. The discrepancy is not material.

[1169] His letter to the President of Congress is in Remembrancer, xii. 197; Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), p. 70; etc. Cf. also a letter to Washington in Sparks, Cor. Rev., iii. 310.

[1170] Cf. Remembrancer, xv. 6, for a copy. Cf. also Remembrancer, xii. 153; Pol. Mag., ii. 483; and Gibbes, p. 89, for extracts. A report to Clinton of June 6 is printed, with this, except in Gibbes.

[1171] Substantially the same account is in White's Hist. Coll. of Georgia, p. 607; Stevens's Georgia, ii. 247; and Jones's Georgia, ii. 455.

[1172] See, in addition to the above, Remembrancer, xii. 289. There are no plans of any of these sieges, and the statements as to numbers are too vague and contradictory to be made the basis of any accurate estimates.

[1173] There is an account of Cruger in Jones, New York during the Rev. War, ii. 376.

[1174] See also Greene, to Marion in Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), p. 100; to Washington in Sparks, Cor. Rev., iii. 341; and to Jefferson in Greene's Greene, iii. 555. O. H. Williams sent an interesting description of the siege to his brother (Tiffany's Williams, p. 21). Greene's letters to Sumter and Marion and Sumter's letters to Marion are in Greene's Greene (fragmentary) and Gibbes, 93 et seq.

[1175] Several letters from Balfour to Germain of this period are in Remembrancer, xii. 172 and 173; Polit. Mag. ii.; and London Gazette, Aug. 7-11, 1781. Rawdon gives the loss of the garrison as less than forty, but this is very possibly too low. Cruger had 550 men when the siege began. The British account in Mackenzie rates Greene at 5,000, which estimate is absurd. It was not under 1,000 nor over 1,500, including militia. Williams reported the loss at 57 killed, 70 wounded, and 20 missing. Rawdon had "near 2,000" men. Of these 7 were placed hors de combat on the way up, "50" died of the heat, and Lee captured 250 of the cavalry on the homeward march,—a total loss of 307.

[1176] Something can also be found in Gordon, American War, iv. 92; Ramsay, Rev. in S. C.; Stedman, Amer. War, ii. 364; Johnson's Greene, ii. 127 (he apologizes for Sumter's behavior; but see Greene's Greene, iii. 319); Greene's Greene, iii. 219; Jones, New York during the Revolutionary War, ii. 376; Lossing, Field-Book, ii. 690; Marshall's Washington, iv. 524; etc. Simms has written several romances relating to this time.

Johnson has given a plan of the works in his Greene, ii. 140; a reduced fac-simile is in Greene's Greene, iii. 299. The works were planned by Lieutenant Haldane, of Cornwallis's family (cf. Stedman, ii. 364), but Lieutenant Barrette was engineer in charge at the time of the siege. Cf. Hatton in Mackenzie, 163. Also map in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 691.

[1177] Dated near Ferguson's Swamp, Sept. 11, 1781, in Caldwell's Greene, p. 441; Remembrancer, xiii. 175; Pol. Mag., ii. 677; Gibbes, Doc. Hist. (1781-82), p. 141; Tarleton, p. 513, etc. Cf. also Marion to P. Horry, in Gibbes, 160.

[1178] It was dated Eutaw, Sept. 9, 1781 (London Gazette, Jan. 29-Feb. 2, 1782;) reprinted in whole or in part in Ann. Reg., 1782, Principal Occurrences, p. 7; Remembrancer, xiii. 152; Pol. Mag., iii. 108; Tarleton, 508; Gibbes, p. 136; etc., etc.

[1179] Cf. J. W. De Peyster in United Service (Sept. 1881; Harper's Mag., lxvii. 557); Lossing, ii. 699; Dawson, Carrington, etc. On the Eutaw flag, see R. Wilson in Lippincott's Mag., xvii. 311. Johnson (Greene, ii. 224) gives a plan of two stages of the battle, and it is reproduced by G. W. Greene (iii. 384). Carrington (p. 582) gives a minuter plan. Johnson (ii. 238) gives a map of the country between Eutaw and Charleston.

The journal of Captain Kirkwood, of the Delaware regiment, beginning at Germantown, Sept. 14, 1777, and giving the marches of that regiment in 1777, its course during the Southern campaign of 1780, with a table of the losses at Eutaw, Sept. 8, is in Sparks MSS., xxv. (also xlix. vol. 3). Greene's medal is given in Loubat.—Ed.

[1180] A notice of Laurens's career, by G. W. P. Custis, is in Littell's Graydon's Memoirs (Appendix, p. 472). See also Hartley's Heroes, 310.

[1181] Remembrancer, xv. 29; the latter is also in Corres. of the Rev., iii. 529. The Delaware troops took part in this action. Cf. C. P. Bennett in Penna. Mag., ix. 452 et seq. Major Bennett was a lieutenant in the regiment at the time. His account, however, was written fifty years after the war, and cannot be reconciled with contemporary narratives.

[1182] Cf. Life of Count Rumford, by George E. Ellis, pp. 123-131, and 666-668. There is absolutely nothing about Rumford's military career in Renwick's so-called Life of Benjamin Thomson, in Sparks's American Biography, xv. pp. 1-216. A most curious and insufficient reason for this omission is given on p. 59 of the same work.

[1183] See also "Journal of Captain John Davis" in Penna. Hist. Mag., v. 300, and Seymour's Journal in Ibid. vii. 390.

[1184] The Maryland Papers, too, contain several interesting letters, especially one from Roxburgh to Smallwood (p. 186), on the evacuation of Savannah. See also, with regard to the same event, Greene to the President of Congress, in Remembrancer, xv. 21.

[1185] Moultrie, Memoirs, ii. 343, has devoted considerable space to it. Cf. also Mag. Am. Hist., viii. 826.

[1186] Cf. especially on this last campaign Johnson's Greene, ii. 238-394, and Lee, Memoirs (2d edition), p. 378 et seq.

[1187] This table as given in Charleston Year Book (1883), p. 416, is not entirely correct.

[1188] See letter from Clinton, enclosing reports from Mathews of May 16th and 24th, and from Collier of May 16, 1779 (London Gazette, June 19-22, and July 6-10, 1779; also in Remembrancer, viii. 270, 296, etc.). Collier also wrote three letters to Stephens, secretary of the admiralty (London Gazette, as above, and July 10-13, 1779).

[1189] See also Girardin, Continuation of Burk, iv. 332-338; Hamilton, Grenadier Guards, ii. 236; Stedman, ii. 136; J. E. Cooke in Harper's Mag., liii. 1 etc.

[1190] A journal of Baron Steuben in Virginia, Dec. 21, 1780, to Jan. 11, 1781, is among the copies of the Steuben MSS. in the Sparks MSS., xv. 182. Cf. Kapp's Steuben, and the lives of Jefferson, then governor. Cf. Henry A. Muhlenberg's Life of Maj.-Gen. Peter Muhlenberg (Philad., 1849), who was under Steuben. Cf. also Deutsch-Amerikanisches Magazin, 1887; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 383; Harper's Mag., lxiii. 333, for portraits and accounts.—Ed.

[1191] Clinton, Observations on Cornwallis, App. p. 61; Parliamentary Register, xxv. 143; and Germain Corresp., 75, 79. Arnold's report to Clinton of May 12th—Phillips, who died on the 13th, being too ill to write—is really a diary of events since the 18th of the preceding April, the day on which Phillips began the ascent of the James. It is in Remembrancer, xii. 60; Political Mag., ii. 390; and Hist. Mag., iii. 294. Extracts are given by Ramsay, Tarleton (p. 334), and others. The report (May 16) is given in full in Arnold's Arnold, p. 344. Jones in his New York during the Revolutionary War (ii. 463) says that Clinton, distrusting Arnold, gave dormant commissions to Dundas and Simcoe. The commissions were never used; but Simcoe in his Military Journal (ed. of 1787, pp. 108-146; ed. of 1844, pp. 158-208) gave a narrative of the whole movement, in which he figured himself as the principal personage. See also Memoir of General Graham, pp. 33-37; Beatson's Memoirs, v. 211-225; and Eelking, Hülfstruppen, ii. 105.

[1192] Giradin's account is full (Continuation of Burk, iv. 418). See also Muhlenberg's Muhlenberg, pp. 205-213; Sparks's Washington, vii. 269; Lee's Memoirs, R. E. Lee's ed., 297, 314; Howison's Virginia, ii. 248; Randall's Jefferson, i. 283-294, etc. See also, on these movements in Virginia, Wirt's Henry; Rives's Madison, i. 289; Madison's Writings, i. 45; Jefferson's Writings, ix. 212; Jones's New York during the Revolutionary War, ii. 177; Campbell's Virginia, 168; I. N. Arnold's Life of B. Arnold, 342-348; Gordon's Am. War, iv. 59; Moore's Diary, ii. 384; Va. Hist. Reg., iv. 195; Marshall's Washington, iv. 387; Sparks's Washington, vii. 347, 410; Carrington's Battles; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 434, 546; and J. A. Stevens's "Expedition of Lafayette against Arnold" in Maryland Hist. Soc. Proc. (1878).

[1193] See also Gordon, iv. 107; Lee, Memoirs (2d edition), 285; Stedman, Am. War; and Beatson, Memoirs, v. 239. On Lafayette's preparations, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., v. 150

[1194] Something may be found in Regnault's Lafayette, 190; Kapp's Steuben, 420; Eelking, Hülfstruppen, ii. 109; Chotteau, Les Français, etc. See also Harper's Monthly, vii. 145.

[1195] Mémoires ... du Générale Lafayette publiés par sa Famille (Paris, 1837), vol. i. This edition was in six volumes. An English translation in three volumes was published at London in the same year. The first volume of this was reprinted at New York in 1838, with an appendix containing many valuable documents not elsewhere in print. Among these is a report to Greene relating to the affair at the crossing of the James near Jamestown. Wayne, who commanded at the front, also made a report, which is in Sparks's Corres. of Rev. Lafayette's letters and narrative of his campaign in Virginia are in the Sparks MSS., nos. lxxxiv., lxxxvi.

[1196] See also The Part of Virginia which was the seat of action, in Gordon, iv. 116.

[1197] There is an interesting letter from Christian Febiger to T. Bland, dated July 3, 1781, in Bland Papers, p. 71. See also Ibid., p. 68.

[1198] Cf. also Denny's journal in Penna. Hist. Soc. Mem., vii.; Judge Brooks's account in Va. Hist. Reg., vi. 197; Mag. Amer. Hist., ii. 572. Lafayette always thought that he forced Cornwallis back to take post at Yorktown; but it was really Clinton's message that he could not reinforce Cornwallis that led the latter to fortify himself, according to E. E. Hale (Franklin in France, 463).—Ed.

[1199] The Tenth Report of the Royal Commission on Hist. MSS. (App. i. p. 29) contains two letters still further lessening the responsibility of Clinton for the disaster. In the first, from Lord George Germain to Clinton, the latter is given "positive orders to push the war in the South." The projected withdrawal of Arnold and Phillips is not approved. This is dated May 2, 1781. In the second letter, also from Germain, Clinton is advised that the French fleet will sail to America, and that Rodney will follow it. This letter is dated July 7, 1781. It is not stated whether Clinton ever received these notes. If he did receive them, he certainly must have felt obliged to continue the war in the South.

In the Fifth Report of the Commission on Hist. MSS. (p. 235) there are three letters written by "Sir H. Crosby" and "Sir H. C.", which the editor takes to stand for Sir H. Crosby. At least one was written by Clinton, and the probability is that all were written by him. The first (N. Y., July 18, 1781) relates to the proceedings of Cornwallis, and gives a statement of the troops under some of the British generals in America, and an estimate of the number of French troops which Washington has within call. The third (to G. G., dated Dec., 1781) is plainly the work of Clinton, as the author says that, from the tone of Cornwallis's letter of Oct. 20 (his official report), it might be supposed that the author was to blame for the selection of the post at Yorktown. In the last, also written in December, 1781, the writer attributes the disaster to the want of promised naval supremacy under Sir G. Rodney. He also gives Cornwallis's explanation of the passages complained of in his report. Cf. also Jones's New York during the Rev. War, ii., notes to pp. 464-470, where the editor gives extracts from Clinton's annotations of a copy of Stedman's American War. S. H. Gay (N. Am. Rev., Oct., 1881) follows Cornwallis's movements previous to his fortifying at Yorktown.

[1200] On this subject see also Clinton's Observations on Stedman, p. 16.

[1201] London Gazette, Dec. 15. Among the more accessible books containing it are Remembrancer, xiii. 37; Johnston's Yorktown, 181; Tarleton, p. 427; Lee, Memoirs (2d ed.), App. p. 457; R. E. Lee's ed., 610, etc.

[1202] Clinton to Cornwallis, Sept. 6, 1781, in Parl. Reg., xxv. 189. Clinton also described his endeavors in a letter to Germain in Remembrancer, xiii. 57.

[1203] Cf. Two Letters respecting the conduct of Rear Admiral Graves on the coast of the United States, July-November, 1781, by William Graves, Esq. Edited by H. B. Dawson, 1865. The original was privately printed. Dawson says "the present edition is as perfect a fac-simile of the original as can now be made."

[1204] Remembrancer, xiii. 515, while a letter from Cornwallis to Washington respecting the form of parole is in Cornwallis Correspondence, i. 126.

[1205] Fifth Report of Royal Commission on Hist. MSS., p. 235 (Lansdown MSS.).

[1206] Memoirs, ii. 434, copied in Niles's Principles, etc. (ed. 1876). For effect of the news in England, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1881, p. 363; and John Fiske on the political consequences, in Atlantic Monthly, Jan., 1886. The papers laid before Parliament are in the Polit. Mag., iii. 339. Cf. also Walpole's Last Journals, ii. 474; Donne's Corresp. of George III., etc., ii. 390; Macknight's Burke, ii. 457, etc. For the effect in Europe generally, see Parton's Franklin, ii. 452; Hale's Franklin in France, p. 464.—Ed.

[1207] Cf. also two valuable letters written during the siege from Washington to Heath, who commanded on the Hudson, in 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iv. 224 et seq. We note two early tables of the prisoners taken, one in the Meshech Weare papers in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library, and the other in the Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii. The vote of thanks given by Congress to Washington, with his reply, is in Journals of Congress, iii. 694. Washington's epaulettes worn at the time are in the Mass. Hist. Soc. (Proc., iii. 133). For "Cornwallis Burgoyned", see Moore's Songs and Ballads, 367.—Ed.

[1208] Orderly-book of the Siege of Yorktown, from September 26th, 1781, to November 2d, 1781 (Philad., 1865), being Revolutionary series, no. 1, published by Horace W. Smith.

[1209] Lincoln's MS. orderly-book is in possession of Mr. Crosby, of Hingham, Mass. Johnston (Yorktown, p. 91, note) gives an order of Lincoln's as copied from the Lamb MSS. An orderly-book of General Gist belongs to the Maryland Hist. Soc. An Orderly-Book of the Second Battalion of the Penna. Troops before Yorktown is in Egle's Notes and Queries, 145-156. It runs, however, only to Sept. 14th. See also Feltman to Lieutenant Johnston, dated Yorktown, Oct. 10, 1781, in Egle (p. 132). There is a Journal of the Campaign by Lieutenant William Feltman, May, 1781-April, 1782 (Penn. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1853, and Penna. Archives, 2d ser., vol. xi.); and a Journal of the Siege of York in Virginia, by a chaplain of the American Army (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iv. 102-108). From a reference in Thacher's Journal, Johnston (Yorktown, App., p. 196) infers that the latter appears to have been the work of Chaplain Evans, of Scammell's corps. A portion of the Military Journal of Major Ebenezer Denny relates to this siege (Penn. Hist. Soc. Mem., vii. 237-249). Another valuable journal is the one kept by Capt. John Davis, of the Pennsylvania line (Westchester Village Record, 1821, and Principles and Acts of the Revolution, 1st ed., p. 465, and 2d ed., p. 293, and entire from May 26, 1781, to June 10, 1782, in Penna. Hist. Mag., v. 290-311; vii. 339). Other journals are Notes of the Siege of Yorktown, by Dayton, in New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., ix.-x. 187; Colonel Tilghman's Diary of the Siege of Yorktown in Appendix to Memoir of Tench Tilghman; Journal of the Siege of Yorktown, by Col. Richard Butler, in Hist. Mag., viii. 102; Extract from the Journal of a Chaplain in the American Army—Sept. 12-Oct. 22, 1781—in Potter's American Monthly, v. 744; Journal of Colonel Jonathan Trumbull in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. (April, 1876), vol. xiv. 331; Thacher's Military Journal, pp. 334-351; "Siege of York and Gloucester" in American Museum, June, 1787,—reprinted in Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 222-224; an anonymous journal in Martin's Gazetteer of Virginia, pp. 293-295; and a Diary of the March from the Hudson to Yorktown and return, by Lieutenant Saunderson, of the Connecticut line, in Johnston's Yorktown, p. 170,—the original being in that author's possession. The diary of David Cobb, Oct.-Nov., 1781, is in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1881, p. 67. A journal of Henry Dearborn, ending Nov. 24, 1781, is owned by Dr. T. A. Emmet, of N. Y., having been bought in the J. W. Thornton sale, no. 284. See also letters from Governor Nelson to various persons in the "Nelson Papers" (no. 1 of the New Series of the Publications of the Virginia Historical Society). There are other letters in the Va. Hist. Reg., ii. 34; v. 157; Drake's Knox, 69, etc.

[1210] It is entitled Journal of the Operations of the French Corps under the command of Count Rochambeau (Remembrancer, xiii. 35, and Pol. Mag., ii. 707). Portions are also in Tarleton's Campaigns, 443, taken, probably, from a diary which was afterwards printed in the Paris Gazette, Nov. 20, 1781, as Journal des Opérations du Corps Français sous le commandement du Comte de Rochambeau; also found in Two Letters respecting the conduct of Rear Admiral Graves, pp. 31, 32, and translated by Dawson, pp. 38, 39. Another translation, Substance of a French Journal from the Supplement to the Gazette de France of Nov. 20, 1781, is reprinted in the Mag. Am. Hist., vii. 224, from Pennsylvania Packet of Feb. 21, 1782. See also the account in Rochambeau's Mémoires, i. 289-302; Wright's translation of above, 65-80; Soulés, Troubles, iii. 369-378, and 386-398,—attributed to Rochambeau; and Lauzun, Mémoires, 194-205.

[1211] No. 1,886 in his sale catalogue.

[1212] The Magazine of American History contains two other journals which really formed a part of this diary, and were written by M. de Ménonville (vii. p 283-288), and by "the engineers" (vii. 449-452).

[1213] The original Journal de Campagne de Claude Blanchard, ed. by Maurice La Chesnais, was published in Paris, 1869.

[1214] My Campaigns in America. A Journal kept by Count William de Deux-Ponts, 1780-81. Translated from the French Manuscript, with an Introduction by S. A. Green, Boston, 1868. The original and translation are here printed successively. Dr. S. A. Green came upon this valuable manuscript by chance while in Paris.

[1215] At a later day it was charged that Lafayette had ordered the garrison of the small redoubt to be put to the sword in revenge for the murder of Alexander Scammell. Of course the charge was false. It led to a correspondence between Lafayette and Hamilton. Cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 363 et seq., and Hamilton's Works, vi. 555. Lafayette's narrative, as he gave it to Sparks, is in the Sparks MSS., no. xxxii.

[1216] Ramsay, Rev. in S. C., ii. 317; Gordon, iv. 175; Stedman, ii.; Lee, Memoirs (2d ed., p. 307). Lee was present during the siege as the bearer of despatches from Greene, or for some other reason.

[1217] The Yorktown Campaign and the Surrender of Cornwallis, 1781 (N. Y., 1881). Johnston also printed an article in Harper's Monthly, lxiii. 323.

[1218] Yorktown, an Account of the Campaign (N. Y., 1882). See also, by the same author, The Campaign of the Allies in Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 241.

[1219] Drake's Knox, 62; Hamilton's Hamilton, ii. 256-275; Leake's Lamb, 276; Williams's Olney, 266; Custis's Recollections, 229; Kapp's Steuben, 453, etc., with the diary of an Anspach sergeant. Cf. Balch, p. 14, for references to another diary of a German.

[1220] See J. A. Stevens, The Allies at Yorktown in Mag. of Amer. Hist., vi. 1; Page, Old Yorktown in Scribner's Mag., xxii. 801; Goldwin Smith, Naseby and Yorktown in Contem. Rev., Nov., 1881; Mag. of Amer. Hist., Dec., 1881,—a collection of newspaper scraps, some of value; E. M. Stone's French Allies, 416; E. E. Hale in Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc., Oct., 1881; Penna. Mag. of Hist., v. 290; W. S. Stryker's New Jersey Continental Line in the Virginia Campaign of 1781 (Trenton, 1882); Longchamps, Histoire Impartiale, iii. 129; Robin, Nouveau Voyage, 29; Le Boucher, ii. 26; Chotteau, 267; Regnault's Lafayette, 199,—not good for much; Tarleton's Campaigns, 351; Clinton, Observations on Stedman, 22; Beatson's Memoirs, v. 271; Memoir of General Samuel Graham, 55; Grant's British Battles, 173; Botta, Otis's trans., iii. 374. Lamb's Journal, p. 370 et seq., is of considerable interest, especially the portion narrating his escape and subsequent recapture. See also Capt. William Mure to Andrew Stuart, dated Yorktown, Oct. 21, 1781, in Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. vii. App. xxxviii. There is in the Boston Public Library a MS. orderly-book of the troops under Lord Cornwallis, dated Williamsburgh, 28 June, 1781, to Yorktown, 19 October, 1781, and made up by several officers. The generally received account of the reception of the news in England is probably not correct. Cf. Stockbridge in Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 321.

[1221] The official account of the recent celebration at Yorktown is called a Report of the Commission for a monument commemorative of the Surrender of Lord Cornwallis (Wash., 1883). This contains Robert C. Winthrop's oration, which has also been separately printed. Another notable address was by the Hon. J. L. M. Curry, delivered at Richmond and published. A French account of this anniversary, Yorktown Centénaire de l'indépendance des Etats-Unis d'Amérique, 1781-1881 (Paris, 1886), is the work of Rochambeau's descendant. Cf. Stone's French Allies, 535; Mag. of Amer. Hist., vii. 302; Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xix. 101. Another volume called forth by the same celebration is An Account of General Lafayette's Visit to Virginia in 1824-25, by Robert D. Ward, Richmond, 1881.

[1222] Liverpool.

[1223] Yet in 1668-9 the colony of Massachusetts had sent a ship-load of masts to Charles II.; and at the end of the century, Bellomont, in one of his despatches home, says that from the port of Boston there sailed more vessels built in New England than belonged to all Scotland and Ireland. Bellomont urged on the home government the importance of making in America their own tar and pitch. New Hampshire was already sending masts, yards, and bowsprits to England, and Bellomont shows the government how they could save by carrying them for themselves. This was in 1700 and 1701.

[1224] Cf. "Ships of the Eighteenth Century", by Admiral Preble, in United Service, x. 95, 117.—Ed.

[1225] On the capture of the "Margaretta" at Machias, see Kidder's Military Operations in Eastern Maine, p. 39; Maine Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 142; Hist. Mag., xiii. 251; Com. F. H. Parker in the Mag. of Amer. Hist. i. 209; Drisko's Life of Hannah Weston (Machias, 1857), ch. vii. Cf. also Journal of Mass. Prov. Cong. (Boston, 1838), pp. 395-96. The account in Dawson's Battles (i. 47) is based on Goldsborough's Naval Chronicle and Cooper's Naval History.—Ed.

[1226] The steps leading to this action of Washington, who felt authorized to take it by giving a liberal interpretation to his commission, were these: As early as June 7, 1775, the Massachusetts legislature had considered the question of creating a naval force, but moved cautiously (Frothingham's Siege of Boston, p. 111). Rhode Island moved first, June 12th, and put two vessels in commission under Abraham and Christopher Whipple, and in July they were cruising. (On this and other early movements in Rhode Island, see Arnold's Rhode Island, ii. 351, 363, 369, 386; Staples's Annals of Providence, pp. 265-70; R. I. Hist. Coll., vol. vi.; Gammell's Life of Samuel Ward; and Ward's journal in Sparks MSS., lxviii. no. 7.) By July 1st Connecticut had begun to move. Washington's first commission was given to Capt. Nicholas Broughton, of Marblehead, accompanied by instructions, which are given in Sparks's Washington, iii. 517, when he took command of the "Hannah" (Frothingham's Siege of Boston, 260). John Adams says (Works, x. 27; Letters of Washington to John Langdon, 1880, p. 19) it was John Manly's application to Washington for authority to fit out a cruiser that led directly to this step, and that Manly was the first to fly a Continental flag, and to have a British flag struck to him.

For the early navy of Pennsylvania, see Wallace's William Bradford, p. 130, and in the Appendix of the same work we have an account of the first naval combat on the Delaware, and the first hostile guns heard by Congress, when the "Roebuck" and "Liverpool" were driven down the river by the American flotilla.

On the early movements in Virginia, see Va. Hist. Reg., i. 185; Southern Lit. Messenger, xxiv. 1-273.—Ed.

[1227] Hancock's letter of instructions, October 5, 1775, is in Sparks's Correspondence of the American Revolution, i. 56. Cf. John Adams's Works, i. 187; x. 31.—Ed.

[1228] Selman's own account of this exploit has been printed in the Salem Gazette, July 22, 1856. Cf. Sparks's Writings of Washington, iii. 193.—Ed.

[1229] "Lord Amherst laments the capture of the ordnance vessel,—says her cargo amounted to £10,500. The Board is censured for not putting her stores into a vessel of greater force." Hutchinson's Diary (July 10). Manly continued to gain and deserve the commendation of Washington (Sparks's Washington, iii. 266, 271). For an account of Manly's being driven into Plymouth, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. 2d ser., ii. 158.—Ed.

[1230] Rhode Island, as she had put the first armed vessel afloat, was also the inciter of the movements in Congress which resulted in this fleet, her members, in Oct., 1775, having urged action (4 Force, iv. 1838). John Adams gives on the successive stages of the movement (Works, ii. 463, iii. 7. Cf. Gammell's Ward, 316, and the Journal of Congress, 1775). A naval committee was instituted Oct. 13th, and in December it was enlarged, to have a member for each colony. John Adams tells on his labors on this committee were the most agreeable he had in Congress; and he always took great credit to himself for being mainly instrumental in committing Congress to naval policy (Works, ix. 363, Familiar Letters, 166), and it was he who drew up the Rules of the naval service (Works, iii. p. 11; Journal of Congress, 1775, p. 282). In tracing the official action of Congress towards the navy, beside the Journals, use the index of Ben: Perley Poore's Descriptive Catal. of Government Publications; the indexes to the Amer. Archives, under such heads as "armed vessels", "fleet", "Mass. armed vessels", "marine committee", "navy", "privateers", "prizes", "row galleys", "seamen", "vessels", and the names of naval characters. The incongruous character of Force's indexes increases the labor considerably in using the Archives.

The beginnings of the navy, beside being followed in Cooper, Clark, etc., can be traced in W. E. Foster's Stephen Hopkins, ii. App. M; in Bancroft, ix. 134, or final revision, v. 50 in Silas Deane's correspondence in Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. Washington ceased to exercise any supervision over the armed fleet after the evacuation of Boston in March, 1776. General Ward, who was then left in command in Boston, commissioned Captain Mugford to cruise, June, 1776, before he received any blank commissions from Congress. Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., i. 203.

In 1775 David Bushnell invented at Saybrook a machine for blowing up the enemy's vessels, called the "American Turtle." It is described in the Conn. Soc. Coll., ii. 315, 322, 333, with references.—Ed.

[1231] Sparks's Washington, i. 36; iii. 77. There is a memoir of Whipple, with a portrait (cf. also E. M. Stone's Our French Allies, p. 26), in Hildreth's Pioneer Settlers of Ohio (1852), pp. 120-164. There are letters of Whipple among the Com. Tucker Papers in Harvard College library. Few of the earlier captains made more captures than Samuel Tucker. Washington commissioned him in Jan., 1776. His reputation as a naval officer was mostly made during his command of the frigate "Boston", in one of whose voyages he took John Adams to France in 1778. The log of this voyage is preserved in Harvard College library, where are also a collection of Tucker's papers, embracing his instructions, correspondence, and logs. They have been used in John H. Sheppard's Life of Samuel Tucker (Boston, 1868), which is abridged by the author in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., April, 1872 (xxvi. 105). Cf. New Eng. Mag., ii. 138; Niles's Register, xliv. 140; and Johnston's History of Bristol and Bremen, Me.—Ed.

[1232] See note at the end of this chapter.

[1233] On the fisheries as a school for the navy of the Revolution, see Lorenzo Sabine's Report on the Fisheries of the U. S. (Washington, 1853), p. 198, and Babson's Gloucester. The histories of the maritime towns of Massachusetts touch this point, like Rich's Truro, Roads's Marblehead, E. V. Smith's Newburyport, etc.—Ed.

[1234] Cf. ante, ch. ii.

[1235] Adams's Familiar Letters, 186. The continued naval exploits of Seth Harding and Samuel Smedley, of the Connecticut armed vessels, are recorded in sundry letters in the Trumbull Papers (MSS.), vol. v., etc.—Ed.

[1236] Journals of Congress, i. 213.

[1237] Cf. Sparks's Washington, iii. 353; John Adams's Works, iii. 65. Bancroft, in his orig. ed., ix. 134, charges Hopkins with incompetency, but omits the accusation in his final revision, v. 50.—Ed.

[1238] Cf. United Service, xii. 411.

[1239] American Archives, ii. 1394.

[1240] There is a portrait of Biddle in the Pennsylvania Hist. Soc. gallery. Catal. of Paintings, no. 138.

[1241] The government of South Carolina gave him four war-vessels of their own, and early in 1778 he went out to meet the English blockading squadron of four vessels, hoping to find himself of superior force to them. He did not meet the squadron, but east of the Barbadoes, on the 7th of March, he did meet the "Yarmouth", sixty-four guns, and, apparently relying on the four small vessels he had with him, he bravely engaged her. But after an action of twenty minutes the "Randolph" blew up, nor was it until five days after that a part of her crew were picked up by the "Yarmouth" on a piece of the wreck. The other vessels of Biddle's squadron escaped.

[1242] The reader will be interested in his own simple account of the voyage, as contained in his report to Franklin and the other commissioners. We print it from his manuscript as a good illustration of the straightforward loyalty of the man.

Port Lewis, Feb'y 14th, 1777.

Gentlemen,—This will inform you of my safe arrival after a tolerable successful cruise, having captured 3 sail of Brigs, one snow, and one ship. The Snow is a Falmouth Packet bound from thence to Lisbon. She is mounted with 16 guns and had near 50 men on board. She engaged near an hour before she struck. I had one man killed. My first Lieut. had his left arm shot off above the elbow, and the Lieut. of Marines had a musquet ball lodged in his wrist. They had several men wounded, but none killed. I am in great hopes that both my wounded officers will do well, as there are no unfavorable symptoms at present. Three of our Prizes are arrived, and I expect the other two in to-morrow. As I am informed that there has been two American Private ships of war lately taken and carried into England, I think it would be a good opportunity to negotiate and exchange prisoners, if it could be done; but I submit to your better judgment to act as you think proper. I should be very glad to hear from you as soon as possible, and should be much obliged if you would point out some line or mode to proceed by in disposing of prisoners and prizes, as nothing will be done before I receive your answer to this. I hope you'll excuse my being more particular at present.

From, Gentlemen,

Your most obliged h'ble serv't,

Lamb't Wickes.

[1243] "This will inform you", he writes on the 12th of August, "of my present unhappy situation. The Judges of the Admiralty have received orders of the 6th inst. from the Minister at Paris, ordering them not to suffer me to take any cannon, powder, or other military stores on board, or to depart from this port on any consideration whatever, without further orders from Paris. In consequence of these orders, they came on board on Saturday to take all my cannon out and to unhang my rudder. I have prevented this for the present by refusing to let them take rudder or cannon without producing an order from the minister for so doing. As I told them, my orders corresponded with theirs in regard to continuing in port, but I had no order to deliver anything belonging to the ship to them, which I would not do without orders, and if the ministers insisted on it, made no doubt but you would give your orders accordingly, which would be readily complied with on my part when such orders were received. My powder is stopped, and they have been contented with taking my written parole not to depart until I receive their permission."

[1244] On the questions arising from the carrying of prisoners by the American cruisers into European ports, see Hale's Franklin in France, ch. xi. and xviii. On American prisoners in England, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., June, '82, p. 428; Memoirs of Andrew Sherburne, p. 81; occupants of Old Mill prison, near Plymouth, N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., 1865, pp. 74, 136, 209; occupants of Forton, and journal of Timothy Connor in Ibid., xxx. 3, 175, 343; xxxi. 18, 212, 288; xxxii, 70, 165, 280; xxiii. 36; journal of Samuel Custer, etc., Ibid., Jan., 1878; Charles Herbert's Relics of the Rev., Amer. prisoners in England (Boston, 1847), with lists of names and the edition of 1854, called The Prisoners of 1776, compiled from Herbert's Journal by R. Livesey; narratives in Moore's Diary, ii. 344, 437. In 1780 there was reprinted in London, to be sold for the benefit of the American prisoners then in England, a Poetical Epistle to George Washington, by the Rev. Charles Perry Wharton of Maryland, which had been originally printed in Annapolis in 1779. There was prefixed to it an unusual portrait of Washington, "engraved by W. Sharp from an original picture."

Perhaps the most distinguished of the Americans confined in the English prisons was Joshua Barney, and the story of his several confinements and escapes is told in A Biographical Memoir of the late Commodore Joshua Barney, from autobiographical notes and journals in the possession of his family, by Mary Barney (Boston, 1832). Cf. Lossing in Field-Book, ii. 850; Harper's Monthly, xxiv. 161; Cyclop. U. S. Hist., i. 105—Ed.

[1245] Almon's Remembrancer.

[1246] Landais survived until the year 1818, when he died at the age of eighty-seven years, in the city of New York.

[1247] See Hutchinson's Diary, at the date of D'Estaing's sailing.

[1248] See Notes, following this chapter.

[1249] It is printed in Franklin in France.

[1250] For accounts of Barry, see Dennie's Portfolio, x.; United Service Mag. (xii. 578), May, 1885, by Admiral Preble; Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 847; Scharf and Westcott's Philadelphia, i. 304. The narrative of Luke Matthewman, one of Barry's lieutenants, is in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 175, copied from the N. Y. Packet, 1783.—Ed.

[1251] A MS. journal of a cruise on board the brigantine of war "Tyrannicide", in the service of the State of Massachusetts Bay, John Allen Hallet commander, in 1778, is in the Boston Public Library.—Ed.

[1252] The log of the "Protector" is in the library of the N. E. Hist. Geneal. Society. Cf. Ebenezer Fox's Revolutionary Adventures (Boston, 1838); Mem. Hist. Boston, iii. 187.—Ed.

[1253] The following is an official list, sent to Franklin in March, 1780, of the navy of the United States at that time:—

"America" (74 guns), Captain John Barry, on the stocks at Portsmouth, N. H.

"Confederacy" (36 guns), Seth Harding, refitting at Martinico.

"Alliance" (36 guns), Paul Jones, in France.

"Bourbon" (36 guns), Thomas Read, on the stocks in Connecticut.

"Trumbull" (28 guns), James Nicholson, ready for sea in Connecticut.

"Deane" (28 guns), Sam'l Nicholson, on a cruise.

"Providence" (28 guns), Ab'm Whipple; "Boston" (28 guns), Sam'l Tucker; "Queen of France" (20 guns), I. Rathbourne; "Ranger" (18 guns), S. Sampson,—within the Bar at Charleston, S. C., to defend that harbor.

"Saratoga" (18 guns), J. Young, on the stocks at Philadelphia.

Cf. Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii.

[1254] See chap. vi.

[1255] The table on a later page shows that there were nearly 90,000 Continentals and militia on the rolls at different times during 1776; but it is not probable that 70,000 were in service at any single time, and the terms of service were short.—Ed.

[1256] There is a curious difficulty as to the name of this little vessel. In printed histories she is sometimes called the "Penet" and sometimes the "Perch." There is no question that the State owned a vessel called the "Penet", which was named from one of the mercantile agents in Nantes. But, after a careful examination of the manuscript of the journals of Mr. Austin, who carried the news, we are satisfied that the vessel was the "Perch", and that she is called the "Penet" in some of the manuscripts only from an error of the early copyists.

[1257] A third edition was printed at Cooperstown in 1848. Editions with revisions and additions were issued at New York in 1853 and 1856, use being made in part of matter collected by Cooper himself. An abridged edition was published in New York in 1856. There were other editions in London, Paris, and Brussels. Cooper's Lives of distinguished Naval Officers (Philad., 1846) includes only Paul Jones of the Revolutionary period.

[1258] Second ed., London, 1866. The first ed. was in 1863.

[1259] There are a few accessory books: J. Rolfe's Naval Biography during the Reign of George III. (London, 1828, in two volumes,—Sabin, xvi. 67,601). The Detail of some particular services performed in America during the years 1776-1779 (printed for Ithiel Town, N. Y., 1835,—Sabin, v. 19,775) had previously appeared in The Naval Chronicle, and consists, in the main, of a journal supposed to be kept on board his Majesty's ship "Rainbow", while under the command of Sir George Collier, on the American coast. Town says that the book was privately printed from a manuscript obtained by him in London in 1830, and it is said that all but seventy copies were destroyed by fire. There is a copy in Harvard College library, and others are noted in the Brinley (no. 4,002) and Cooke (no. 708) sales.

John Adams sent to Congress in 1780 an account of the naval losses of Great Britain from the beginning of the war (Diplom. Corresp., iv. 483, v. 234). A similar statement (1776-1781) on the British side is in the Political Magazine, ii. 452.

[1260] In January, 1763, peremptory orders were sent from England to the governor and company of Connecticut to put a stop to the Susquehanna settlement. In September of the same year, Governor Fitch wrote to the board of trade that he had strictly obeyed the orders; that a delegation from the Six Nations had been received, and in the presence of the assembly he had announced the commands of his majesty; that this had apparently satisfied the natives. (Trumbull MSS., Mass. Hist. Soc.)

[1261] In Proud's History of Pennsylvania, ii. p. 326, there is a note containing an extract from an "authentic publication", entitled A narrative of the late massacres in Lancaster County, of a member of Indians, friends of this Province (Philadelphia, 1764). In this narrative (which was written by Franklin,—cf. Sparks's Franklin, i. 273; iv. 56), religious enthusiasm, "chiefly Presbyterian", is the alleged motive for the outbreak. See, also, a reprint of a curious pamphlet on the massacre of the Conestogoe Indians by the Paxton Boys, in the Hist. Mag., July, 1865, p. 203. For other tracts see Carter-Brown Catal., iii. 1,407-1,415; Field's Indian Bibliog., nos. 854, 1,187, 1,193, 1,331; Brinley Catal., nos. 3,062-3,070; Hildeburn's Penna. Press, ii. nos. 2,029-2,034; cf. Penna. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 73; Zeisberger, by Schweinitz, 274; Graydon's Memoirs, 49; and letter of Richard Peters in Aspinwall Papers, ii. 508.—Ed.

[1262] In Reed's Reed, i. p. 35, there is a letter from Dr. John Ewing, coolly discussing this transaction, as if it were a laudable attempt on the part of the frontier inhabitants to relieve themselves in a perfectly justifiable way from a source of danger. He says, "there was not a single act of violence, unless you call the Lancaster affair such, although it was no more than going to war with that tribe."

[1263] The Conestogoes belonged to the Five Nations, but had no connection with the Tuscaroras. The Five Nations put in a claim for the land of the Conestogoes, as "their relations and next heirs." (Sir William Johnson to Governor Penn, Feb. 9, 1764, Penna. Archives, iv. p. 162.)

[1264] His correspondence with Gage is in the Doc. Hist. N. Y., ii. 833 et seq.

[1265] The question of the rights of Indian women in lands of the tribes forms part of the discussion in the paper by Lucien Carr, entitled "The social and political condition of women among the Huron-Iroquois tribes." (Report xvi. of the Peabody Museum, pp. 216-218.) Instances are on record where transfers were compelled by the women in opposition to the wishes of the chiefs, and where they prevented sales, the terms of which had been arranged by the men. At the conference at Canajoharie Castle in 1763, where the Mohawks submitted one of their numerous complaints against settlers for stealing their lands, all the women present interrupted the speaker, and declared that they "did not choose to part with their lands and be reduced to make brooms for a living." The fraudulent transfers alluded to in the text had already attracted the attention of the authorities. By proclamation, dated October 7, 1763, the king had forbidden private individuals to purchase land from Indians.

[1266] "After the peace, numbers of the frontier inhabitants of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, etc., animated with a spirit of frenzy, under pretext of revenge for past injuries, though in manifest violation of British faith and the strength of the late treaties, robbed and murdered sundry Indians of good character, and still continue to do so, vowing vengeance against all that come in their way; whilst others forcibly established themselves beyond even the limits of their own governments in the Indian country."

[1267] At this date the Mohawk Valley, as far west as the boundary line, was jointly occupied by the whites and the Mohawk tribe. Immediately to the west of that line, in the neighborhood of Oneida Lake, lived the Oneidas. Both Mohawks and Oneidas had extensive hunting-grounds to the north. The Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas severally lived upon the lakes which to-day bear the names of those tribes. The Tuscaroras occupied land which had been allotted them immediately to the south of the Oneida country, and had also a section on the Susquehanna. [See Colden's map in Vol. IV. 491, and the maps in Vol. III. 281, 293.—Ed.] The whole number of the confederacy did not exceed 10,000 souls, of whom 2,000 were warriors, more than one half being Senecas. The most conspicuous tribe among the Ohio Indians was the Shawanese. They were a source of terror to the Virginia settlers, and had a hand in most of the invasions of Kentucky, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. They numbered about 300 warriors, and lived in Ohio on the Scioto and its branches. The Delawares, counting 600 warriors, were scattered from the Susquehanna Valley to Lake Erie; 200 Wyandots lived near Sandusky. These and other tribes living on the border or in Canada, who were classified as allies of the Six Nations, numbered in all about 2,000 warriors. The other tribes living east of the Mississippi and north of the Ohio, with whom the British had dealings, or of whom they had knowledge, were classified as the "Ottawa Confederacy, comprehending the Twightwees or Miamis", and numbered about 8,000 warriors, of whom 3,000 lived near Detroit. In all, there were, according to this estimate, which is from Sir William Johnson's papers, about 12,000 warriors. [See Sketch map in Vol. IV. 298.—Ed.]

A similar computation of the "gun-men or effectives" in the South, made by Sir James Wright in 1773, shows that over 9,500 men could be furnished by the Choctaws, Creeks, Cherokees, and Catawbas. From other sources we have estimates which include tribes omitted by the above authorities, from which it would appear probable that there were about 35,000 warriors east of the Mississippi, in the United States and across the straits at Detroit. There is a difference of opinion as to the proportion of warriors to the total population. Apparently the proportion varied in different tribes. Some observers have placed the number as high as six to one; others, as low as three to one. Between four and five to one appears to be about the number furnished by the averages of the best observers. This will give for a total Indian population east of the Mississippi, in the United States and along the lakes near Detroit, at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, 150,000 persons.

[1268] "My intelligence informs me", wrote Governor Penn to Lord Dunmore, March 1, 1775, "that your lordship has set up an office for granting lands far within the limits of this province, and that lands already patented by me have been granted by your lordship."

[1269] Guy Johnson refers to the success of his interference on this occasion in his letter to the magistrates and others of Palatine, Canajoharie, and the upper districts, dated May 20, 1775, quoted in Stone's Brant, i. p. 65.

[1270] Accustomed as the inhabitants of the Northern colonies had been to coöperating with Indians in the several wars with the French, the proposition to make use of their services did not excite the universal feeling of horror which would be aroused by the same proposition to-day. On the contrary, it was regarded as a natural and inevitable condition attached to the war that the natives should be engaged upon the one side or the other; and rumors of the friendly disposition of this tribe, and of the number of warriors which that tribe would furnish to the cause, found their way into the journals of that day. It was evident that Indian auxiliaries would be of greater military value to the English than to the Americans. The English army would be practically an army of invasion. There were no English homes exposed to destruction. The use of savages by the Americans would not keep out of the field a single Englishman for the protection of the scalps of his family. Nevertheless, it was felt by the colonists that all the tribes that could be secured would be an advantage gained. Such evidently was the opinion of the men composing the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts Bay, who first met the question, and, even before the battle of Lexington, solved it by employing some of the Stockbridge Indians as minute-men. The records of that body go far towards justifying the statement made by Gen. Gage at Boston (June 12, 1775), that the "rebels" were "bringing as many Indians down here as they could collect."

[1271] In this letter to Kirkland the assertion is made that the step was taken because of information received that "those who are inimical to us in Canada have been tampering with the natives." In the American Archives, 4th series, ii. p. 244, is a letter dated Montreal, March 29th, from J. Brown to Samuel Adams and Joseph Warren, Committee of Correspondence of Boston, in which Brown's mission is betrayed even without his credentials. He was prospecting the ground with a view to future operations. He reports that "the Indians say they have been repeatedly applied to and requested to join with the king's troops to fight Boston, but have peremptorily refused, and still intend to refuse. They are a simple politick people, and say that if they are obliged, for their own safety, to take up arms on either side, they shall take part on the side of their brethren the English in New-England." In the same letter Brown states as a secret that Ticonderoga must be seized on the beginning of hostilities. Samuel Adams, one of the committee to whom Brown's letter was addressed, was also a member of the committee which drafted the letter to Kirkland. If Brown's letter did not reach Adams in time to inspire the suggestion of "tampering", it indicates at least the character of the rumors. The English writers (like Mahon, vi. 35) look upon the plea of "tampering" as a pretence; and Dartmouth, in July and August, 1775, called his orders retaliatory ones. We know that there was little for the colonists to apprehend from Carleton on this score. His opposition to the enlistment of Indians for service outside Canada drew forth complaints afterward from Guy Johnson (N. Y. Col. Docs., viii. p. 636). Still less was there cause for apprehension if the Caughnawagas were going to take sides with the colonists. It was probably understood that the statements of these Canadian Indians could not be implicitly relied upon.

[1272] The enlisted Indians are occasionally heard from during the war, although their services were not conspicuous. Their fondness for liquor soon brought them into trouble, and we find that a petition signed by seventeen of them was presented to the Provincial Congress, asking that liquor might be kept out of their way. This petition was duly granted. (Am. Arch., 4th ser., ii. pp. 1049 and 1083.) During the siege of Boston they occasionally killed a sentry (The Boston Gazette and Country Journal, Aug. 7, 1775; Frothingham's Siege of Boston, pp. 212, 213). In Mass. Archives, vol. lvi. (special title, "Coat Rolls, 8 Months' Service, 1775—vol. i. Rolls"), no. 173, is a copy of what purports to be an order for bounty money, etc., signed by thirty-two persons. Appended is the following: "Camp at Charlestown, March 12, 1776. This may certify that the within named persons were soldiers in my Regiment, and served as such in the service of this province last summer, until they were discharged by his Excellency Gen. Washington. Attest, John Paterson, Col. These Indians belonged to Capt. William Goodrich's Company. Attest, John Sargent." Some of them, under the command of Captain Ezra Whittlesey, were "posted at the saw-mills", Sept. 13, 1776 (Amer. Arch., 5th series, ii. p. 476). If Guy Johnson is to be believed, there were enlisted Indians in the battle of Long island, and some of them were taken prisoners (N. Y. Coll. Doc., viii. p. 740). Washington applied for them for scouting service, Oct. 18, 1776 (Amer. Arch., 5th series, ii. p. 1120); Jones (Annals of Oneida County, p. 854) says that a considerable party of Oneidas participated in the battle of White Plains, and that a full company of Stockbridge Indians, under Captain Daniel Ninham, went to White Plains (Ibid. p. 888). A capture by Indians of six prisoners is reported in Moore's Diary, etc., i. p. 476. The Stockbridge Indians were ambuscaded at King's Bridge with severe loss, Aug. 31, 1778. (Mag. Am. Hist., v. p. 187.) In 1819, the survivors of this tribe, petitioning the President of the United States for the protection of their rights in certain lands in Indiana, said: "When your parent disowned you as her children, and sent over to this great island many strong warriors to burn your towns, destroy your families, and bring you into captivity, we, of the Muhheakunuks, defended your fathers on the west against the warriors which your parent had sent against you on that side; and we also sent our warriors to join your great chief, Washington, to aid him in driving back into the sea the unnatural monsters who had come up from thence to devour you, and ravage the land which we a long time before granted to your fathers to live upon." (American State Papers—Public Lands, vol. iii., Washington, 1834).

[1273] Kidder's Mil. Operations in Eastern Maine, p. 51.—Ed.

[1274] In Kidder's Expeditions of Captain John Lovewell, it is stated that the petition for guns, blankets, etc., of thirteen Pequakets, who were willing to enlist, was granted by the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts Bay. The date of the petition is not given. For the treaty of July 10, 1776, see Amer. Arch., 5th, i. 835; and the reply of the Micmacs to Washington, Ibid. iii. 800.—Ed.

[1275] On the 24th of May, Ethan Allen addressed a letter to several tribes of the Canadian Indians, asking their warriors to join with his warriors "like brothers, and ambush the regulars." This proceeding he reported to the General Assembly of Connecticut two days afterward. On the 2nd of June, Allen proposed to the Provincial Congress of New York an invasion of Canada, urging as one of the reasons therefor that there would be "this unspeakable advantage: that instead of turning the Canadians and Indians against us, as is wrongly suggested by many, it would unavoidably attach and connect them to our interest." From Newbury, Colonel Bayley, on the 23d of June, addressed the Northern Indians as follows: "If you have a mind to join us, I will go with any number you shall bring to our army, and you shall each have a good coat and blanket, etc., and forty shillings per month, be the time longer or shorter."

In the autumn of 1775, Arnold on his Kennebec march was joined at Sartigan by a number of Indians, to whom he offered "one Portuguese per month, two dollars bounty, their provisions, and the liberty to choose their own officers." Under this inducement they took their canoes and proceeded with the invading column.

[1276] Governor Trumbull, of Connecticut, was in correspondence with Major Brown. Fifteen days after the fall of Ticonderoga the governor wrote to the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts Bay, and, without mentioning his authority, spoke of the "iterated intelligence we receive of the plans framed by our enemies to distress us, by inroads of Canadians and savages from the Province of Quebec upon the adjacent settlements." (Stuart's Trumbull, p. 185.) In a note (Ibid. p. 186) an extract from a letter of Arnold, of the 19th, is given, in which Arnold says that there are "400 regulars at St. Johns, making all possible preparation to cross the lake, and expecting to be joined by a body of Indians, with a design of retaking Crown Point and Ticonderoga." (Cf. also, Arnold, May 23d, from Crown Point, in Jour. Cong., i. 111.) The New Hampshire Provincial Congress, on the 3d of June, 1775, had "undoubted intelligence of the attempts of the British ministry to engage the Canadians and savages in their interest, in the present controversy with America, and by actual movements in Canada." (Sparks's MSS.) On the 6th of July, 1775, Governor Trumbull wrote to General Schuyler, enclosing a statement of a person who had been in Canada, containing the assertion that Governor Carleton "directly solicited the Indians for their assistance, but on their refusal declared he would dispossess them, and give their lands to those who would." July 21, 1775, Schuyler gave Major John Brown a general letter for use in Canada, in which he said: "Reports prevail that General Carleton intends an excursion into these parts; that for that purpose he is raising a body of Canadians and Indians." (Lossing's Schuyler, i. 366.) On Aug. 15th, Brown reported that "Sir John Johnson was at Montreal with a body of about 300 Tories and some Indians, trying to persuade the Caughnawagas to take up the hatchet", etc. (Ibid. p. 380). From the foregoing we can see that Congress had some reason to believe that the English authorities were at work among the Indians. Washington was evidently not convinced of the fact until Schuyler received information of a positive character concerning the Guy Johnson conference at Montreal. On the 24th of December, 1775, he wrote to Schuyler: "The proofs you have of the ministry's intention to engage the savages are incontrovertible. We have other confirmation of it by some despatches from John Stuart, the superintendent for the southern district, which luckily fell into my hands" (Sparks's Washington, iii. p. 209). Congress had not made public its previous sources of information, but it authorized the publication of "the second paragraph in General Schuyler's letter relative to the measures taken by the ministerial agents to engage the Indians in a war with the colonies." Montgomery, at St. John's, had, in September, already met with proofs of the most convincing character, but the presence of the Mohawks there, and their opposition to the American force, does not seem to have made the impression to which it was entitled.

[1277] Secret Journals of Congress, p. 44. Sparks, in his review of the subject, says "After the sanguinary affair at the Cedars ... Congress openly changed their system" (Washington, iii. p. 497). The resolution passed May 25th. Washington was then in Philadelphia. As late as June 9th, he wrote from New York: "I have been much surprised at not receiving a more explicit account of the defeat of Colonel Bedell and his party at the Cedars. I should have thought some of the officers in command would and ought to have transmitted it immediately, but as they have not, it is probable that I should have long remained in doubt as to the event, had not the commissioners called on me to-day." The coincidence of Washington's presence in Philadelphia at the time of the passage of the resolve is more significant than the fact that a battle had been fought of which the general of the army had only just heard two weeks after that date.

[1278] The address to the people of Ireland is dated May 10, 1775, the date of the assembling of Congress. The address was agreed to July 28th. It would be hard to justify the language used, if we accept the nominal date of the instrument as the actual date of its composition. When it was issued, the atrocities committed at the Cedars were still fresh in the minds of the members.

[1279] A note on the opinions of leading men, respecting the employment of Indians, is on a later page. The index (under Indians) to B. P. Poore's Descriptive Catalogue will point to the government publications.—Ed.

[1280] Speeches; also in Niles's Principles (1876), p. 459. Cf. also Burke's Speeches, and the reference in Walpole's Last Journals, ii. 193.—Ed.

[1281] This letter of Dunmore is quoted by Dartmouth. (Am. Arch., 4th, iii. 6.) On the 23d of April, 1779, William Livingston forwarded copy to Congress. It was ordered to be printed (Almon's Remembrancer, viii. p. 278). According to Bancroft, Gage in 1774 asked Carleton his opinion about raising "a body of Canadians and Indians, and for them to form a junction with the king's forces in this province." Carleton, in reply, apparently discouraged the project, saying, "You know what sort of people they [the Indians] are" (Bancroft, vii. pp. 117, 119).

[1282] Guy Johnson was the son-in-law of Sir William Johnson, as well as his successor in office, and the Mohawks said: "The love we have for Sir William Johnson, and the obligations the whole Six Nations are under to him, must make us regard and protect every branch of his family."

[1283] From the best evidence that I can get, I conclude that Ontario and Oswego are one. Stone and Lossing state that there were two conferences. Guy Johnson, in "a brief sketch of his past transactions", refers to but one (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 636).

[1284] At a conference between Captain John, in behalf of the Six Nations, and Colonel Butler, of the colony of Connecticut, in 1776, Captain John said: "We come to make you a visit, and let you know we were at the treaty at Oswego with Col. Guy Johnson." "We do now assure you that so long as the waters run, so long you may depend on our friendship. We are all of one mind and are all for peace." (Miner's Wyoming, p. 183.) Under date of Nov. 21, 1774, the following is entered in the records of Harvard College: "As the corporation with pleasure have received information of Mr. Zebulon Butler to engage in a mission to the Tuscarora Indians, they cheerfully signify their readiness to give him all suitable encouragement, as far as may be in their power, if he should proceed according to his intention in so laudable an undertaking." This extract will perhaps explain Col. Butler's influence among the Indians.

[1285] An unsuccessful attempt was made to detach Cameron, Stuart's deputy, from the king's service. He was offered a salary and compensation for losses if he would join the American cause. "He refused to resign his commission or accept of any employment in the colony service." Hearing later that he was to be seized, he fled to the Cherokee country. This alarmed the colonists, but they were quieted when they heard that he had written "that Captain Stewart had never given him orders to induce the Indians to fall upon Carolina, but to keep them firmly attached to his majesty" (Moultrie's Memoirs, i. p. 76). It appears from Stuart's correspondence that he received almost simultaneously, in the first part of October, satisfactory replies from the Indians and orders from General Gage to make use of the natives (Amer. Arch., 4th ser., iv. p. 317). The Catawbas, a relatively insignificant tribe, were said to be friendly to the rebels. The Cherokees were ready for attack (Almon's Remembrancer, Part iii., 1776, p. 180).

[1286] The reasons for believing that both these statements were true have already been given.

[1287] Bancroft's United States, viii. p. 88.

[1288] Parl. Reg., x. p. 48. Flavored as follows in a communication quoted in Almon's Remembrancer, viii. p. 328: "God and nature hath put into our hands the scalping-knife and tomahawk, to torture them into unconditional submission." Burgoyne's opinions at this time became important; they are in his speeches (Parl. Reg.), his letter to the secretary of state (Ryerson's Loyalists), his address to the Indians (Anburey's Travels), and elsewhere (Hadden's Journal and Orderly-Book, etc.). Cf. also Gent. Mag., March, 1778; McKnight's Burke, ii. 213; Walpole and Mason Corresp., i. 335; Fonblanque's Burgoyne.—Ed.

[1289] Vol. iii., App.

[1290] At the same time that some of them were engaged in hostilities in Canada, others were at Philadelphia having peace-talks with Congress (Journals of Congress, ii. pp. 192, 206, 207).

[1291] For the treaty at Albany in August, see Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., xxv. 75, and N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 605. A report of the commissioner of Indian affairs in the Northern Department, addressed to President Hancock from Albany, Dec. 14, 1775, is in Letters and Papers, 1761-1776 (MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc.).—Ed.

[1292] Numerous other conferences and communications between different persons and bodies and the several tribes attracted attention this season. In May, 1775, the Mohawks declared to the committee of Albany and Schenectady that it was their intention to remain neutral, but they had heard that their superintendent was threatened, and they would protect him (Am. Arch., 4th ser., ii. p. 842). They also addressed a letter to the Oneidas, calling on them to prevent the Bostonians from capturing him (Ibid. pp. 664, 665). For accounts of the conferences, see Am. Arch., 4th ser., iii.; also Stone's Brant, i. ch. v. Cf. letter from Albany in Am. Arch., 4th ser., iii. p. 625.

[1293] When Fort Stanwix was occupied without causing an Indian outbreak, Washington congratulated Schuyler (Sparks's Washington, iv. p. 24). We have but little information of the conference at Montreal which Col. Guy Johnson held in July; but in Almon's Remembrancer, i. p. 241, the statement is made that a considerable number of the chiefs and warriors of the Six Nations were present, and that there were also present 1,700 Caughnawagas. In the presence of Governor Carleton, "they unanimously resolved to support their engagements with his majesty, and remove all intruders on the several communications." This gives a hint of the jealousy with which they regarded the occupation of the posts at the carrying-places between the Mohawk Valley and the lakes. See also Guy Carleton's letter to Dartmouth (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 635), in which he says that at Ontario they agreed to defend the communications.

[1294] An intended conference of the Six Nations with the Canadian Indians was announced to Congress by Schuyler in January, 1776 (Am. Arch., 4th ser., iv. p. 898). In March the Oneidas, by their friendly interference, again prevented the taking up of the hatchet which had been surrendered at Albany. (Dean to Schuyler, Am. Arch., 4th ser., v. p. 768.) The Caughnawagas went to Oneida, but would not go to the Onondaga council in March (Ibid. p. 769). Dean went to the Onondaga council. While on the way there his life was threatened, and the Oneidas declined to go on until they received assurances of Dean's safety (Ibid. pp. 1100-1103). The Caughnawagas, returning from Onondaga[?], surrendered the sharp hatchet which Col. Guy Johnson had given them. ("The Commissioners in Canada to the President of Congress, Montreal, May 6, 1776", in Ibid. p. 1214.)

[1295] The loyalists termed this Schuyler's "Peacock Expedition", because the men decorated themselves with feathers from the peacocks at Johnson Hall. Cf. Jones's New York, i. 71, and note xxx.; De Peyster's Life and Misfortunes of Sir John Johnson (New York, 1882), which was first issued as a part of the Orderly-Book of Sir John Johnson (Albany, 1882). This contains a portrait of Sir John, which will also be found in Hubbard's Red Jacket.—Ed.

[1296] Tuesday, March 5, 1776. Two Indian chiefs, who lately arrived in town from Canada, were introduced to his majesty at St. James's by Col. Johnson, and graciously received (Gentleman's Magazine, xlvi. p. 138).

[1297] See ante, chap. ii.

[1298] The site is at present covered by the town of Rome. Its name was changed, when occupied by the Americans, to Fort Schuyler, and for a time the new name conquered a place in the despatches, but the fort is more generally known and spoken of by its original title. There had been another Fort Schuyler at the spot where Utica now stands, and this fact has caused some confusion. See a paper on Forts Stanwix and Bull and other forts near Rome, by D. E. Wager, in the Oneida. Hist. Soc. Trans., 1885-86, p. 65.—Ed.

[1299] The "large force at Oswego" was probably suggested by a grand Indian council held at Niagara in September, 1776, between Col. John Butler and others representing the English and fifteen Indian tribes, including representatives of the Six Nations. The Indians declared their intention to embark in the war and abide the result of the contest (MSS. of Gen. Gansevoort, quoted by Stone in his Brant, ii. p. 4, note).

[1300] In March the Oneidas sent a delegation, accompanied by the Rev. Mr. Kirkland, to the army, to see how matters were going. An offer made by them to act as scouts, probably a result of this tour of inspection, was on the 29th of April accepted by Congress.

[1301] Stone, in his Brant, i. p. 185, attributes to Herkimer an act of intended treachery utterly inconsistent with Herkimer's character as it is portrayed to us. Simms, in his Frontiersmen, etc. (ii. p. 19), gives a more natural version of the story.

[1302] This tragical incident, which attained great currency at the time, is followed in D. Wilson's Life of Jane McCrea (New York, 1853); Mrs. Ellet's Women of the Rev. (ii. 221); Lossing's Schuyler (ii. 250) and Field-Book (vol. i.); the elder Stone's Brant (i. 203), and the younger Stone's papers in Hist. Mag. (April, 1867) and Galaxy (Jan., 1867, also in Beach's Indian Miscellany), and App. to his Burgoyne's Campaign; Asa Fitch in N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., also in Stephen Dodd's Revolutionary Memorials; Epaphras Hoyt in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc. (1847, p. 77); Mag. of Amer. Hist., viii. 202; also Moore's Diary (475), and Ruttenber's Hudson River Indians (p. 273). The subsequent fate of Lieut. Jones, her lover, is told in the Catholic World, Dec., 1882.—Ed.

[1303] The hints as to Burgoyne's opinions of the Indians which are derived from contemporaneous documents are of course more satisfactory than any of his subsequent expressions of opinion. In his speech in the House of Commons, May 26, 1778, his estimate of their value as soldiers was very reasonable: "Sir, I ever esteemed the Indian alliance, at best, a necessary evil. I ever believed their services to be overvalued; sometimes insignificant, often barbarous, always capricious; and that the employment of them in war was only justifiable when, by being united to a regular army, they could be kept under control, and rendered subservient to a general system." (Parl. Reg., ix. p. 218).

[1304] The number of Herkimer's force can never be positively ascertained. It has generally been stated at from 800 to 1,000. In the letter of the Council of Safety to John Jay and Gouverneur Morris (Journals of the Provincial Congress, the Provincial Convention, the Committee of Safety, and the Council of Safety of the State of New York, vol. i. p. 1039) it is estimated at 700.

[1305] Narrative of the Mil. Actions of Col. Mariamus Willett (N. Y., 1831).

[1306] In Simms's Frontiersmen, ii. p.152, and note, there is a description of the Cobleskill affair. Simms says that Stone is in error in making two engagements, one in 1778 and one in 1779, at this spot, and he places the date at May 30, 1778. Campbell describes the event as having occurred in 1779 (Border Warfare, etc., p. 175). Thacher, in his Military Journal, mentions the event in 1778. The next date preceding the entry is May 20th; the next succeeding, June 1st. Col. Stone actually gives three accounts of this engagement,—two in the summer of 1778 and one in 1779.

[1307] The population of the valley at that time has been estimated by Miner at twenty-five hundred, who rejects the larger number given by Chapman and others as not being based on any enumeration; but John Jenkins, in 1783, represented, in behalf of the inhabitants, to the legislature, that such an enumeration was taken, and yielded six thousand persons.

[1308] From Major John Butler's report to Lieut.-Col. Bolton, dated at Lackwanak, July 8, 1778. This report was apparently withheld from Miner's agent, who wrote against its title "Disallowed at the foreign office." Butler's humanity "in making those only his object who were in arms" was the subject of congratulation of Lord George Germain, in a letter to Sir Henry Clinton. See extract in Miner's Wyoming, p. 234. Butler probably understates his losses; but, as is the case with all successful ambuscades, it must have been light. Miner quotes from an American prisoner, who thinks from forty to eighty fell. This seems improbable, when the circumstances of the fight are taken into consideration. The report of Colonel Denison to Governor Trumbull is among the Trumbull MSS. in the Mass. Hist. Soc.

[1309] Eleven dead Indians were left on the field. The American loss was reported by Sullivan as three killed and thirty-three wounded. The number of the enemy engaged was reported by prisoners at eight hundred, although Butler himself stated that his whole force numbered only six hundred men.

[1310] Aug. 20, 1779, General Haldimand had a conference with deputies of the Six Nations. Sullivan was then invading the Indian country. Haldimand told the Indians that he did not "establish" Oswego, because he then "had intelligence that the rebels were preparing boats at Saratoga and Albany to go up the Mohawk River, with an intention to take post at Oswego; but in the course of a few weeks he received a different account, that that was not their intention, but a large rebel army was come up the Connecticut River under the command of the rebel General Haysen, with an intention to invade this province." "As to your apprehensions of the rebels coming to attack your country, I cannot have the least thought of it" (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 776). Sullivan's force was accounted for as "a feint to be made upon the Susquehanna to draw the attention of Colonel Butler and the Six Nations of Indians from going to Detroit."

[1311] Respecting the original maps made by Lieut. Lodge, of Sullivan's army, showing by actual survey the routes of the several divisions of the army, General Clark informs me that they have been discovered, and will be included in a proposed volume on the campaign, to be issued by the State of New York. What seems to be an original map is preserved among the Force maps in the library of Congress. There is in Simms's Frontiersmen (ii. 272) a map of Sullivan's march along Seneca and Cayuga lakes from the Tioga, following a sketch found among the papers of Capt. Machin, who was in the expedition. See note following this chapter.

For the route of Brodhead, see Mag. of Amer. Hist., iii. 655. Maps of the Groveland ambuscade and the Newtown fight are in the Cayuga County Hist. Soc. Coll., no. 1.—Ed.

[1312] There is in the Penna. Archives, xii., a list of the forts in Pennsylvania built and maintained during the war.

[1313] It did not need that with the adoption of Indian tactics the barbarous custom of mangling the dead should be included, even for purposes of economy. "On Monday, the 30th, sent out a party for some dead Indians." "Toward morning found them, and skinned two of them from their hips down, for boot-legs: one pair for the major, the other for myself" (Proc. N. J. Hist. Soc., ii. p. 31,—Diary of Lieut. William Barton).

[1314] The destruction of grain in Schoharie Valley alarmed Washington. On November 5th he wrote Governor Clinton, saying: "We had the most pleasing prospects of forming considerable magazines of bread from the country which has been laid waste, and which from your Excellency's letter is so extensive that I am apprehensive we shall be obliged to bring flour from the South to support the troops at and near West Point" (Sparks's Washington, vii. p. 282).

[1315] The operations of the several columns are reported by Gen. Haldimand in a letter to Lord George Germain, dated Quebec, Oct. 25, 1780. The return of "rebels killed and taken on the expedition to the Mohawk River, in October, 1780", was as follows: On the Mohawk River and at Stone Arabia, the 18th, 19th, and 20th of October, prisoners, 10 privates; killed, 1 colonel and 100 privates. At Canaghsioraga, the 23d of October, prisoners, 2 captains, 1 lieutenant, 4 sergeants, 4 corporals, 45 privates; killed, 1 lieutenant, 3 privates. The returns of October 23d must refer to the capture of the party sent to destroy the boats, an event which is generally said to have been accomplished without firing a shot.

[1316] "It is thought, and perhaps not without foundation, that this incursion was made upon a supposition that Arnold's treachery had succeeded" (Sparks's Washington, vii. p. 269).

[1317] By a pocket-book found on Butler's person it appears that he had with him 607 men, including 130 Indians. This list is appended to Willett's report in Almon's Remembrancer, xiii. 341.

[1318] Secret Journals, p. 255.

[1319] Cf. Vol. V. p. 584.

[1320] William Leete Stone was born April 20, 1792. He died August 15, 1844. He was for many years one of the proprietors and editors of the New York Commercial Advertiser. In addition to the works enumerated in the text, and besides several miscellaneous works, he also published Border Wars of the American Revolution (two volumes, 1839), Poetry and History of Wyoming, (1841), and Life of Uncas and Miantonamoh (1842). He is generally spoken of as Col. Stone, a title which he gained through a staff-office. (Cf. account of Col. S. in Hist. Mag., Sept., 1865, and his portrait in Feb., 1866).

[1321] Cf. Vol. III. p. 510.

[1322] See Vol. IV. pp. 409-12.

[1323] The Journals of the Provincial Congress, The Provincial Convention, The Committee of Safety, and the Council of Safety of the State of New York, 1775-1776-1777, Albany, 1842, in two volumes, the second volume being devoted to the correspondence of the Provincial Congress. Here we are able to trace the doubts about Brant, the suspicion of Guy Johnson, and we learn what steps were taken to check their influence. Reports of conferences and meetings are given here, including the meeting between Brant and Herkimer at Unadilla.

[1324] Two of these which have been found useful in connection with this chapter are: Indian Treaties and Laws and Regulations relating to Indian affairs, to which is added an Appendix, containing the proceedings of the Old Congress, and other important State Papers, in relation to Indian Affairs (published by the War Department, Washington, 1826); and Laws, Treaties, and other documents having operation and respect to the Public Lands. Collected and arranged pursuant to an Act of Congress, passed April 27, 1810 (Washington City, 1811).

See also Indian Treaties, 1778-1837. Compiled by the Committee on Indian Affairs (Washington, 1837).

[1325] See notice in Vol. V. p. 581.

[1326] In this book there is a full account of the organization of a company of rangers, and a description of their mock Indian costume. There is also an account of the seizure and destruction by the settlers of a lot of goods which the authorities had quietly permitted to be forwarded by traders to the frontier for traffic with the Indians at a time when the border inhabitants did not wish it done. The military authorities, who interfered, were brushed away as lightly as the traders had been who complained to them. The bibliography of the book is given in Vol. V. p. 579.

[1327] See Vol. V. p. 580.

[1328] Upper Mississippi, or historical sketches of the Mound Builders, the Indian Tribes and the progress of civilization in the Northwest, from A. D. 1600, to the Present time, by George Gale (Chicago, 1867).

[1329] An authentic and comprehensive history of Buffalo, with some account of its early inhabitants, both savage and civilised, comprising historic notions of the Six Nations, or Iroquois Indians, including a sketch of the life of Sir William Johnson, and of other prominent white men long resident among the Senecas. Arranged in chronological order, by William Ketchum (Buffalo, 1864), 2 vols.

[1330] Mary Jemison, the white woman who lived among the Senecas so many years, is carelessly spoken of several times as Mary Johnson; elsewhere he gives the name correctly.

[1331] The Book of the Indians and History of the Indians of North America from its first discovery to the year 1841, by Samuel G. Drake (Boston, 1841). This is the title of the 8th edition.

[1332] The Memoir and writings of James Handasyd Perkins, edited by William Henry Channing (Boston, 1851), 2 vols. His chief paper originally appeared in the N. A. Rev., Oct., 1839.

[1333] Annals of the West, embracing a concise account of principal events which have occurred in the Western States and territories, from the discovery of the Mississippi Valley to the year eighteen hundred and fifty-six. Compiled from the most authentic sources, and published by James R. Albach (Pittsburgh, 1858, 3d edition).

[1334] Cf. Vol. V. p. 581.

[1335] Lack of space prevents the proper development of the influence upon the Indians, of the constant absorption by the colonies of their lands. Besides settlers with their families; besides squatters, and in addition to English companies, like the Ohio Company and the Walpole Company, the attention of individuals was directed towards these lands for the double purposes of colonization and investment. Bancroft (vi. 377) says that Franklin organized "a powerful company to plant a province in that part of the country which lay back of Virginia, between the Alleghanies and a line drawn from Cumberland Gap to the mouth of the Scioto." The correspondence of Washington discloses his eagerness to secure land for investment (see Vol. V. p. 271). He labored to get for the soldiers who had participated with him in the French wars the land bounties offered by Dinwiddie, and in addition he sought to secure land for himself by purchase. "Nothing is more certain", he wrote to his agent, "than that the lands cannot remain long ungranted, when once it is known that rights are to be had" (Sparks's Washington, ii. 346). "My plan is to secure a good deal of land" (Ibid. 348). He wished the matter kept secret, as he apprehended that others would enter into the same movement if they knew about it (Ibid. 349). In 1770 he personally visited the valley of the Ohio, and marked corners for the soldiers' land. While on this trip he was told by Indians that they viewed the settlements of the people on this river with an uneasy and jealous eye, and that they must be compensated for their right if the people settle there, notwithstanding the cession of the Six Nations (Ibid. 531).

In Pennsylvania an act was passed Feb. 18, 1769, "to prevent persons from settling on lands within the boundaries of this province not purchased of Indians." The preamble recites that "Whereas, many disorderly persons have presumed to settle upon lands not purchased of the Indians, which has occasioned great uneasiness and dissatisfaction on the part of the said Indians, and have [sic] been attended with dangerous consequences to the peace and safety of the province", etc. (Laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, etc., republished under authority of the Legislature, by Alexander James Dallas, Philadelphia, 1797).

[1336] See Vol. III. p. 161.

[1337] If land companies were disposed to avail themselves of the doubt as to what tribe of Indians had a right to sell land, so the British government itself had treated the question of their shadowy allegiance to suit its convenience. Bradstreet, in his abortive attempts at making a treaty with them, called them subjects. Sir William Johnson said the very idea of being "subjects was abhorrent to them." Compare this with the doctrine laid down in Huske's Present State of North America, pp. 16, 17.

[1338] Croghan's testimony does not materially alter the boundaries as they were defined by Sir William Johnson in his report to the Lords of Trade, Nov. 13, 1763 (N. Y. Col. Docs., vii. p. 573). "Along the ridge of the Blue Mountains to the head of the Kentucky River, and down the same to the Ohio above the rifts, thence northerly to the south end of Lake Michigan", etc. Cf. letters (1767) to Franklin from George Croghan, Joseph Galloway, and Samuel Wharton, in the Shelburne Papers (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep., v. 218).

Charles W. E. Chapin contributed an article entitled "The Property Line of 1768", to the Magazine of American History, January, 1887. He shows how the boundary line defined in the Fort Stanwix treaty came to be known as the "Property Line", and forcibly points out the powerful influence this treaty had upon the Revolution.

[1339] The Register of Pennsylvania, devoted to the preservation of facts and documents, and every other kind of useful information respecting the State of Pennsylvania, 16 vols., 1828-1835, a weekly journal, edited by Samuel Hazard. See Vol. III. p. 510.

[1340] Cf. Vol. III. p. 508.

[1341] An historical Amount of the Expedition against the Ohio Indians in the year 1764 under the command of Henry Bouquet, etc., (London, reprinted for T. Jefferies, etc., 1766), App., vol. v. p. 69.

[1342] See also Stone's Sir William Johnson, Appendix, ii. no. vii. p. 486.

[1343] This original edition is called History of the Discovery of America, of the landing of our forefathers at Plymouth, and of their most remarkable engagements with the Indians in New England from their first landing in 1620, until the final subjugation of the natives in 1669. To which is annexed the defeat of Generals Braddock, Harmer, and St. Clair by the Indians at the Westward, etc. By the Rev. James Steward, D. D. (Brooklyn, L. I., no date). Slight changes were made in some of the titles to later editions, to indicate the material added, and the date 1669 was altered to 1679. Pritts, under the impression that it was a rare book, reprinted it in his Border Life, etc. Its accuracy was impugned in the Historical Magazine (1857, p. 376; and 1858, p. 29). It was vigorously denounced in Field's Indian Bibliography (no. 1,570, p. 397). "This work under all its Protean forms bears evidence that it was written for a comparatively unlettered public." Col. Peter Force is quoted as having said that he found twenty-two chronological errors on a single page. The notice concludes: "Under all forms there is only a variation of worthlessness." Dr. Trumbull gives a brief bibliographical notice in the Brinley Catalogue (which shows six editions), from which I have extracted some of the information used in the text. The very poor woodcuts with which the book was originally illustrated, the violent colors with which the wretched illustrations of some of the later editions were disfigured, and the errors of dates, have prevented recognition of what there was of value about it.

[1344] It is not worth while to undertake to follow this book through all its editions and changes. It is important, however, for our purposes to note some of them. The estimate to which I have alluded is given in the appendix of the edition referred to above (p. 176), and the statement is made that it was obtained "from a gentleman employed in one of the Indian treaties." There was a second issue of the first edition with the imprint "Norwich", and the authorship attributed to "A Citizen of Connecticut." An edition was published at "Norwich, for the Author, at his Office", in 1810. In this edition "Henry Trumbull" appears as the author. Another edition was issued at Norwich in 1811, and another in 1812. One was also issued at Trenton in 1812. In these various editions slight changes in the arrangement of materials took place, some corrections were made, and from time to time additional matter was inserted. The name of the gentleman who furnished the list of Indians is given on page 115 of the Trenton edition, which I have been able to consult, as Benjamin Hawkins. Editions were published at Boston in 1819, 1828, 1841, and 1846. Dr. Trumbull is of opinion that there must be twenty editions of the book, which is certainly poor enough; but it happens that this list, which was evidently furnished by some one familiar with the subject, is to our purpose. The same list did service in A Tour in the United States of America, etc., by J. F. D. Smyth (London, 1784), where it appears (i. p. 347) without recognition of the original source. The arrangement of the order of tribes is changed, and the spelling of many of the Indian names is altered to correspond with the French methods of spelling, thus suggesting the possibility that the list may have been transcribed by Smyth from some French work. The author foots up the total number of warriors, including certain tribes west of the Mississippi and others in Canada, at 58,930. To these he adds one third to represent the old men, and making an error in his calculation, calls the total number of men 88,570. Allowing six souls for each male warrior he arrives at a total of 531,420, which, he says, "I consider as the whole number of souls, namely, men, women, and children of all the Indian nations."

[1345] Views of Louisiana, together with a Journal of a Voyage up the Missouri River in 1811. By H. M. Brackenridge, Esq. (Pittsburgh, 1814).

[1346] Voyage dans les deux Louisianes et chez les Nations Sauvages du Missouri, par les Etats-Unis, l'Ohio et les Provinces qui le bordent, en 1801, 1802, et 1803; Avec un apperçu des mœurs, des usages, du caractère et des coutumes religieuses et civiles des peuples de ces diverses Countrées, par M. Perrin du Lac (A Lyon, 1805).

[1347] It is also given in Campbell's Annals of Tryon County, note L, p. 319.

[1348] Three of the estimates referred to in the text are reprinted by Schoolcraft under the following headings: "Enumeration of M. Chauvignerie's Official Report to the Government of Canada, A. D. 1736;" "Estimate of Colonel Bouquet, 1764;" "Estimate of Captain Thomas Hutchins, 1764." Schoolcraft also gives one more estimate of that period, viz.: "Account of the Indian Nations given in the year 1778 by a Trader who resided many years in the neighborhood of Detroit. (From the MSS. of James Madison.)" (Schoolcraft's Indian Tribes, iii. p. 553.)

[1349] All of the authorities to which he refers have already been cited, and it may fairly be said that there is nothing of special value in his remarks on the subject. In the development of the topic to which the work is devoted the author alludes to the custom of the Indians to refrain from connection with women not only during the time that they were on the war-path, but for some days before starting. The unanimity of testimony as to this custom of the Indians renders special citations unnecessary. Until the natives were debauched in this respect by contact with civilization, no authentic instance can be found of the violation of a woman by a warrior on the war-path. Brantz Mayer, in his defence of Cresap (Logan and Cresap, p. 110), quotes from the Md. Gazette (Nov. 30, 1774) a charge of this sort. If there was foundation for it in the minds of those who made it, investigation would probably have traced the outrage to whites disguised as Indians. The superstition which protected women from Indian assault was still in force at that time.

[1350] The editor says he "has given the following memorandum of Indian fighting men, inhabiting near the distant parts, in 1762; to indulge the curious in future times, and show also the extent of Dr. Franklin's travels. He believes it likely to have been taken by Dr. Franklin in an expedition which he made as a commander in the Pennsylvania militia, in order to determine measures and situation for the outposts; but is by no means assured of the accuracy of this opinion. The paper, however, is in Dr. Franklin's handwriting: but it must not be mistaken as containing a list of the whole of the natives enumerated, but only as such part of them as lived near the places described."

[1351] In addition to a vast number of reports, extracts from letters, and proceedings of one sort and another, I would call especial attention to the following papers: Carleton's Commission (ii. p. 120); Proceedings connected with Connolly's arrest (ii. pp. 218-221); Schuyler's expedition to Tryon County (iii. p. 135); Stuart's letter to Gage, Oct. 3, 1776 (Part iii., 1776, iv. p. 180); an account of Wyoming massacre from fugitives (vii. p. 51); Col. Wm. Butler's report to General Stark of the destruction of Unadilla, etc. (vii. pp. 253-255); Colonel Van Schaick's report of the destruction of Onondaga (viii. p. 272); the Minisink affair (viii. pp. 275, 276); the letter of the Earl of Dartmouth to Lord Dunmore (viii. p. 278); attack On Indians at Ogeechee, April, 1779 (viii. p. 300); action of the Council at Williamsburgh in Hamilton's case (viii. p. 337); letters from Sullivan's headquarters concerning battle at Newtown (ix. p. 23); Sullivan's proclamation to Oneidas (ix. p. 25); Brodhead's report of his expedition (ix. p. 152); Sullivan's report, Teaoga, Sept. 30, 1779 (ix. p. 158); Joint movements in the valleys of Mohawk, Hudson, and Connecticut (xi. pp. 81-83). The foregoing sufficiently illustrates the wealth of historical material collected in the Remembrancer.

[1352] The Register contains nearly all the papers submitted to Parliament which bore upon American affairs, together with other documents which the publishers from time to time added to the volumes. The Remembrancer and the Register together furnish the means of writing a history of the border warfare of the Revolution which would be nearly complete. A large mass of documentary material respecting the relation of General Haldimand in Quebec with the Indians and with British officers operating with the Indians is in the Haldimand Papers, in the British Museum, of which the Dominion archivist, Douglas Brymner, is now printing a calendar in his Annual Reports (Ottawa). The correspondence of Haldimand and Guy Johnson, 1778-1783, makes three vols. Many papers on this border warfare are in the Quebec series of MSS. in the Public Record Office, and are also noted by Brymner (Report, 1883, p. 79).—Ed.

[1353] In the Secret Journals, the Articles of Confederation, proposed by Franklin on the 21st of July, 1775, are printed in full. I have had occasion to refer to them because an offensive and defensive alliance with the Six Nations is proposed in them. In the "Advertisement" to the edition of the Secret Journals which is cited, the publishers say that these Articles "have never before been published." In the Gentleman's Magazine (xlv. p. 572) a "Plan of the American Confederacy" is given. This plan is copy of Franklin's proposed Articles of Confederation, with a preamble addressed to the Provincial Congress of North Carolina, and was apparently received from that colony. In connection with this, see Bancroft (viii. p. 97). In the Scot's Magazine (Edinburgh, 1775, xxxvii. p. 665) these Articles were copied from the Gentleman's Magazine, with this comment: "The copy from whence this was printed was addressed particularly to the Province of North Carolina; but the same was without doubt submitted to the consideration of every other Provincial Congress, as the preamble clearly shows." The preamble thus referred to reads: "The Provincial Congress of —— are to view the following Articles as a subject which will be proposed to the Continental Congress at their next session." These two magazines publish the Articles as a mere submission of a plan. When the proposed Articles of Confederation reached the Annual Register they became "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union entered into by the several colonies of New Hampshire, &c., &c., in General Congress met at Philadelphia, May 20, 1775" (Annual Register, 1775, p. 253). These Articles were also published as if they had been adopted in The History of the British Empire, etc. By a Society of Gentlemen. (Printed for Robert Campbell & Co., Philadelphia, 1798, 2 vols.: i. p. 188, note.) They are also given as Articles of Confederation, etc., entered into, etc., May 20, 1775, in An Impartial History of the War in America, etc., Boston, 1781, Appendix to vol. i. p. 410.

[1354] The rumors current in the colonies during the progress of events express the hopes and the fears of the colonists, and to a certain extent also indicate their opinions. We should naturally expect to find in an American collection of this sort something to help us in getting at the views of the colonists on the question of employing Indians. In fact, there is but little to be found in the book on this subject, and we are obliged to turn again to Almon's Remembrancer, where we find numerous rumors recorded, some of them improbable in their very nature, but serving to indicate the hopes of the people; as for instance, in a letter from Pittsfield, May 18, 1775: "The Mohawks had given permission to the Stockbridge Indians to join us, and also had 500 men of their own in readiness to assist" (i. p. 66). Again, Worcester, May 10: "We hear that the Senecas, one of the Six Nations, are determined to support the colonies" (i. p. 84). [This extract will be found in the Spy of that date.] June 20, 1775: "The Indians from Canada, when applied to by Governor Carleton to distress the settlement, say they have received no offence from the people, so will not make war with them" (i. p. 147). August 3: "The Canadians and Indians cannot be persuaded by Governor Carleton to join his forces, but are determined to remain neuter" (i. p. 169). August 12: "The Indian nations, for a thousand miles westward, are very staunch friends to the colonies, there being but one tribe inclined to join Governor Carleton, of which, however, there is no danger, as the others are able to drive that tribe and all the force Carleton can raise" (i. p. 251). The Boston Gazette and Country Journal for August 21, 1775, contains the statement that "all apprehensions of danger from our fellow-subjects in Canada and the Indians are entirely removed." The arrival of Swashan, with four other Indians of the St. Francois tribe, at Cambridge, with the statement that "they were kindly received and are now in the service", is printed in the columns of the same journal. Cf. Drake's Book of the Indians, iii. ch. xii. p. 156; Moore's Diary of the Rev., i. p. 127. The Boston Gazette, etc. (Dec. 4, 1775) has the following: "Last week his Excellency the Commander-in-Chief received some despatches from the Honorable Continental Congress, by which we have authentic intelligence that several nations of the Western Indians have offered to send 3,000 men to join the American forces whenever wanted." The New England Chronicle or the Essex Gazette, from Thursday, July 27, to Thursday, August 3, 1775, published at Stoughton Hall, Harvard College, under date of Aug. 3, says: "We can't learn that a single tribe of savages on this continent have been persuaded to take up the hatchet against the colonies, notwithstanding the great pains made use of by the vile emissaries of a savage ministry for that purpose."

[1355] Also in Campbell's Border Warfare of New York during the Rev. War (a second edition of his Annals of Tryon County), App.

[1356] This petition, if in the Mass. Archives, as one might infer, cannot now be found there.

[1357] For instance, John Sullivan and John Langdon write from Philadelphia, May 22, 1775, that the Indians tell them Guy Johnson "has really endeavored to persuade the Indians to enter into a war with us" (vii. p. 501); Lewa, a well-known Indian, reports the Canadian Indians friendly to the Americans, and says he "can raise 500 Indians to assist at any time" (vii. p. 525); Governor Trumbull has learned that "the Cognawaga Indians have had a war-dance, being bro't to it by Gen. Carleton" (vii. p. 532); Rev. Dr. Eleazer Wheelock gives Dean's report as to the good-will of the Canadian Indians (vii. p. 547).

[1358] Sparks asserts that Natanis, a Penobscot chief, was in the interest of Carleton (Washington, iii. p. 112, note). Judge Henry says he was one of those who joined Arnold at Sartigan. In the American Archives (5th ser., i. pp. 836, 837), James Bowdoin, writing to Washington, says that the Penobscots said "that when General Washington sent his army to Canada, five of their people went with them, and two of them were wounded and three taken prisoners." The small number of Indians who accompanied Arnold cut no figure in the campaign, but the advance of the column under Montgomery excited fears in the minds of the English in Canada that the invaders might use the natives as auxiliaries, precisely as the Americans feared a similar use on the English side. In Almon's Remembrancer (ii. p. 108), a letter from Quebec states: "General Montgomery, who commands the provincial troops, consisting of two regiments of New York militia, a body of Continental troops, and some Indians", etc. On Sept. 16, 1775, General Carleton, writing from Montreal to Gage, in an account of the landing of the Americans near St. John's, says: "Many Indians have gone over to them, and large numbers of Canadians are with them at Chamblée" (Sparks's Washington, iii. 110, note). The Canadian Indians, instead of contributing to Montgomery's force, asked for protection,—a plea which apparently seemed, in the excitement of the hour in Canada, to be a declaration of friendship. "The Caghnawagas have desired a 100 men from us. I have complied with their request, and am glad to find they put so much confidence in us, and are so much afraid of Mr. Carleton" (letter from Montgomery, camp before St. John's, Oct. 20, 1775, in Almon's Remembrancer, ii. p. 122). The Mohawks, on the contrary, acted on the English side, and some of them were killed by the Americans.

[1359] It was from these reports, as well as from personal interviews, that Washington formed his opinion as to the temper of the Canadian and Northern Indians. A few quotations will illustrate what he had a right to think, e. g. (p. 35) report of committee, August 3, 1775, appointed to confer with Lewis, a chief of the Caughnawaga tribe. "Question. Has the governor of Canada prevailed on the St. Francois Indians to take up arms against these colonies? Answer. The governor sent out Messi'rs St. Luc and Bœpassion to invite the several tribes of Indians to take up arms against you.... They answered nobody had taken up arms against them, and they would not take arms against anybody to trouble them, and they chose to rest in peace." Again (p. 80), the committee appointed to confer with the St. Francois tribe reported, Aug. 18, 1775: "Q. If Governor Carleton should know you offered us your assistance, are you not afraid he would destroy you? A. We are not afraid of it; he has threatened us, but if he attacks us we have arms to defend ourselves." Once more (p. 81): "Q. Do you know whether any tribes have taken up arms against us? A. All the tribes have agreed to afford you assistance, if wanted." Also (p. 89), Aug. 21st, £10 was appropriated for the use of five Indians belonging to the St. Francois tribe, "one being a chief of said tribe; the other four, having entered into the Continental army, are to receive eight pounds of said sum as one month's advance wages for each of them;" and (p. 148) Oct. 9, speech of two head sachems of the St. John's tribe. "Penobscot Falls, September 12, 1775. We have talked with the Penobscot tribe, and by them we hear that you are engaged in a war with Great Britain, and that they are engaged to join you in opposing your and our enemies. We heartily join with our brethren in the colony of Massachusetts, and are resolved to stand together, and oppose the people of Old England, that are endeavoring to take your and our lands and liberties from us."

[1360] "A company of minute-men, before the 19th of April, had been embodied among the Stockbridge tribe of Indians, and this company repaired to camp. On the 21st of June two of the Indians, probably of this company, killed four of the regulars with their bows and arrows, and plundered them" (Frothingham's Siege of Boston, p. 212). A letter of July 9th says: "Yesterday afternoon some barges were sounding the river of Cambridge (Charles) near its mouth, but were soon obliged to row off, by our Indians (fifty in number), who are encamped near that place" (Ibid. p. 212, note). On the 25th (June): "This day the Indians killed more of the British guard." On the 26th: "Two Indians went down near Bunker Hill, and killed a sentry" (Ibid. p. 213). Frothingham's authority is given as "John Kettel's diary. This commences May 17, and continues to Sept. 31, 1775." Through the kindness of Mr. Thomas G. Frothingham I have examined the original diary, which, in addition to the extracts given, contains several others showing that our riflemen picked off the British sentries. The Boston Gazette and Country Journal (August 7, 1775) contains the following: "Watertown, August 7. Parties of Rifle Men, together with some Indians, are constantly harassing the Enemy's advanced Guards, and say they have killed several of the Regulars within a Day or two past." (Ibid. 14th): "We hear that last Thursday Afternoon a number of Rifle men killed 2 or 3 of the Regulars as they were relieving the Centries at Charlestown lines." The fact that two Indians were wounded by our own sentries in August is recorded in Craft's Journal, etc. (Essex Institute Hist. Coll., iii. p. 55). As there were no Indians with the English, this must have been an accidental collision.

[1361] The correspondence of Allan and Haldimand is in the Quebec Series, vol. xvii. (Public Record Office), and is chronicled in Brymner's Report on the Dominion Archives (1883). Cf. further in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., 1858, p. 254, Mag. of Amer. Hist., 1882, p. 486; W. S. Bartlet's Frontier Missionary (1853); G. W. Drisko's Life of Hannah Weston (Machias, 1857); Journal of sloop "Hunter" in Hist. Mag., viii. 51; Ithiel Town's Particular Services, etc. There is a portrait and memoir of Frederic Kidder in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., April, 1887.—Ed.

[1362] Cf. N. S. Benton's Herkimer County; Harold Frederic in Harper's Mag., lv. 171; Dawson's Battles, ch. 36; Lossing's Field-Book, i. ch. 12, etc.

[1363] This work was reviewed in the Monthly Review, iii. p. 349; The New York Review, iii. p. 195; Christian Examiner and General Review, xxvi. p. 137; Christian Review, iii. p. 537; No. Amer. Rev., Oct., 1839, by J. H. Perkins. (Cf. Poole's Index.)

The two volumes originally published in 1838 were edited by the son in 1865. An abridgment of it, known as the Border Wars of the Rev., makes part of Harper's Family Library.

There is some account of the early life of Brant in J. N. Norton's Pioneer Missionaries (N. Y., 1859), and of his posterity by W. C. Bryant, of Buffalo, in Amer. Hist. Record, July, 1873; reprinted in W. W. Beach's Indian Miscellany. S. G. Drake told Brant's story in the Book of the Indians, and in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., ii. 345; iii. 59. There are references to letters of Brant among the Haldimand Papers, in the Index of MSS. (Brit. Mus.), 1880, p. 195. Mr. Lyman C. Draper, of Madison, Wisconsin, has been an amasser of material respecting Brant for forty years, but has not yet published his studies.

[1364] Col. Stone speaks of two conferences held in 1775, one at Ontario and one at Oswego. He says: "Tha-yen-dan-e-gea had accompanied Guy Johnson from the Mohawk Valley first westward to Ontario, thence back to Oswego" (Brant, i. p. 149). Lossing, upon the evidence at his command, adopted the same opinion: "Johnson went from Ontario to Oswego" (Schuyler, i. p. 355). I have made some effort to discover the site of Ontario, which apparently was to the "westward" of Oswego, but have been unable to find it, and have been forced to the conclusion that the officers who dated their letters from Fort Ontario at Oswego, and who spoke of the post in their correspondence, used the words Ontario and Oswego indifferently to express the same place. Guy Johnson dates several letters at Ontario. Col. Butler, in his correspondence in connection with the St. Leger expedition, dates his letters first at Niagara, then at Ontario. On Guy Johnson's map of the country [see ante, p. 609] the site is designated as Fort Ontario, and no other Ontario is put down. Guy Johnson reported that St. Leger had gone "on the proposed expedition by way of Ontario" (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 714). We know that he went by Oswego, and except that Col. Butler writes from Ontario, we have no mention of Ontario in any of the accounts of this expedition. Gen. Haldimand, in speaking of the proposed reëstablishment of the post, calls it Oswego (Ibid. viii. p. 777). Guy Johnson, in the same connection, calls it Ontario (Ibid. p. 775) and Fort Ontario (Ibid. p. 780). Rev. Dr. Wheelock, describing Johnson's movements, said he had withdrawn with his family by the way of Oswego (N. H. Provincial Papers, vii. p. 548).

Shortly after Johnson's arrival in Montreal he wrote a brief account of his transactions to the Earl of Dartmouth, in which he spoke of the conference at Ontario, but said nothing of a second at Oswego (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 636). This journal, certified by Joseph Chew, Secretary of Indian Affairs, appears to account for his motions continuously during this period, and speaks only of the conference at Ontario. He arrived at Ontario June 17th, embarked at that point July 11th for Montreal, and arrived at the latter place July 17th, with 220 Indians from Ontario (Ibid. viii. p. 658; Ketchum's Buffalo, i. p. 243). Mr. Berthold Fernow informs me that in Guy Johnson's account for expenses in the Indian Department in 1775 this item occurs: "July 8, 1775. For cash given privately to the chiefs and warriors of the 6 Nations during the treaty at Ontario, £260." No other conference in that immediate neighborhood is mentioned in the Johnson MSS. An instance of indifference in the application of the two names will be found in Mrs. Grant's Memoirs of an American Lady. Mr. B. B. Burt, of Oswego, writes to me that "there was not any Ontario west of Oswego except the lake", and kindly calls my attention to several instances in the records which tend to show the confusion in the use of these names. Among others he refers to a letter of Sir William Johnson's, in which he speaks of Ontario and Oswego, apparently meaning the same place (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. p. 530). A similar instance, as I believe, is to be found in the letter of Capt. Walter N. Butler to Gen. Clinton, Feb. 18, 1779, quoted in Stone's Brant, i. p. 384. In this latter case it is not surprising that the identity of the two places was not suspected by Col. Stone. At first sight Butler seems to be speaking of two distinct spots. In Orasmus H. Marshall's Niagara Frontier, embracing Sketches of its early history and French and English local names (1865), Ontario as a town or site is not mentioned. O'Reilly's Rochester contains an Indian account of the alliance, which makes no mention of Ontario (see pp. 388, 389). On the other hand, the Duc de la Rochefoucault Liancourt's Travels through the United States of North America, the country of the Iroquois and Upper Canada, in the years 1795, 1796, and 1797, mentions a place called Ontario on the Genessee River, but he gives no other description of it than of the log-cabin where he spent the night.

Hough, in his Northern Invasion of October, 1780, gives his reason for disputing Stone's statement that the Oneida settlements were destroyed by the enemy in the winter of 1779-1780. The reasons for believing that Hough was correct are stated elsewhere.

Stone places the invasion of the Schoharie Valley in October, 1780; but Simms (Frontiersmen, ii. p. 392 et seq.) makes it clear that there were two invasions during that year, as indeed Stone himself (vol. ii. p. 97) seems to allow in quoting from Almon's Remembrancer (part ii., 1780).

In his enthusiasm for his hero, Col. Stone is betrayed into calling Brant the principal war-chief of the confederacy; but Morgan, in his League of the Iroquois (p. 103), speaking of the celebrated Joseph Brant Ta-yen-dä-ná-ga, says his "abilities as a military leader secured to him the command of the war parties of the Mohawks during the Revolution. He was also but a chief, and held no other office or title in the nation or in the confederacy." (Ketchum's Buffalo, i. p. 331). Stone (ii. p. 448) further says "the Six Nations had adopted from the whites the popular game of ball or cricket", but the Jesuit Relations, as well as La Potherie and Charlevoix, would have put him right in this respect.

[1365] Tryon County was formed in 1772 (Albany County then embracing all the northern and western part of the colony), so as to cover all that part of New York State lying west of a line running north and south nearly through the centre of the present Schoharie County. Campbell's work, by its title, therefore fairly included the scene of all the border warfare of New York. Many of the notes in the appendix are valuable, and they contain sketches of the lives of Sir William Johnson, Brant, Gen. Clinton, and Gen. Schuyler; Moses Younglove's account of his captivity and his charges against the English; and an account of the Wyoming massacre. Franklin's successful imitation, the Gerrish letter, is copied (as genuine in the first edition) from a local newspaper of the Revolutionary period. A table of the number of Indians employed by the English in the Revolutionary War is given, and an article, by the author, on the direct agency of the English government in the employment of Indians in the Revolutionary War is reprinted. The sketch of Clinton's life was separately published as Lecture on the Life and Military Services of General James Clinton, read before the New York Historical Society, Feb., 1839.

[1366] Life of Kirkland, by S. K. Lothrop, in Sparks's Amer. Biog., vol. xv. A sketch will also be found in the History of the town of Kirkland, New York, by Rev. A. D. Gridley (New York, 1874).

[1367] In the History of the United States for families and libraries, by Benson J. Lossing (New York, 1857), the author deals briefly, but accurately, with the events covered by this chapter. Cf. also his earlier Seventeen Hundred and Seventy-Six (New York, 1849).

[1368] Historical writers have been greatly at variance on this point. John M. Brown (pamphlet History of Schoharie County, quoted by Simms and Stone) says the event took place in June or July, 1776; but Stone (Brant, ii. p. 313), in giving Brown's account, corrects the date to July, 1778. In the Gansevoort Papers Stone found the affair assigned to the close of May, 1778, corresponding with the date in Thacher, and with the account given in McKendry's journal of the disaster to "Capt. Partrick" at "Coverskill;" this was adopted by Simms in his Frontiersmen (ii. p. 151), and Stone put his narrative under this date in his Brant (ii. p. 354). Campbell (Border Warfare) places it in 1779, but Stone (Brant, ii. p. 412) says that Capt. Patrick could not possibly have commanded the troops, as he was killed in the attack of the previous year. It seems to me that Simms clearly establishes that there was but one attack on Cobleskill.

[1369] See Vol. V. p. 616. Fort Stanwix, which is sometimes spoken of as a log fort, is thus described by Pouchot: "This fort is a square of about ninety toises on the outside, and is built of earth, revetted within and without by great timbers, in the same fashion as those at Oswego" (vol. ii. p. 138). We find no mention of Ontario.

[1370] See ante, ch. iv.—Ed.

[1371] De Peyster seems to have misinterpreted the language of St. Leger's letter, where St. Leger states that Lieut. Bird was led to suppose that Sir John Johnson needed succor, and in consequence of this false information Bird went to the rescue, thus leaving the camp without defenders. On page cxi, De Peyster says: "The white troops, misled by the false reports of a cowardly Indian, were recalled to the defence of the camp." There is no phrase in any accounts that I have met with in which action on the part of the troops is predicated on the information of a "cowardly Indian", except that contained in St. Leger's account, which De Peyster himself quotes, p. cxxx, as follows: "Lieut. Bird, misled by the information of a cowardly Indian that Sir John was prest had quitted his post; to march to his assistance." In spite of his mistake as to which marched to the other's assistance, on page cxxxiv he says "When the Indians began to slip out of the fight, the Royal Greens must have been hurried to the scene of action, leaving the lines south of the fort entirely destitute of defenders."

[1372] The troops which were intended for St. Leger are named in the Parl. Reg., viii. p. 211. He was to have 675 regulars and Tories, "together with a sufficient number of Canadians and Indians." St. Leger was to report to Sir William Howe at Albany. The numbers of the force which he took with him, although different in detail, corresponded as a whole with the estimate. He was so confident of success that at Lachine he detached a sergeant, a corporal, and thirty-two privates to accompany the baggage of the king's royal regiment by way of Lake Champlain to Albany. Ten "old men" were also ordered to be left at Point Clair (Johnson's Orderly-Book, p. 63). Carleton on the 26th of June reported as follows: "St. Leger has begun his movement, taking the detachment of the 34th regiment [100 men], the royal regiment of New York increased to about 300 men, and a company of Canadians [say 75 men]. He will be joined by the detachment of the 8th regiment [100 men] and the Indians of the Six Nations with the Misasages, as he proceeds. About 100 Hanau chasseurs have since arrived, and are on their way to join him" (Parl. Reg., viii. p. 215). The king's (8th) regiment, which was to join as the expedition proceeded, and the Hanau chasseurs, were at Buck Island July 10th (Johnson's Orderly-Book, p. 67). The increase of Johnson's regiment is to be accounted for by the presence of "Jessup's corps" (Ibid. p. 36, note 17). This force, apparently numbering 675 men, was increased at Oswego by Butler's rangers, a company of 70 to 75 men, making the total force of whites nominally about 750 men. From that number 44 men had been detached, as above. Forty days' provisions for 500 men were on the 17th of July ordered to be made ready to be embarked. From this order De Peyster and Stone argue that St. Leger's total effective force of whites was 500 men. In the same order Lieut. Collerton was directed "to prepare ammunition for two 6-pounders and 2 cohorns, and 50 rounds ball cartridges per man for 500 men", showing by the same reasoning that there were 500 men who bore muskets. No entry is made in the order-book concerning provisions for the Indians and rangers after leaving Buck Island. Col. Claus reported "150 Mississaugas and Six Nation Indians" at that point (Claus to Secretary Knox, N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 719), and said that St. Leger had 250 with him when he arrived at Oswego (Ibid.). Brant joined the expedition at this point with 300 more (Ibid.). A company of rangers raised by Col. Butler participated in the campaign (Carleton to Germain, July 9 and Sept. 20, 1777, Parl. Reg., viii. pp. 220, 224). They apparently joined the expedition at "Ontario", as Butler calls "Oswego." The Western Indians and the Senecas had been summoned by Col. Butler. He reported that "the number of Indians at Ontario and the Senecas at 'three rivers' cannot fall much short of 1,000" (Ibid. 226). The Indians were stopped at "three rivers" by Col. Claus; but from those assembled at Oswego and "three rivers", there were "upwards of 800" who went forward with the expedition to Fort Stanwix (Claus to Secretary Knox, N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 719). Among these were some Senecas, who participated in the ambuscade under the leadership of chiefs of their own tribe, in concurrence with Sir John Johnson and Col. Butler (Parl. Reg., viii. p. 226). It is evident that the rations for 500 men did not make provision for the Indians nor for the company of rangers. Making every allowance for the reduction of the force by illness, it would seem as if the allowance of 650 whites to St. Leger's effective force must be within limits. The presence of each separate command alluded to by Carleton in his report of what had gone forward, is recognized at some point in the Orderly-Book. The "upwards of 800 Indians" mentioned by Claus makes a total of about 1,450. St. Leger throws a doubt over the number of Indians present by saying that all of them participated in the ambuscade. Both Butler and Claus say there were 400 of them in the fight. The probability is that some of them were engaged in transporting supplies across the portage, and that all in camp were sent forward. Col. Stone gives Brant credit for devising the ambuscade and leading the Indians. Butler says not a ward of Brant, but praises the Senecas. Here again we must resort to conjecture for explanation. It may be that Brant was on one side of the road with his "poor Mohawks", of whose sufferings in the battle he afterwards spoke, while Butler with his Senecas was on the other side. St. Leger's statement that all the Indians went to the front shows one thing at least,—that the force with which he undertook to cut off Willett's 250 men must have been whites. He had men enough with him while engaged in clearing the creek and in transporting provisions—with 80 men at the front, and with Lieut. Bird's command, decoyed from camp by false intelligence—to return to intercept Willett. Cf. Precis of the Wars in Canada (London, 1826), which states that St. Leger's corps "consisted of 700 regulars, with eight pieces of ordnance and about 1,000 Indians."

In all this discussion I have assumed that Sir John Johnson's orderly-book contained all the orders with reference to rations. As such orders were not a necessary part of the record, it may he doubted whether other orders not affecting that corps would not be found in St. Leger's order-book.

[1373] Mary Jemison puts the loss of the Senecas alone above what Claus and Butler reported the total Indian loss. Claus states the British loss at three officers, two or three privates, and thirty-two Indians killed (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. p. 720). Col. Butler puts the English loss in the action at four officers killed and two privates wounded; the Indian loss at thirty-three killed and twenty-nine wounded (Parl. Reg., viii. p. 226). Mary Jemison (p. 116) says: "Previous to the battle of Fort Stanwix the British sent for the Indians to come and see them whip the rebels; and at the same time stated that they did not wish to have them fight, but wanted to have them just sit down, smoke their pipes, and look on. Our Indians went, to a man, but, contrary to their expectation, instead of smoking and looking on, they were obliged to fight for their lives; and in the end were completely beaten, with a great loss of killed and wounded. Our Indians alone had thirty-six killed and a great number wounded. Our town exhibited a scene of real sorrow and distress when our warriors returned, recounted their misfortunes, and stated the real loss they had sustained in the engagement. The mourning was excessive, and was expressed by the most doleful yells, shrieks, and howlings, and by inimitable gesticulations."

[1374] The exaggerated rumors of the losses at Minisink which first reached Sullivan's camp were immediately displaced by more accurate accounts. "The accts we rec'd from the Delaware at Minisings on the 29th are more favorable than at first represented. The Tories and savages made a descent upon that settlement, and, having burned several houses, barns, etc., were attacked by a Regt. of Militia, who repulsed and pursued them a considerable distance. Forty men were killed on our side, the Colo. and Major included" (Major Norris's journal in Publications of the Buffalo Hist. Soc., i. p. 225).

The account which appears in the Boston Gazette and Country Journal, Sept. 6, 1779, is singularly free from exaggeration. Indeed, it underrates the whole affair. It speaks of the destruction of the town as "an excursion on old Minisink", and says the militia marched to the assistance of their neighbors and followed the savages thirty miles into the wilderness. An action ensued in which upwards of twenty of the enemy were killed, and our losses, killed, wounded, and missing, were upwards of thirty. The later accounts are in E. M. Ruttenber's Orange County (Newburgh, 1875); Charles E. Stickney's Minisink Region (Middletown, 1867); in the N. Y. Columbian, copied in Niles's Principles and Acts, and in Dr. Arnell's Address to the Med. Soc. of Orange Co.; and the addresses at the dedication of the monument at Goshen (showing forty-five names of the slain), in Samuel W. Eager's Outline Hist. of Orange County.

[1375] Almon's Remembrancer, viii. 51. The Boston Gazette and Country Journal (July 27, 1778) contains a letter from Samuel Avery, July 15, 1778, giving the "disagreeable intelligence, brought by Mr. Solomon Avery, this moment returned from Wyoming, on the Susquehanna River", which says: "The informant conceives, that of about five thousand inhabitants one half are killed and taken by the enemy prisoners, and the other half fleeing away naked and distressed." The same paper (August 3) contains the Poughkeepsie account.

[1376] Botta's account is reprinted in the Penna. Register (i. 129; cf. vi. 58, 73, 310; vii. 273).

[1377] Miner, in 1806, called Judge Marshall's attention to some of the errors in his account. In 1831 the judge revived the correspondence on the subject, and expressed his intention to avail himself of the information furnished by Mr. Miner.

[1378] William L. Stone, in the Life and Times of Red Jacket, referring to his father's Life of Brant, says (p. 75): "Indeed, until this work appeared, it was universally believed that Brant and his Mohawk warriors were engaged in the massacre of Wyoming. Gordon, Ramsay, Thacher, and Marshall assert the same thing." Thacher in his account of Wyoming, under date of August 3, does not mention Brant's name, but charges the responsibility for the atrocities upon Col. John Butler.

Ramsay (ii. 323, etc.) mentions Brant's name, but does not charge upon the invaders an indiscriminate slaughter. He says the women and children were permitted to cross the Susquehanna and retreat through the woods to Northampton County. Stone claimed an alibi for Brant in his Border Wars, while Caleb Cushing (Democratic Rev.) thought the case not proved; but Stone, again, in his Wyoming, reasserted it, and Peck, in his Wyoming (3d ed., N. Y., 1868), sustains Stone. The question is also discussed by Thomas Maxwell in Schoolcraft's Indian Tribes, v. 672.

On this subject see "Letter to the Mohawk chief, Ahyonwaegho, commonly called John Brant, Esq., of the Grand River, Upper Canada, from Thomas Campbell, Jan. 20, 1822", published in the New Monthly Magazine, London, 1822 (vol. iv. p. 97).

It has been already stated that the correspondence of Guy Johnson shows that in the plan of campaign Brant's field of operations in 1778 did not include Wyoming. Gen. John S. Clark in a private note quotes from a MS. in the handwriting of Col. Daniel Claus, entitled Anecdotes of Captain Joseph Brant, 1778, a copy of which is in the possession of Hon. J. B. Plumb, of Niagara, Canada, a statement that Sakayenwaraghton led the Senecas at Oriskany (1777), and that after the battle a council was held at Canadesege, at which it was agreed that this chieftain should attack Wyoming in the early spring, and that Brant should attack the New York settlements. This MS. further says that the Indians "bore the whole brunt of the action, for there were but two of Butler's rangers killed." What is known of the life of this Seneca chieftain is given by Geo. S. Conover in his pamphlet, Sayengueraghta, King of the Senecas (Waterloo, 1885).

[1379] Ryerson in his Loyalists of America (ii. ch. 34) compares the accounts of Wyoming given by Ramsay, Bancroft, Tucker, and Hildreth, and credits Hildreth with the most accurate story. He copies Stone's account from the Life of Brant, and expresses himself in approbation of it. There is an account of the Wyoming affair in The History of Connecticut from the first Settlement to the present time, by Theodore Dwight, Jr. (New York, 1841), which is unusually full of errors. I should be strongly inclined to quote here from the pages of Murray's Impartial History of the present War, etc., to show that British opinions were as strongly pronounced in their expressions against the reported acts of Butler, and that they held the authorities who permitted him to bear a commission responsible, were it not that I find so many pages in this book identical with An Impartial History of the War in America, which was published about the same time in Boston, that I am at a loss to determine which was the original book. The two books are not in all respects the same. The one purports to be an English composition, the other an American recital. Phrases in which the enemy are alluded to in the one are reversed in the other, while topics which are elaborated in one are barely mentioned in the other; still, there are enough pages identical in the two, except for the toning down of the adjectives, to make me doubtful of the authorship of the Rev. James Murray. The bibliography of these books is examined elsewhere in this History.

[1380] In order to show what has been accepted as history on this point, I quote a portion of the account in this history, which is typical: "After the savages had completed their work of slaughter in the field, they proceeded immediately to invest Fort Kingston, in which Col. Dennison had been left with the small remnant of Butler's troops and the defenceless women and children. In such a state of weakness the defence of the fort was out of the question; and all that remained to Dennison was to attempt to gain some advantageous terms by the offer of a surrender. For this purpose he went himself to the savage chief; but that inhuman monster, that Christian cannibal, replied to the question of terms that he should grant them the hatchet. He was more than true to his word, for when, after resisting until all his garrison were killed or disabled, Col. Dennison was compelled to surrender at discretion, his merciless conqueror, tired of scalping, and finding the slow process of individual murder insufficient to glut his appetite, shut up all that remained in the houses and barracks, and by the summary aid of fire reduced all at once to one promiscuous heap of ashes. Nothing now remained that wore the face of resistance to these savage invaders but the little fort of Wilksborough, into which about seventy of Col. Butler's men had effected their retreat, as has been said. These, with about the same number of Continental soldiers, constituted its whole force, and when their enemy appeared before them they surrendered without even asking conditions, under the hope that their voluntary obedience might find some mercy. But mercy dwelt not in the bosoms of these American Tories; submission could not stay their insatiable thirst of blood. The cruelties and barbarities which were practised upon these unresisting soldiers were even more wanton, if possible, than those which had been exhibited at Fort Kingston. The seventy Continental soldiers, because they were Continental soldiers, were deliberately butchered in cruel succession; and then a repetition of the same scene of general and promiscuous conflagration took place, which had closed the tragedy at the other fort. Men, women, and children were locked up in the houses, and left to mingle their cries and screams with the flames that mocked the power of an avenging God."

[1381] Chapman's sketch, although it repeats many of the errors in the popular accounts, says that the women and children fled from the valley. It also gives a copy of the articles of capitulation at the final surrender (note ii.). This account is a long step towards the story as at present accepted.

[1382] It is also given, with other official documents, in Dawson's Battles, i. ch. 38.

[1383] This report is also given in a sketch of the life of Zebulon Butler, which forms a part of the article headed Edmund Griffin Butler, in Geo. B. Kulp's Families of the Wyoming Valley (Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1885, vol. i.).

[1384] Bancroft has necessarily treated such events briefly, but the peculiar facilities which he has enjoyed for gaining access to the papers in foreign archives give especial value to his statistics in connection with such incidents in the war as the battle of Oriskany and the destruction of Wyoming.

[1385] In the N. E. Hist. and Gen. Register (xiv. p. 265) an article, "Mrs. Skinner and the Massacre at Wyoming", by D. Williams Patterson, opens with a quotation from Col. Stone's book, and then proceeds as follows: "The above account, which was probably taken by Col. Stone from a newspaper article, published soon after the death of Mrs. Skinner, contains so many errors that it seems proper to place on record a version of the story more nearly in accordance with facts." The facts stated are of a biographical and genealogical character.

[1386] In a previous note I have reproduced one of the typical accounts of the Wyoming massacre, as the story was told by the earlier historians. The details given in accounts of that class were accepted for a long time without question. Fortunately for the good name of the human race, Butler, with all his responsibility for the wrongs done during the continuance of this border warfare, was not the inhuman wretch which he was represented to be, and the wholesale slaughter of the women and children turned out to be a pure invention. Horrors enough remain unchallenged to raise a doubt if even now all errors have been removed. I have not introduced any of these shocking stories in my narrative, but they can be found in Chapman, Miner, and Stone.

The story of the horrors of the night is told in Hubbard's Life of Van Campen in such a way as to make it seem more probable than the same story appears when read in some of the other accounts.

Among the more general accounts are those in Egle's Pennsylvania; Hollister's Connecticut, with a good account of the Connecticut colony in Pennsylvania; H. Hollister's Lackawana Valley (N. Y., 1857), following Miner closely; Stuart Pearce's Luzerne County (Philadelphia, 1860); Campbell's Tryon County, App.; Mrs. E. F. Ellet's Domestic Hist. of the Amer. Rev. (N. Y., 1850), ch. 13, and her Women of the Amer. Rev. (N. Y., 1856), ii. 165; Henry Fergus's United States in Lardner's Cab. Cyclopædia, reproducing the old erroneous accounts; and even so late a history as Cassell's United States, by Edmund Ollier, is little better. A marked instance of the heedless method of popular historians is J. A. Spencer's United States (N. Y., 1858), who seems to have followed at that late day Thacher as he found his account in Lossing, Seventeen Seventy-Six (Hist. Mag., ii. 126-128), which author reasonably complained that if he were to be trusted at all, he should have been taken in the later research of his Field-Book, or even of his school history, since Dr. Spencer was fond of quoting such authorities.

Poole's Index gives references to several periodical articles. Chief among such contributions are those in the Worcester Mag., i. 37; the reviews of Peck in the Methodist Quarterly (3d ser., xviii. p. 577, and the 4th ser., vol. xl.), and the paper in Household Words, xviii. p. 282; A. H. Guernsey in Harper's Mag., xvii. 306 (also see vii. 613); L. W. Peck in National Mag., v. 147; Erastus Brooks in the Southern Lit. Messenger, vii. 553.

The whole subject of the invasion of the valley was reviewed by Steuben Jenkins in an historical address, which is embodied in "A record of the one hundredth year commemorative observances of the battle and massacre", etc., etc., edited by Wesley Johnson (Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1882).

The bibliography of Wyoming, by H. E. Hayden, is given in the Proc. of the Wyoming Valley Hist. and Geol. Soc. (1885).

[1387] There are contemporary letters in the Hist. Mag., x. 172.

[1388] The story of Cherry Valley is one of the numerous incidents connected with the border war included in the Historical Collections of the State of New York, edited by John W. Barber and Henry Howe (New York, 1845). Such accounts in this work are generally transferred bodily from Campbell or Stone, but occasionally some old newspaper cutting is reproduced. At the celebration in 1840, addresses were made by William W. Campbell and by William H. Seward. They were published in pamphlet form, and Mr. Campbell printed his own address as a note to the 2d edition of the Annals of Tryon County.

The speeches made at centennial anniversary in 1878 were published in the Centennial Celebration of the State of New York (Albany, 1879). The main address was delivered by Major Douglass Campbell (p. 359). Cf. H. C. Goodwin's Cortland County (N. Y., 1859); Dawson's Battles, i. ch. 45; Lossing's Field-Book, i. 268, 297.

[1389] Ibid., Jan. 4, 1779, has a letter from Cherry Valley, dated Nov. 24, 1778.

[1390] See Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., 1886. One hundred copies of McKendry's journal were privately printed from these proceedings in 1886, with the title,—1779. Sullivan's Expedition against the Indians of New York, edited by the writer of this chapter.

[1391] See note E, at the end of this chapter.—Ed.

[1392] In a note, vol. iii. p. 312, he says: "Sullivan in his account says forty: but if a few old houses which had been deserted for years were met with and burnt, they were put down for a town. Stables and wood hovels and lodges in the field, when the Indians were called to work, these were all reckoned as houses." He charges that Sullivan was importunate in absurd demands for supplies, and amongst other things called for eggs to take upon his Indian campaign. This statement of Gordon undoubtedly rests upon something which he had seen in print. Is it not probable that his prejudice prevented him from seeing the humor in a newspaper squib inserted by some wag, in which Sullivan's slow movements and pertinacious demands for supplies are thus ridiculed? Cf. Eben Hazard in Belknap Papers, i. 23. The writers of "Allen's History" follow the same lead. "He lived during the march in every species of extravagance, was constantly complaining to Congress that he was not half supplied, and daily amused himself in unwarrantable remarks to his young officers respecting the imbecility of Congress and the board of war" (Allen's Amer. Rev., ii. 277). Bancroft (x. 231) speaks of Sullivan as "wasting his time writing strange theological essays", and gives him credit for destroying only "eighteen towns."

[1393] The attendant controversies touching Sullivan's career as a soldier and a legislator are examined in another place in this History, but reference may be here made to T. C. Amory's paper on this expedition in the Mag. Amer. Hist., iv. 420, and to another on the same subject in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xx. 88.

[1394] Quotations from Haldimand's correspondence and speeches are given elsewhere. The openness of Clinton's movements seemed to Washington such a complete betrayal of the whole scheme that on the 1st of July he wrote to Sullivan that Clinton "had transported, and by last accounts was transporting, provisions and stores for his whole brigade three months, and two hundred and twenty or thirty batteaux to receive them; by which means, in the place of having his design concealed till the moment of execution, and forming his junction with you, in a manner by surprise, it is announced" (Sparks's Washington, vi. p. 281). During the whole of this hazardous proceeding Clinton was not molested, nor did Haldimand seem to derive any conception of what it meant. Yet Washington was so far right in saying that the intention of the movement was "announced" that on the 5th of July the following appeared in the Boston Gazette and Country Journal: "The stores are all arrived, and the greatest exertions are made by Gen. Clinton to transport them unto Lake Otsego, over a carrying-place of about thirty miles. Everything will be then ready to go down the Susquehanna and join Gen. Sullivan."

[1395] The latest official figures given by Sullivan are those of July 21st,—2,312 rank and file; the entire number given in the report footing up, according to Craft, 2,539. In the same estimate, Craft puts Clinton's force at 1,400, and the total marching column at 3,100 to 3,200 men. It was promised by Washington that Lieut.-Col. Pawling should join Clinton at Anaguaga with 200 men (Sparks's Washington, vi. p. 275). Stone says Clinton was joined at "Oghkwaga" by a detachment of Col. Pawling's levies from Wawarsing (Brant, ii. p. 18). Peabody in his Life of Sullivan makes the same statement. Bleeker in his order-book makes no mention of Pawling's regiment. Erkuries Beatty, August 16th, says: "Major Church marched to meet the militia here. Returned in the evening and saw nothing of them" (Cayuga Co. Hist. Soc. Coll. no. i. p. 64). McKendry in his journal corroborates this statement (Sullivan's Expedition against the Indians, p. 30). In a letter (Aug. 24, 1779) from Gen. Clinton to his brother, contained in the Sparks collection, the general states that the expected reinforcement by Pawling was not effected. Geo. Clinton papers—Sparks MSS., no. xii. (Harvard Col. library).

[1396] Washington in his instructions to Sullivan had insisted that Sullivan should dispense with everything possible, on the ground that the delays incident to the transportation of a great bulk of stores might balk the expedition (Sparks, vi. 264; Hist. Mag., xii., Sept., 1867, p. 139). He was indignant when he heard that Clinton had taken to great a quantity of stores with him. Referring to this, Sullivan wrote to Clinton, July 11, 1779 saying "Gen. Washington has wrote to me as he has to you, but I have undeceived him by showing him that in case you depended on our magazines for stores we must all starve together, as the commissaries have deceived us in every article" (Bleeker's Order-book, p. 15). Lt.-Col. Adam Hubley wrote to the President of Pennsylvania: "Our expedition is carrying on rather slow, owing to the delay in provisions, etc. I sincerely pity Gen. Sullivan's situation. People who are not acquainted with the reasons of the delay, I'm informed, censure him, which is absolutely cruel and unjust" (Penna. Archives, vii. p. 554). "The long stay at Wyoming was owing to the infamous conduct of the commissaries and quartermasters employed in furnishing the necessary provisions and stores. And finally, when the army did move, it was so scantily supplied that the success of the expedition is by that means rendered exceedingly precarious" (Diary of Jabez Campfield, surgeon, etc., N. J. Hist. Soc. Coll., 2d Series, iii. p. 118). "Various opinions prevailed about our proceeding any further on account of our provisions" (Hubley, in Miner's History, App., p. 97).

[1397] Sullivan to Col. John Cook, July 30, 1779: "Nothing could afford me more pleasure than to relieve the distressed, or to have it in my power to add to the safety of your settlement; but should I comply with your requisition, it would most effectually answer the intentions of the enemy, and destroy the grand objects of this expedition" (Penna. Arch., vii. p. 593).

[1398] "We converted some old tin kettles, found in the Indian settlements, into large graters, and obliged every fourth man not on guard to sit up all night and grate corn, which would make meal, something like hominy. The meal was mixed with boiled squash or pumpkin, when hot, and kneaded into cakes and baked at the fire" (Nathan Davis, in Hist. Mag., April, 1868, p. 203).

[1399] Adam Hubley says 500 savages, 200 Tories (Miner's History, Appendix, p. 93); Daniel Livermore says 600 chosen savages (N. H Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. p. 308); Lieut. Barton, 200 whites, 500 Indians (N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., ii. p. 31); Daniel Gookin, 600 Indians, 14 regulars, 200 Tories (N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg., xvi. p. 27); Jabez Campfield, 1,000 strong, 300 or 400 of whom were Tories (N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., iii. 2d Series, p. 124); George Grant, 1,500 (Hazard's Reg., xiv. p. 74); Major Norris, 1,500 Indians (Jones's New York, vol. ii. p. 613); Gen. Sullivan, 1,500 (Remembrancer, ix. p. 158); Rev. David Craft, after a study of the subject, estimates the force at 200 to 250 whites, and probably not less than 1,000 Indians (Centennial Celebration, etc., p. 127, note). Cf. Mag. Amer. Hist., iv. 420, and F. Barber's letter in Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii.

[1400] Dr. Campfield says: "The Indian houses might have been comfortable had they made any convenience for the smoke to be conveyed out; only a hole in the middle of the top of the roof of the house. The Indians are exceedingly dirty; the rubage of one of their houses is enough to stink the whole country" (N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc., iii., 2d Series, p. 132). Erkuries Beatty, speaking of the houses at Onoguaga, says that they were good log houses, with stone chimneys and glass windows (Cayuga Hist. Soc. Coll., no. i. p. 64). Van Campen says that the houses were generally built by fixing large posts in the ground, at a convenient distance from each other, between which poles were woven. This formed the covering of the sides. The roof was made by laying bark upon poles, which were properly placed as a support. To afford greater warmth the sides were plastered with mud. The houses that were found on the route were all of this description (John N. Hubbard's Border Adventures of Major. Moses Van Campen, Bath, N. Y. 1842). "They were built chiefly with split and hewn timbers, covered with bark and some other rough materials, without chimneys or floors" (Norris in Jones's New York, ii. p. 613). Col. Dearborn (MS. Journal) uses almost identical language with Norris. "Newtown—here are some good buildings of the English construction" (Capt. Daniel Livermore, in N. H. Hist. Coll., vi. pp. 308-335). The huts or wigwams were constructed of bark, and very narrow in proportion to their length, some being thirty or forty feet long, and not more than ten feet wide, generally with a bark floor, except in the centre, where there was a place for the fire (Nathan Davis, in Hist. Mag., April, 1868, p. 202). According to Hubley, Chemung contained fifty or sixty houses built of logs and frames; Catharine's town, fifty houses, in general very good; Canadea, about forty well-finished houses, and everything about it seemed neat and well improved; Kanadalauga, between twenty and thirty well-finished houses, chiefly of hewn plank; Anayea, twelve houses, chiefly of hewn logs (Penna. Archives, 2d Series, vol. xi.). Nukerck describes the houses at "Kandaia" as "large and elegant; some beautifully painted" (Campbell, Annals Tryon County, p. 155); speaking of "Kanandagua", he says: "This town, from the appearance of the buildings, seems to have been inhabited by white people. Some houses have neat chimneys, which the Indians have not, but build a fire in the centre, around which they gather" (Ibid. p. 157). McKendry speaks of the "cellars and walls" of the houses at "Onnaguago", and says it was a "fine settlement, considering they were Indians." This place had been destroyed fifteen years before by Capt. Montour, and Sir William Johnson then described it as having houses "built of square logs, with good chimneys" (N. Y. Col. Docs., vii. p. 628). McKendry says some of the houses at "Appletown" were of "hew'd timber." At "Canondesago", some of them built with hewed timber and part with round timber and part with bark.

[1401] Hildreth and others speak of Niagara as if it were Sullivan's objective point. John C. Hamilton (History of the Republic, i. p. 543) says: "Instructions from Hamilton's pen were addressed to Sullivan", etc. (p. 544). "A surprise of the garrison at Niagara and of the shipping on the lakes was to be attempted." By whom was Niagara to be surprised? Hamilton leaves it to be inferred that Sullivan was instructed to attempt it, whereas it was only mentioned as one of the possible advantages to be gained from the Indians in case they should sue for peace.

[1402] Washington's letters in Sparks, and in Mag. Amer. Hist., Feb., 1879, p. 142.

[1403] Ryerson in his Loyalists of America, etc., devotes a chapter to the Sullivan campaign, which he terms "Revenge for Wyoming." He confounds Zebulon Butler with William Butler, which is not perhaps to be wondered at, for Campbell and Stone did the same thing, although the fact that there were two English officers of the name of Butler engaged in the border wars on the English side, and two American officers of the same name opposed to them in the same campaigns, and the further fact that at Wyoming the forces on each side were commanded by a Butler, were warnings enough that especial scrutiny should be observed in distinguishing these persons.

[1404] General Stryker (p. 7) gives Clinton's force at 1,700, and Sullivan's at 3,500. He states that his account was compiled from twenty published (by typographical error, the compositor has put thirty) and five unpublished diaries. He suggests that Sullivan's delay may possibly have been a part of Washington's strategy. T. C. Amory shares this opinion.

Sullivan's fight at Newtown is thus described by H. C. Goodwin in Pioneer History of Cortland Co., etc.: "The contest was one which has but few parallels. The enemy yielded inch by inch, and when finally forced at the point of the bayonet to leave their intrenchments and flee, terror-stricken, to the mountain gorges or almost impassable lagoons, the ground they had occupied was found literally drenched with the blood of the fallen victims." Accounts of varying length are given in other local histories: Delaware County and Border Wars of New York, etc., by Jay Gould (Roxbury, 1856); Centennial History of Erie County, New York, by Crisfield Johnson (Buffalo, 1876); Annals of Binghamton and of the Country connected with it, from he earliest settlement, by J. B. Wilkinson (Binghamton, 1840); History of the Pioneer Settlement of Phelps and Gorham's Purchase, and Morris reserve, etc., by O. Turner (Rochester, 1851); J. M. Parker's Rochester (1884, p. 236); Ketchum's Buffalo (ii. 318); Campbell's Tryon County; Simms's Frontiersmen, etc.

There is a monograph on the campaign by A. T. Norton,—Hist. of Sullivan's Campaign (1879),—and special chapters in Dawson (i. 537), and accounts in the more general works, like Stone's Brant; Ryerson's Loyalists (ii. 108), examining Stone's account; O. W. B. Peabody's Life of Sullivan; Hamilton's Republic of the U. S.; some local traditions in Timothy Dwight's Travels (iv. 204). Gen. J. Watts De Peyster has some essays on the campaign in the N. Y. Mail, Aug. 26, 29, and Sept. 15, 1879.

There are various letters respecting the campaign in the Gansevoort Papers, as copied by Sparks (Sparks MSS., vol. lx.). Cf. the autobiography of Philip van Cortlandt in Mag. of Amer. Hist., ii. 289, and William M. Willett's Narrative of the military actions of Col. Marinus Willett (N. Y., 1831).

[1405] The New Jersey Historical Society has a MS. order-book kept by Lieutenant-Colonel Barber, of the Third New Jersey Regiment, who was also appointed deputy adjutant-general for the Western army. The last entry made is dated Sept. 6, 1779. In Hammersly, and in the roster compiled by General Stryker, Francis Barber is put down as lieutenant-colonel of this regiment. This order-book has been attributed by some to George C. Barber. The library of Cornell University owns one kept by Thomas Gee, quartermaster's sergeant in Col. John Lamb's regiment of artillery, which contains the orders of the day issued at Fort Sullivan from Aug. 27, 1779, to Oct. 2, 1779 also the return march to Easton, the last entry being Oct. 26, 1779. My knowledge of these MS. order-books was derived from Gen. John S. Clark, of Auburn, N. Y. I am indebted to Hon. Steuben Jenkins for details concerning the Barber order-book, and to Professor Moses Coit Tyler, of Cornell University, for a description of the Gee order-book. Dr. F. B. Hough edited the Order-book of Capt. Leonard Bleeker, major of brigade in the early part of the expedition under Gen. James Clinton against the Indians in the Campaign of 1779 (N. Y., 1865). On Clinton's share in the expedition, see W. W. Campbell's Services of James Clinton (N.Y. Hist. Soc., 1839); Chaplain Gano's Biog. Memoirs (1806). For a portrait of Clinton, see Irving's Washington, 4^o ed., v., and Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 112.

[1406] Craft, May 9, 1879, had already furnished a list of journals of the campaign, and had appealed to the public for further information (Penna. Mag. of Hist., iii. pp. 348, 349).

[1407] See note E, at end of chapter.—Ed.

[1408] The journals thus used are Erkuries Beatty's, covering Clinton's movements; Thomas Grant's and George Grant's, covering the march up the east side of Lake Cayuga; and Henry Dearborn's, for the march up the west side of the same lake.

[1409] Boston Gazette and Country Journal, Nov. 1, 1779.

[1410] The expedition is referred to by Gordon, Ramsay, and Marshall, each of these writers giving a brief account of the march and the work accomplished. On the 27th of October, 1779, Congress resolved that "the thanks of Congress be given to his excellency General Washington for directing, and to Colonel Brodhead and the brave officers and soldiers under his command for executing, the important expedition against the Mingo and Munsey Indians, and that part of the Senecas on the Allegheny River, by which the depredations of those savages, assisted by their merciless instigators, subjects of the King of Great Britain, upon the defenceless inhabitants of the Western frontiers have been restrained and prevented."

[1411] A descriptive article entitled "Mohawk Valley in the Revolution", by Harold Frederic, was published in Harper's Magazine (lv. p. 171). Cf. Mag. of Amer. Hist., Oct., 1879. The activity of the Tories and Indians in the Mohawk Valley gave rise from time to time to various rumors, some of which found their way into print. It was stated in 1779 that Fort Stanwix had surrendered to the English. This was repeated in a pamphlet of the day, a mere chronological register of events, published in 1783, and entitled The American and British Chronicle of War and Politics; being an accurate and comprehensive Register of the most memorable occurrences in the last ten years of his Majesty's reign, etc. From May 10, 1773, to July 16, 1783. The entry of Nov. 2, 1779, was, "Col. Butler, with some Indians, surprise and take Fort Stanwix, Mohawk River." In 1780 this rumor was repeated, and found its way into the Remembrancer (x. 347): "New York, Sept. 23.... We are informed that about a fortnight ago Fort Stanwix, after having been five or six weeks closely invested, was taken by 600 British troops commanded by a Lieutenant-Colonel, supposed to be the King's or 8th Regiment: Our faithful friend, Capt. Joseph Brant, with a party of Indians, shared in the glory of the conquest."

Occasionally we meet, in the accounts of the fighting in the Mohawk Valley and vicinity, with the statement that some Indian was present who was commissioned by the Continental Congress. In the Journals of Congress (v. 133) we find that on the 3d of April, 1779, the board of war submitted a report, whereupon it was resolved, "That twelve blank commissions be transmitted to the commissioners of Indian affairs for the Northern Department, and that they or any two of them be empowered to fill them up with the names of faithful chiefs of the Oneidas and Tuscaroras, giving them such rank as said commissioners shall judge they merit." (Cf. Remembrancer, viii. p. 121)

[1412] Stone relied upon the statement of John T. Kirkland (Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iv. p. 69): "In the year 1780, the hostile Indians, British troops, and refugees drove them from their villages", etc.

[1413] Sparks MSS. (Harvard College library,—no. xiii. p. 281), where are various letters of John Butler, Brant, Lt.-Col. Bolton, etc., taken from the headquarters or Carleton Papers, and they include Brant's report on the Minisink affair and Butler's report of the Newtown fight. The letter of Guy Johnson is in Ketchum's Buffalo (i. 337).

[1414] As early as 1774 the minds of the colonists were turned inquiringly towards this question. Joseph Reed wrote on Sept. 25, 1774, to the Earl of Dartmouth, that "the idea of bringing down the Canadians and savages upon the English colonies is so inconsistent, not only with mercy, but justice and humanity of the mother country, that I cannot allow myself to think that your lordship would promote the Quebec Bill, or give it your suffrage, with such intention" (Reed's Reed, i. p. 79). The "full power to levy, arm, muster, command, and employ all persons whatsoever residing within our said province", and to "transport such force to any of our plantations in America", with which Carleton was commissioned, was but a renewal of the authority conferred upon James Murray in 1763 (Parl. Reg., iv., App., "The New Commission of the Governor of Quebec", etc., pp. 8, 26). The same language was used in the commission of Sir Danvers Osborn, Bart., to be captain-general of New York in 1754 (Ibid. p. 48). In the XV. section of the charter granted by Charles II. to the Lords Proprietors of South Carolina, the grantees were authorized to levy, muster, and train "all sorts of men, of what condition, or wheresoever born", and to pursue enemies, "yea, even without the limits of the said province" (Ibid. p. 64). The clause is repeated in the second charter of Charles II. to the Lords Proprietors of Carolina (Ibid. p. 79). Lord Baltimore was authorized by Charles I. with the same general powers to levy and arm, and "to make war and pursue the enemies and robbers aforesaid, as well by sea as by land, yea, even without the limits of the said province, and (by God's assistance) to vanquish and take them." (Cf. The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, etc., Washington, 1877, part ii. p. 1388, "Charter of Carolina, 1663, § 15.")

[1415] Samuel Kirkland was born at Norwich, Conn., Dec. 1, 1744; graduated at Princeton, 1765; became a missionary among the Indians. The hostility of Guy Johnson bore testimony to the influence of the missionary among the natives. Kirkland was afterward a chaplain in the army. In 1789 he received a grant of land two miles square, now the town of Kirkland, N. Y. He died in 1808. His life, by S. K. Lothrop, was published in Sparks's American Biography.

James Deane was born at Groton, Conn., Aug. 20, 1748; graduated at Dartmouth in 1773; and then went as missionary among the Indians. He was employed to pacificate the Northern Indians, and acted as interpreter on many important occasions. He was afterward a judge in Oneida County, N. Y., where he died in 1823. He was much esteemed. Gov. Trumbull said: "The abilities and influence of Mr. Deane to attach the Six Nations to the interest of these colonies is an instance of Divine favor."

[1416] See incidents of this border warfare in James Banks's Hist. Address (Fayetteville, N. C., 1859).

[1417] The rank of this officer is sometimes given as colonel. The expedition is stated by Haywood, in his History of Tennessee, to have been led by Col. Leonard McBury. Capt. Leonard Marbury, who at that time commanded a company under Major Jack, is probably the officer referred to.

[1418] The experience of South Carolina in these border wars is exemplified in Alexander Gregg's History of the old Cheraws: containing an account of the aborigines of the Pedee, the first white settlements, their subsequent progress, civil changes, the struggle of the revolution, and growth of the country afterward; extending from about A. D. 1730 to 1810, with notices of families and sketches of individuals (N. Y., 1867).—ED.

[1419] In a letter from Col. Charles Robertson, trustee of the Watauga Association, to his excellency Richard Caswell, etc., April 27, 1777, it is stated that on the 27th of March last Col. Nathaniel Guess brought letters from the governor of Virginia soliciting the Indians to come in to treat for peace. The Indians, in reply to pressure brought to bear upon them, said "they could not fight against their Father King George", etc. (Ramsey's History of Tennessee, p. 171).

[1420] Calendar of Virginia State Papers, i. 415.

[1421] See Vol. V. p. 280.

[1422] The definitive treaty is in Hansard, xv. (1753-65) p. 1291; Lond. Mag., 1763, p. 149; and the preliminary articles signed at Fontainebleau, Nov. 3, 1762, are in Hansard, xv. p. 1240; Lond. Mag., 1762, p. 657. There are in the archives of the Dept. of Foreign Affairs in Paris several vols. (nos. 444-449) of papers respecting the negotiation between France and England which led to the treaty of 1763. Cf. Report, 1874, on the Canadian archives. Cf. Vol. V. 614.—Ed.

[1423] See Parkman's Montcalm and Wolfe, ii. 383-413; Green's Hist. of the English People (Lond., 1880), iv. 193; Macaulay's "Earl Chatham", Ed. Rev., lxxx. 549, also in his Essays; Olden Time, i. 329. Cf. Vol. V. ch. viii.—Ed.

[1424] "The treaty of cession to Spain was never published, and the terms of it remain a secret to this day" (Stoddard's Louisiana, 1812, p. 72).

[1425] Monette, Discovery and Settlement of the Valley of the Mississippi (New York, 1848), vol. i., has a map showing the territorial possessions before the treaty. For later maps showing the treaty lines, see Vol. V. p. 615.—Ed.

[1426] The Duc de Choiseul, in conducting the negotiations on the part of France, suggested that the English colonies would not fail to shake off their dependence the moment Canada should be ceded (Parkman's Montcalm, ii. 403); and Kalm, the Swedish botanist, who visited America in 1748-49, made a similar prediction in his Travels: "The English government has, therefore, the sufficient reason to consider the French in North America as the best means of keeping the colonies in their due submission" (London, 1772, i. 207). As to the spurious Montcalm letters, see Vol. V. p. 606.—Ed.

[1427] A satirical article on restoring Canada to the French appeared in Gentleman's Mag., 1759, p. 620, which has the flavor of Dr. Franklin's style: "Canada ought to be restored in order that England may have another war; that the French and Indians may keep on scalping the colonists, and thereby stint their growth; for otherwise the children will be as tall as their mother; that, though we ought to keep faith with our allies, it is not necessary with our children. We must teach them, according to Scripture, not to 'put trust in princes.' Let 'em learn to trust in God. If we should not restore Canada, it would look as if our statesmen had courage like our soldiers. What have statesmen to do with courage? Their proper character is wisdom." Franklin's serious and avowed tract is considered in Vol. V. p. 615.—Ed.

[1428] This document is in the London Mag., 1763, p. 541; Amer. Archives, 4th ser., i. 172, and in other places [given in Vol. V. p. 615.—Ed.] Its terms were the subject of constant reference and discussion for the next twenty years.

[1429] "Many reasons may be assigned for this apparent omission. A consideration for the Indians was, we presume, the principal, because it might have given a sensible alarm to that people if they had seen us formally cantoning out their whole country into regular establishments" (Annual Register, 1763, p. 20). The writer of the very able and interesting political articles in this volume was Edmund Burke (Robertson's Burke, p. 18).

[1430] Sparks's Franklin, iv. 303-323. Dr. Franklin made an extended and vigorous reply to this report (Idem, iv. 324-374); and when the matter came up for action in the Privy Council, and his reply was read, the prayer of the petitioners was granted. Lord Hillsborough was so much offended by the decision that he resigned. The Doctor, writing to his son, July 14, 1773, said: "Mr. Todd told me, as a secret, that Lord Hillsborough was much chagrined at being out of place, and could never forgive me for writing that pamphlet against his report about the Ohio" (Works, viii. 75).

[1431] See ante, chap. i.

[1432] Sir William Johnson, the superintendent of Indian affairs, writing to Secretary Conway, June 28, 1766, said: "Our people in general are very ill calculated to maintain friendship with the Indians, they despise in peace those whom they fear to meet in war. This, with the little artifices used in trade, and the total want of that address and seeming kindness practiced with such success by the French, must always hurt the colonists. On the contrary, could they but assume a friendship, and treat them with civility and candor, we should soon possess their hearts, and much more of their country than we shall do in a century by the conduct now practiced" (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 836). The outrageous conduct of the English traders towards the Indians is a constant theme of complaint by Sir William Johnson in his letters to the Lords of Trade (see Idem, vii. 929, 955, 960, 964, 987). He speaks (vii. 965) of the contrast between the French and English traders. The former are gentlemen in character, manners, and dress; the latter, "for the most part, men of no zeal or capacity; men who often sacrifice the credit of the nation to the basest purposes. Can it otherwise happen but that the Indians' prejudices must daily increase, when they are on the one side seduced by men of abilities, influence, and address; and on the other, see such low specimens of British abilities, honor, and honesty? What, then, can be expected but loss of trade, robbery, murder of traders, and frequent general ruptures?" See also Diary of Siege of Detroit, ed. by Hough, preface, xiii., and Dr. Hall's tract on The Dutch and the Iroquois.

[1433] Sir William Johnson, writing Dec. 26, 1764, to the Lords of Trade, said: "Indeed, it is not to be wondered that they should be concerned at our occupying that country, when we consider that the French (be their motive what it will) loaded them with favors, and continue to do so, accompanied with all outward marks of esteem, and an address peculiarly adapted to their manners, which infallibly gains upon all Indians who judge by externals only; and in all their acquaintance with us [the English] upon the frontiers, have never found anything like it; but, on the contrary, harsh treatment, angry words, and, in short, everything which can be thought of to inspire them with a dislike for our manners and jealousy of our views. I have seen so much of these matters, and am so well convinced of the utter aversion our people have for them in general, and of the imprudence with which they constantly express it, that I absolutely despair of ever seeing tranquillity established until I may have proper persons to reside at the posts, whose business it shall be to remove their prejudices, and whose interests it becomes to obtain their esteem and friendship" (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 689).

[1434] Cf. Major Robert Rogers's Concise Account, 1765, pp. 240-243. It was the opinion of Rogers that if the English had used common sagacity in their treatment of Pontiac, the colonies would have been spared the horrors of the Pontiac War.

[1435] The fort at Detroit was a stockade on the west side of the Detroit River, twenty-five feet high, with a bastion at each corner, and a block-house over each gateway, the whole enclosing about a hundred small houses. A few pieces of light artillery were mounted on the bastions. The garrison consisted of eight officers, one hundred and twenty soldiers, and forty-five fur traders, under the command of Major Henry Gladwin, an experienced and gallant officer. Two small armed schooners were anchored in the stream. The white cottages of the Canadian farmers lined both banks of the river. About a mile below the fort, on the western bank, was a village of the Pottawattamies, and on the opposite shore a Wyandot village. Four miles above the fort were the lodges of the Ottawas (Parkman's Pontiac, i. 212-222). Parkman's, Conspiracy of Pontiac is one of the most entertaining monographs in American history; and no writer can treat the subject without acknowledging his indebtedness to the accurate and scholarly investigations of that distinguished historian. The reader of this brief summary of events will find full details in the charming narrative of Parkman. He says of the Bouquet and Haldimand Papers, in the British Museum, that they contain "several hundred letters from officers engaged in the Pontiac War, some official, others personal and familiar." These he availed himself of in his last revision (1870), but he had collected 3,400 MS. pages of unprinted documents for his original edition (1851). All these MS. collections are now in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society.—Ed.

[1436] A biographical notice of Major Gladwin (who became major-general in 1782) by Dr. O'Callaghan is in N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 961. Parkman spells the name "Gladwyn." Detroit was now the chief post of this new Northwestern government. Amherst, in a letter to Egremont, Nov. 30, 1762, had recommended the place as the proper headquarters (Shelburne Papers, vol. 48, Hist. MSS. Com. Report, v. 217).—Ed.

[1437] See plan in Vol. V. p. 532.

[1438] Some years later, an Indian who was present described the scene to Sir William Johnson. A party of Senecas gained admission to the fort by treachery, and murdered all the garrison except the commander, and him they later put to death by roasting over a slow fire (Parkman, ii. 20).

[1439] Capt. Simeon Ecuyer was in the English service during the Revolutionary War, and is mentioned with high terms of praise, as "Major" Ecuyer, in "Journal of the most remarkable Occurrences in Quebec, from Nov. 14, 1775, to May 7, 1776" (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1880, p. 232).

[1440] A biographical sketch (in French) of Col. Bouquet, by C. G. F. Dumas, is prefixed to the Amsterdam edition, 1769, of Bouquet's second expedition, 1764. The same (in English) is prefixed to Robert Clarke's reprint in the Ohio Valley Series, 1868. A different and fuller translation of Dumas's sketch is in Olden Time, i. 203, and is preceded (p. 200) by a sketch by another writer. George H. Fisher, in Penna. Mag., iii. 121-143, gives the life, with an excellent portrait, of Col. Bouquet, and his letters to Anne Willing, a young lady with whom he had tender relations, but whom he did not marry. J. T. Headley, in Harper's Mag., xxiii. 577 (Oct., 1861), has an illustrated article on Col. Bouquet. The Bouquet Papers, 1757-1765, were given by the heirs of Gen. Haldimand, in 1857, to the British Museum. There is a synopsis of them in Brymner's Report on the Canadian Archives, 1873.—Ed.

[1441] Brymner, the Canadian archivist, in examining the papers in the Public Record Office in London, was denied access to the volume of the "America and West Indies" series, which contains the correspondence of Amherst, Jan.-Nov., 1763.—Ed.

[1442] Sir Wm. Johnson (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 962) gives the number of men in Bouquet's command as 600.

[1443] He soon found that even they had the bad habit of losing themselves in the woods. He wrote to Amherst, July 26th: "I cannot send a Highlander out of my sight without running the risk of losing the man, which exposes me to surprise from the skulking villains I have to deal with" (Parkman, ii. 56).

[1444] The reports of Colonel Bouquet to General Amherst, Aug. 5th, 6th, and 11th, give the losses in both actions as 50 killed, 60 wounded, and 5 missing (Gent. Mag., 1763, p. 486; Lond. Mag., 1763, p. 545; Mag. of Western Hist., ii. 650; Annual Register, 1763, p. 31). Parkman (ii. 68) makes the losses "8 officers and 115 men." The officers were included in the above enumeration. Of the losses by the Indians, General Amherst wrote (Gent. Mag., 1763, p. 489): "The number of the savages slain was about 60, and a great many wounded in the pursuit. The principal ringleaders who had the greatest share in fomenting the present troubles were killed." As to the number of Indians engaged, Sir William Johnson (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 962) states on the best authorities of white men who were with the Indians, and of several different Indians, who all agree, that the true number of Indians who attacked Colonel Bouquet at Bushy Run was only ninety-five. This statement seems hardly probable, in view of the number killed and the accounts given by the officers engaged.

[1445] "His Majesty has been graciously pleased to signify to the commander-in-chief his royal approbation of the conduct and bravery of Col. Bouquet and the officers and troops under his command in the actions of the 5th and 6th of August" (General Orders from headquarters in New York, January 5, 1764).

An excellent description of Bouquet's expedition of 1763 and of the battle of Bushy Run is in Annual Register, 1763, pp. 27-32. It was doubtless written by Edmund Burke from authentic information furnished by some of the officers engaged. Another account is in the introduction to Bouquet's second expedition of 1764, in which the writer (Dr. William Smith) uses freely the account in the Annual Register. Cf. T. J. Chapman on the siege of Fort Pitt in Mag. of Western Hist., Feb., 1886.

[1446] See Parkman's Pontiac, i. 305-317; Annual Register, 1763, p. 26; and General Amherst's report in Gent. Mag., 1763, p. 486; Lond. Mag., 1763, p. 543; Mag. of West. Hist., ii. 648. He concludes his detailed "Return of killed and wounded" with "Total, 19 killed and 42 wounded." The name of Captain Dalzell, whom he had previously reported as killed, is not included in the return, and the wounded named number only 39. The Annual Register gives the loss as "only seventy men killed, and about forty wounded"!

[1447] An orderly-book of Bradstreet's campaign, June-Nov., 1764, is in the library of the American Antiquarian Society.

[1448] Bradstreet sent Capt. Thomas Morris on a mission to Pontiac, and an account of Morris's experience and his capture by the Indians is given in his Miscellanies in prose and verse (London, 1791). See Field, Ind. Bibliog., no. 1,095, and Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 854. Morris's original journal, sent to Bradstreet, is in the Public Record Office, London. He extended the copy from which he printed. A letter from Morris to Bradstreet is among the papers of Sir William Johnson in the State Library at Albany (Parkman, ii. 195). The Parkman MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc.) have minutes of the council held by Bradstreet with the Indians at Detroit, Sept. 7, 1764, and the Shelburne Papers (vol. 50) show similar records (Hist. MSS. Com. Rept., v. 218).—Ed.

[1449] Sir William Johnson (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 686), writing to the Lords of Trade, Dec. 26, 1764, and having spoken with much severity of Bradstreet's bad management of his expedition, says: "On the other hand, Col. Bouquet, under all the disadvantages of a tedious and hazardous land march with an army little more than half that of the other, has penetrated into the heart of the country of the Delawares and Shawanese, obtained above two hundred English captives from amongst them, with fourteen hostages for their coming here [Johnson Hall] and entering into a peace before me in due form; and I daily expect their chiefs for that purpose." A touching account of the English captives, the reluctance of some of them to part from their captors and savage life, and the joy of others again to meet their relatives, is in Dr. Smith's Historical Account, pp. 75-80 (ed. 1868), and in Parkman, ii. 231-240. An engraving, after Benj. West, representing the delivery of the English captives at the forks of the Muskingum, is in some of the editions (p. 72) of the Historical Account, described in a following note.

[1450] Cf. a paper on the forks of the Muskingum in the Mag. of West. Hist., Feb., 1885, p. 283.

[1451] Pennsyl. Mag., iii. 134. An obituary notice of him appeared in the Pennsyl. Journal, Oct. 24, 1765. In the Haldimand Coll. (Canadian Archives), p. 21, appears: "June 5, 1765. Bouquet waiting for a vessel to Florida. Nov. 17. Gen. Gage appoints Lieut.-Col. Taylor to act as Brig.-Gen. in room of Brig. Bouquet, deceased." Among army promotions, in Gent. Mag., Jan., 1766, is "Aug. Provost, Esq., Lieut.-Col. of the 60th Reg., in room of H. Bouquet, deceased."

[1452] An Historical Account of the Expedition against the Ohio Indians in the Year 1764, under the command of Henry Bouquet, Esq., Colonel of Foot, and now Brigadier-General, appeared from the press of William Bradford, Philadelphia, in 1765 (Wallace's William Bradford, p. 85). The authorship has been ascribed by Rich, Allibone, and others to Thomas Hutchins, later geographer of the United States; but it is now known that the writer was Dr. William Smith, Provost of the College of Philadelphia. It is a quarto, pp. xiii+71, with three maps by Thomas Hutchins, Asst. Engineer, viz.: (1) "Map [of the route of Col. Bouquet's expedition of 1763, and] of the country on the Ohio and Muskingham Rivers; also, on the same sheet, separated by a line, a map of the country traversed in his expedition of 1764;" (2) plan of the Battle of Bushy Run; and (3) the order of march. The work has been several times reprinted: (I.) In London, 1766, 4^o, pp. xiii+71, with the plates named reëngraved, and two additional plates inserted, after designs by Benj. West, viz.: (4) conference of Indians with Col. Bouquet, engraved by Gregnion; and (5) Indians delivering up the English captives to Col. Bouquet, engraved by Canot (II.) At Amsterdam, 1769, 8^o, pp. xvi+147+ix, a French translation, with the same plates very neatly reëngraved, the two maps on the first plate being engraved separately, making in all six plates. (III.) At Dublin, 1769, by John Millikin, pp. xx+99, no plates. (IV.) In Olden Time, i. 203-221, 241-261, no plates. (V.) In the Ohio Valley Series, Cincinnati, 1868, with preface by Francis Parkman, and photo-lithographic copies of the plates in the London edition. The last two editions have translations (not the same, however) of C. G. F. Dumas's biographical sketch of Col. Bouquet, which is prefixed to the Amsterdam edition. The first two maps are prefixed to Hildreth's Western Pioneer, and extracts from the work are given (pp. 46-64). The map of the expedition of 1763 is in Parkman's Pontiac (ii. 199). (Cf. Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, nos. 1,065, etc.)

The Historical Account has an introduction giving a summary of Col. Bouquet's expedition of 1763, and supplementary matter, viz., Reflections on the War with the Savages in North America; and five appendixes: (I.) Construction of Forts in America; (II.) Account of the French Forts ceded to Great Britain in Louisiana; (III.) Route from Philadelphia to Fort Pitt; (IV.) Indian Towns on and near the Ohio River; (V.) Names of Indian tribes in North America. The supplementary matter, and doubtless some of the narrative, were furnished by Col. Bouquet himself, as Dr. Smith, in writing to Sir William Johnson, said: "I drew up [the work] from some papers he favored me with." Cf. on the expedition of 1764, Col. Whittlesey's Cleveland, p. 105; Darlington's ed. of Col. James Smith's Remarkable Occurrences, pp. 107, 177; Hildreth's Pioneer Hist. of Ohio Valley, p. 46; Western Reserve Hist. Soc. tracts, nos. 13, 14, 25.

[1453] M. D'Abbadie died in February, 1765. Pittman, p. 16.

[1454] The Pontiac War is treated in Doddridge's Notes (ed. 1876), p. 220; Kercheval (taken largely from Doddridge), p. 258; Monette, i. 326; Stone's Sir William Johnson, ii. 191; Perkins's Western Annals (ed. 1851), p. 66; Davidson and Struve's Illinois, p. 137; Silas Farmer's Detroit and Michigan (1884); Sheldon's Michigan; Blanchard's North West, 119, with a map; Schweinitz's Zeisberger, p. 274; and in an illustrated article by J. T. Headley, Harper's Mag., xxii. 437. Munsell published at Albany in 1860, as edited by F. B. Hough, and no. 4 of Munsell's "Historical Series", a Diary of the siege of Detroit in the war with Pontiac. Also a narrative of the principal events of the siege, by Major R. Rogers; a plan for conducting Indian affairs, by Col. Bradstreet; and other authentick documents, never before printed. Rogers MS. diary is noted in the Menzies Catal., no. 1,715. There was a Life of Pontiac published in N. Y. in 1860. See also Poole's Index for reviews of Parkman's admirable work.—Ed.

[1455] Gage's despatch, May 27, 1764 (Haldimand Coll., p. 18). Major Loftus arrived at New Orleans from Mobile with the 22d regiment, Feb. 12, 1764. The French governor "gave him a very bad account of the disposition of the Indians towards us [the English], and assured him, unless he carried some presents to distribute amongst them, that he would not be able to get up the river" (Gage to Earl Halifax, N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 619). The attack on the command of Major Loftus was made on the 20th of March, 1764, by the Tunicas Indians, a few miles above the mouth of the Red River: first from the west bank, and later from the east bank, of the Mississippi. The spot is indicated on Lieut. Ross's Map of the Mississippi, 1765 (pub. 1775), by the legend "Where the 22d regiment was drove back by the Tunicas, 1764;" and on Andrew Ellicott's Map of the Mississippi, 1814 (Journal, p. 25), by "Loftus's Heights", on the east bank. Pittman (p. 35) gives some particulars of the attack, and says, "They killed five men and wounded four."

[1456] Capt. Pittman was the author of The Present State of the European Settlements on the Mississippi, with a Geographical Description of that River; illustrated by [eight] plans and draughts (London, 1770, 4to). It is the earliest English account of those settlements, and, as an authority in early Western history, is of the highest importance. He was a military engineer, and for five years was employed in surveying the Mississippi River and exploring the Western country. The excellent plans which accompany the work, artistically engraved on copper, add greatly to its value. They are: (1) Plan of New Orleans; (2) Plan of Mobile; (3) Draught of River Ibbeville to Lake Ponchartrain; (4) Plan of Fort Rosalia; (5) Plan of Cascaskies [Kaskaskia]; (6, 7, 8) Draught of the Mississippi River from the Balisle to Fort Chartres (in three sheets). Cf. Vol. V. pp. 47, 71.—Ed.

[1457] Sir William Johnson, hearing of the failure of the English troops to reach the Illinois country by way of the Mississippi, attributed the result to a conspiracy existing between eighteen tribes of Indians to prevent it, which he charged to the intrigue of the French residing in New Orleans and the Illinois (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 776).

[1458] Fraser, "being too zealous", as Sir William Johnson wrote in July, 1765, "set out before Mr. Croghan had effected the necessary points with the Indians;" and "with two or three attendants" (Stone's Life of Johnson, ii. 247) floated down the Ohio, and arrived at Fort Chartres without casualty. Here he was courteously received by the French commander; but he and his attendants were ill treated by drunken Indians, and their lives were saved by the interposition of Pontiac in their behalf. The story of Fraser's troubles came to Sir William in another form, and he wrote: "From late accounts from Detroit there is reason to think that Fraser has been put to death, together with those that accompanied him, by Pontiac's party" (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 746). Fraser, finding the Illinois country at that time an unsafe place of residence, took a passage in disguise down the Mississippi to New Orleans, and thence to Mobile.

[1459] N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 746, 765. The Shawanese, in their treaty of July 7, stipulated to send ten deputies (Ibid. 752); and the Delawares, in their treaty of May 8, agreed "to send with Mr. Croghan proper persons to accompany and assist him" (Ibid. 739).

[1460] Then called Post Vincent, and later simply "The Post" and "O'post." It was often erroneously written "St. Vincent."

[1461] The savages apologized, saying they supposed the Indians of the party were Cherokees.

[1462] Now Lafayette, Indiana.

[1463] George Croghan's journals (for there are several) of his journey to the Illinois country in 1765 are important documents in the history of the West. "This journal", says Parkman (ii. 296), "has been twice published,—in the appendix to Butler's History of Kentucky, and in the Pioneer History of Dr. S. P. Hildreth",—implying that they were publications of the same journal. Dr. Hildreth, in a note appended to his version (p. 85), makes a statement from which it is evident that he supposed they were the same journal: "The above journal was copied from an original MS. among Col. [George] Morgan's papers, and not copied from Butler's History of Kentucky, which had not been seen by the writer at that time." It is an important fact that these journals are not the same, no paragraph in one being the same as a paragraph in the other. Their subject matter is different, and yet they are in no instance contradictory. The one printed by Dr. Hildreth may be regarded as an official report, and the one printed by Butler as a descriptive account. The former gives the details of the official business which he was sent to transact; the latter is such a journal as any traveller would keep, giving from day to day the incidents of the journey, describing the scenery and topography of the country, the fertility of the soil, the game, and omitting wholly to speak of public business, or what was done at councils with the Indians. He describes his being wounded and captured by the Indians, near the Wabash, as a personal misfortune, but makes no mention of conferences with the Indians at Ouatanon, or of his meeting Pontiac and making peace with him. Butler (p. 365, ed. 1834; p. 459, ed. 1836) states that "the following journal, so curious and little known, is extracted from the Monthly American Journal of Geology and Natural Science, December, 1831, by G. W. Featherstonhaugh, Esq., Philadelphia, and purports to be from the original, in possession of the editor." This text was reprinted at Burlington, New Jersey, 1875, in a tract of 38 pages (Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 285). A third version of Croghan's journal is in the letters of Sir William Johnson to the Lords of Trade (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 779-788). With some variations it is the same as that printed by Dr. Hildreth. Each contains passages and paragraphs which are not in the other. In the Johnson text, words and passages are omitted, as illegible, which are given in the Pioneer History. Sir William, writing Nov. 16, 1765, says: "A few days ago [Oct. 21] Mr. Croghan arrived here, and delivered me his journal and transactions with the Indians, from which I have selected the principal parts, which I now inclose to your lordships. The whole of his journal is long and not yet collected; because after he was made prisoner and lost his baggage, etc., he was necessitated to write it on scraps of paper procured with difficulty at Post Vincent [Vincennes], and that in a disguised character, to prevent its being understood by the French, in case through any disaster he might again be plundered" (Ibid. 775). Sir William, from May 8 to Sept. 28, 1765, frequently reports that he has heard from Croghan, and mentions incidents and details which are not contained in either of the three versions named (Ibid. 746, 749, 765). Being at Post Ouatanon on the 12th of July, Croghan said: "I wrote to Gen. Gage and Sir William Johnson, to Col. Campbell at Detroit, Major Murray at Fort Pitt, and Major Farmar at Mobile, or on his way up the Mississippi, and acquainted them with everything that had happened since my departure from Fort Pitt" (Hildreth's Pioneer History, p. 71; N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 781). In the Butler journal, writing from the same place, July 15, he said: "From this post the Indians permitted me to write to the commander at Fort Chartres [St. Ange]; but would not suffer me to write to anybody else (this, I apprehend, was a precaution of the French, lest their villainy should be perceived too soon), although the Indians had given me permission to write to Sir William Johnson and to Fort Pitt on our march, before we arrived at this place." In the summary of his report to Sir William, he said: "In the situation I was in at Ouatanon, with great numbers of Indians about me, and no necessaries, such as paper and ink, I had it not in my power to take down all the speeches made by the Indian nations, nor what I said to them, in so particular a manner as I could wish." It is evident that Croghan wrote many accounts of his journey, and only three of them, as now appears, are accessible. A biographical sketch of George Croghan, by Dr. O'Callaghan, is in N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 982, 983. For earlier traces of Croghan see Vol. V. 10, 596, 610.—Ed.

[1464] N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 783; Hildreth's Pioneer History, p. 75. Pontiac kept his promise, visited Sir William Johnson in the spring, concluded a peace, and departed laden with presents. He returned to his village on the Maumee, and little is known of him for the next three years. He then reappeared in the Illinois country, and visited his old friend M. St. Ange, who was in command of the post of St. Louis, then under Spanish rule. Like other Indians, Pontiac indulged at times in the excessive use of intoxicating liquors. Against the advice of his friend, St. Ange, he attended an Indian drinking carousal, at which he was waylaid and brained with a hatchet by a Kaskaskia Indian, who had been paid a barrel of rum by an English trader, named Williamson, to commit the deed. St. Ange claimed the body, and buried it with the honors of war, in an unknown grave near the fort of St. Louis. J. N. Nicollet, in his sketch of St. Louis (p. 82), says: "This murder, which roused the vengeance of all the Indian tribes friendly to Pontiac, brought about the successive wars and almost total extermination of the Illinois nation. Pontiac was a remarkably well-looking man, nice in his person, and full of taste in his dress and in the arrangement of his exterior ornaments. His complexion is said to have approached that of the whites. His origin is still uncertain, for some have supposed him to belong to the Ottawas, others to the Miamis, etc.; but Col. P. Chouteau, senior, who knew him well, is of the opinion that he was a Nipissing." (Reprinted in Olden Time, i. 322.)

[1465] N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 808.

[1466] The account of St. Ange's "Surrender of Fort Chartres to M. Stirling on the 10th of Oct., 1765", with a detailed description of the fort, from the French archives, is in N. Y. Col. Doc., x. 1161-1165. See also Stone's Life of Sir Wm. Johnson, ii. 252. [There are documents about Fort Chartres referred to in the Hist. MSS. Com. Report, v. 216. Cf. Hist. Mag., viii. 257, and H. R. Stiles's Affairs at Fort Chartres, 1768-1781 (Albany, 1864), being letters of an English officer at the close of the war.—Ed.]

[1467] Nicollet (p. 81) states that "Capt. Stirling, at the head of a company of Scots, arrived unexpectedly in the summer of 1765;" and Parkman (ii. 298), that "Capt. Stirling arrived at Fort Chartres just as the snows of early winter began to whiten the naked forests." The articles of surrender are conclusive as to the fact that the English troops arrived and took possession of the Illinois country, October 10. Capt. Stirling was relieved by Major Robert Farmar, of the 34th regiment, about the time of which Parkman speaks. Sir William, writing March 22, 1766, says: "Just now I have heard that Major Farmar, who proceeded by the Mississippi, arrived there [the Illinois] the 4th of December, and relieved Capt. Stirling" (N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 816; Stone's Johnson, ii. 251). Monette (i. 411) states that "Capt. Stirling died in December; that St. Ange returned to Fort Chartres, and not long afterward Major Frazer, from Fort Pitt, arrived as commandant." These errors have been repeated scores of times, and the last repetition I have seen is in F. L. Billon's Annals of St. Louis in early Days, 1886, p. 26. Capt. Stirling lived until 1808: served in the Revolutionary War, became colonel in 1779, and later brigadier, major-general, lieut.-general, general, and was created a baronet. For a biographical sketch of him, by Dr. O'Callaghan, see N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 786; and for one of Major Farmar, Ibid. 775. F. S. Drake (Biog. Dict.) records Capt. Stirling's extraordinary feat of marching his company of Highlanders overland 3,000 miles, from Fort Chartres to Philadelphia, without losing a man. The facts were that Capt. Stirling floated his company in boats down the Mississippi to New Orleans; thence they sailed to Pensacola, and later to New York, where they arrived June 15, 1766. Gen. Gage, in a letter of that date, wrote to Gov. Penn announcing their arrival, stating that they would march on the 17th for Philadelphia, and asking that quarters be assigned them (Penna. Col. Rec., ix. 318). No officer of the name of Frazer was ever in command at Fort Chartres. Fort Chartres, built by the French in 1720, was in its time the strongest fortress in America. Its ruins are on the left bank of the Mississippi, now a mile from the river, in Randolph County, Ill., 50 miles south of St. Louis, and 16 miles northeast of Kaskaskia. It was abandoned in 1772, in consequence of a portion of it being undermined by a Mississippi flood. See Edw. G. Mason's Old Fort Chartres, in Fergus's Historical Series, no. 12; Pittman, p. 45; Reynolds, My own Time, p. 26, ed. 1879; also his Pioneer History, p. 46, ed. 1887, with plan, from Beck's Gazetteer of Illinois and Missouri. For a plan of the fort, see Vol. V. p.54; and Mr. Davis's collation of authorities regarding its position, p. 55.—Ed.

[1468] N. Y. Col. Doc., vii. 775.

[1469] The Six Nations claimed by conquest the supremacy of all the tribes west of the Alleghanies and as far south as the Cherokees, with whom the Northern tribes were in perpetual warfare. See Monette, i. 323; and Huske's map in Vol. V. p. 84.—Ed.

[1470] A fac-simile of this map is in N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 31; and of the map as the treaty was finally made, Ibid. 136. See ante, p. 610.—Ed.

[1471] Ibid. ii. 2.

[1472] Haldimand Col., p. 103.

[1473] Stone's Life of Johnson, ii. 306. "I was much concerned", Sir William wrote, "by reason of the great consumption of provisions and the heavy expenses attending the maintenance of those Indians, each of whom consume daily more than two ordinary men amongst us, and would be extremely dissatisfied if stinted when convened for business" (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 105).

[1474] Sir William's full report of the council at Fort Stanwix, with the treaty, which he transmitted to Lord Hillsborough, is in N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 111-137. In the appendix to Mann Butler's History of Kentucky, 1834, p. 378-394, is an abstract of the proceedings of the council, with the treaty, for which the author expresses his obligations to Hon. Richard M. Johnson. The treaty and map are also in N. Y. Doc. History, i. 587.

[1475] In this interval between 1765 and 1774 there was a revival of the purpose of settlements in the country watered by the Ohio and its tributaries. The breaking up by the war of the earlier enterprise of the Ohio Company (see Vol. V., ante; Sparks in his Washington, ii. 483, says its papers were entrusted to him fifty years ago by Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia) had led to a plan to buy out the French settlers in Illinois (Sparks's Franklin, vii. 356; Bigelow's Franklin, i. 537, 547; ii. 112); and this being abandoned, the earlier project had been merged in the scheme known at first as Walpole's Grant, and subsequently as the Colony of Vandalia, which had derived some impetus immediately after the conclusion of peace in 1763 by the publication in London of The Advantages of a Settlement upon the Ohio (now rare; copies in Harvard College library; in Carter-Brown Catal., iii. 1363; Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 7), and in Edinburgh of The Expediency of securing our American Colonies by settling the Country adjoining the Mississippi River and the Country upon the Ohio Considered (Harvard College library, 6373. 33). The scheme had the countenance of Lord Shelburne, and the Shelburne MSS., as calendared in the Hist. MSS. Com. Report, v. p. 218 (vol. 50), show various papers appertaining. Professor H. B. Adams, in the Maryland Fund Publications, no. xi. p. 27, has marked the growth of the perception of the importance of these lands.

The grant was not secured till 1770, nor ratified till 1772 (account in Sparks's Franklin, iv. 233, and Washington, ii. 483). Franklin had interested himself in securing the grant against the opposition of Hillsborough. See Franklin's letters in Works, iv. 233; the adverse report of the Lords of Trade (p. 303), and Franklin's reply to it (p. 324). These last papers are also included in Biog. lit. and polit. Anecdotes of several of the most Eminent persons of the present Age (London, 1797), vol. ii. Provision was made for securing out of this grant the lands promised to the Virginia soldiers, in which Washington was so much interested. The coming on of the Revolution jeopardized the interests of the grantees, and in 1774 they petitioned the king that the establishment of a government for Vandalia be no longer delayed. Walpole, in May, 1775, was anxious at the turn of affairs (Hist. Mag., i. 86), and in 1776 the plan was abandoned. A memorial of Franklin and Samuel Wharton, dated at Passy, Feb. 26, 1780, tracing the history of these lands, is in the Sparks MSS., no. xvii.

On the early settlers of Ohio at this time, see S. P. Hildreth's Biog. and Hist. Memoirs of the Early Pioneer Settlers of Ohio (Cinn., 1852); James W. Taylor's Hist. of Ohio, 1650-1787 (Sandusky, 1854); and a paper by Isaac Smucker on the first pioneers, in Mag. of Amer. Hist., Aug., 1885, p. 326. The position of the Delawares in this region during the war is discussed by S. D. Peet in the American Antiquarian, ii. 132.

The Filson Club of Louisville has published (1886) Thomas Speed's Wilderness road, a description of the route of travel by which the pioneers and early settlers first came to Kentucky, their previous publication having been Reuben T. Durrett's Life and Writings of John Filson, the first historian of Kentucky (1884), which gives in fac-simile the earliest special map of Kentucky, after a copy in Harvard College library,—most copies of the book being without it,—for while the Discovery, Settlement, and Present State of Kentucke was printed in 1784, at Wilmington, Del., the map was printed in Philadelphia, and was an improvement upon the general maps of Charlevoix, Evans, Hutchins, Pownall, and others. Filson's book was issued in French, at Paris, in 1785, and reprinted in English in Imlay's Topog. Description of North America (London, 1793 and 1797), in conjunction with Imlay; again by Campbell in New York, in 1793. Filson first presented to the world the story of the adventures of Daniel Boone in the appendix of his book, and from that it has been copied and assigned to Boone himself, in the Amer. Museum, Philadelphia, Oct. 1787, and in Samuel L. Metcalfe's Collection of some of the most interesting narratives of Indian Warfare in the West (Lexington, Ky., 1821,—Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 818). The life of Boone embodies much of the history of the pioneer days of Kentucky. His subsequent biographers, J. M. Peck (in Sparks's Amer. Biog.), E. S. Ellis, G. C. Hill, H. T. Tuckerman (in his Biog. Essays), C. W. Webber (in Hist. and Rev. Incidents, Phil., 1861), Lossing (in Harper's Mag., xix.), and others, have depended upon Filson. E. C. Coleman has told the story as it is centred about Simon Kenton (Ibid. xxviii.), and J. H. Perkins has given it more general bearings in his "Pioneers of Kentucky", in No. Amer. Rev., Jan., 1846, included in his Memoir and Writings, ii. 243. Cf. Marshall Smith's Legends of the War of Independence and of the Earlier settlements in the West (Louisville, 1855), and the old fort at Lexington, Ky., in Mag. Amer. Hist., Aug., 1887, p. 123.

What is now Tennessee was known after 1769 as the Settlements of the Watauga Association, and so continued till 1777, when, during the rest of the Revolutionary War, it was a part of North Carolina (J. E. M. Ramsey's Annals of Tennessee, Charleston, 1853; Philad., 1853, 1860; Sabin, xvi. no. 67, 729).

There are documents on the Illinois country during this quiet interval among the Shelburne Papers, as noted in the Hist. MSS. Com. Report, v. pp. 216, 218 (vols. 48 and 50). Cf. John Reynolds, Pioneer Hist. of Illinois (1852); Breese's Early Hist. of Illinois, and the other later histories (see Vol. V., ante, p. 198). Cf. Arthur Young's Observations on the present State of the waste lands of Great Britain, published on occasion of the establishment of a new Colony on the Ohio (London, 1773).

Several journals of voyages and explorations along the Ohio and its tributary streams, which were made during this period, are preserved to us, such as that of Capt. Harry Gordon, from Fort Pitt to the Illinois in 1766, which is printed in Pownall's Topog. Description (London, 1776), and of which the original or early copy seems to be noted in the English Hist. MSS. Com. Report, v. p. 216; that of Washington, who visited the Ohio region in 1770 to select lands for the soldiers of the late wars, and which is printed in Sparks's Washington (vol. ii. 516, beside letters in Ibid. 387, etc. Cf. Irving's Washington, i. 330, and some letters in Read's George Read, p. 124); and those of Matthew Phelps, who was twice in this Western country between 1773 and 1780, and whose account is given in the Memoirs and adventures, particularly in two voyages from Connecticut to the river Mississippi, 1773-80. Compiled from the original journal and minutes kept by Mr. Phelps. By Anthony Haswell (Bennington, Vt., 1802).

The diary of Rufus Putnam, who explored the lower regions of the Mississippi Valley between Dec. 10, 1772, and Aug. 13, 1773, is preserved in the library of Marietta College. (Cf. Mag. Amer. Hist., vii. 230.)—Ed.

[1476] Connolly was arrested as a Tory in November, 1775, and held as a prisoner until exchanged in the winter of 1780-81. He then planned a scheme with Tories and Indians to capture Fort Pitt. See Olden Time, i. 520; ii. 93, 105, 348; Craig's Pittsburg, 112, 124; Perkins's West. Annals, 140, 148; Jacob's Cresap, 75-91; Am. Archives, 4th ser., i. 774.

[1477] Botta's Am. War, i. 250; Doddridge's Notes, (ed. 1876), 238; Olden Time, ii. 43.

[1478] Concerning this controversy, see Craig's Pittsburg, 111-128. The right of Pennsylvania to land beyond the Alleghanies is examined in a paper (1772) entitled "Thoughts on the situation of the inhabitants on the frontier", by James Tilghman, printed in the Penna. Mag. of Hist., x. 316. Cf. also Daniel Agnew's History of the Region of Pennsylvania north of the Ohio and west of the Allegheny River, of the Indian purchases, and of the running of the southern, northern, and western State boundaries; also, an account of the division of the territory for public purposes, and of the lands, laws, titles, settlements, controversies, and litigation within this region (Philadelphia, 1887).—Ed.

[1479] No Indian tribes had their homes in Kentucky. The territory was the common hunting and fighting ground of the Ohio Indians on the north and the Cherokees and Chickasaws on the south. See Butler's Kentucky, p. 8.

[1480] Brantz Meyer's Logan and Cresap, 1867, p. 149. Clark's letter is also printed in The Hesperian (Columbus, Ohio), 1839, ii. 309; Jacob's Life of Cresap, pp. 154-158, and portions of it in Perkins's Western Annals, 143-146.

[1481] Capt. Cresap was then thirty-two years of age, was a trader, and had had no experience in a former war. His father, however,—Col. Thomas Cresap,—was a noted Indian fighter. Clark and his party evidently supposed it was the father, and not the son, they were sending for. The Cresaps were a Maryland family, and the party who wanted a leader were Virginians.

[1482] A few days before, a canoe from Pittsburg, coming down the river, was fired on by Indians, near Baker's Bottom, two white men killed and one wounded. Baker's family had been warned, and were preparing to leave for one of the forts. Baker kept tavern, sold rum, and the Indians across the river were his habitual customers. Fearing an attack, he called in his neighbors. Twenty-one of them responded, but kept out of sight. A party of Indians appeared, and all with the exception of Logan's brother became very drunk. Logan's brother was drunk enough to be insolent, and he attempted to strike one of the white men. As he was leaving the house with a coat and hat which he had stolen, the white man whom he had abused shot him. The neighbors rushed from their concealment and killed the whole Indian party, except a half-breed child whose father was Gen. John Gibson. The Indians on the opposite shore, hearing the firing, came over in canoes. They were also fired on, and twelve of them were killed. (See the statements of John Sappington and others in Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, App. iv., 1800, and later editions; and Withers's Border Warfare, p. 113.)

[1483] This comment Jefferson cancelled in his edition of 1800.

[1484] "I appeal to any white man to say if ever he entered Logan's cabin hungry and he gave him not meat; if ever he came cold and naked and he clothed him not.... Col. Cresap, the last spring, in cold blood and unprovoked, murdered all the relations of Logan, not sparing even my women and children. There runs not a drop of my blood in the veins of any living creature", etc.

Col. Thomas Cresap, well known in the West as an Indian fighter, was the father of Capt. Michael Cresap, and it is not strange that the rank of the father should have been given to the son. Public attention was not directed to Logan's speech, or the comments of Jefferson on the character of Capt. Cresap, until 1797, when Luther Martin, an ardent Federalist and the Attorney-General of Maryland (who had married a daughter of Capt. Cresap), addressed a public letter to an elocutionist, objecting to his reciting "Logan's Speech", on the ground that it was a slander on a noble man and patriot. The speech itself, he stated, was probably never made by Logan; and the letter had sneering allusions to the claim that Jefferson was a philosopher. Martin's letter is in Olden Time, ii. 51. Jefferson's letter to Gov. Henry of Maryland, of Dec. 31, 1797 (Writings, viii. 309), shows that he attributed Martin's attack to political motives, and that his feelings were greatly disturbed. He immediately set about collecting testimony (1) to prove the genuineness of Logan's speech, and (2) to justify the charges he had made against Cresap. On the first point, it was easy for him to show that he had not invented the speech; that it was common talk in Dunmore's camp; that he took it, as he printed it, from the lips of some person in Williamsburg in 1774, and that it was printed at the time in the Virginia Gazette. It appears that the speech was printed in the Gazette at Williamsburg, Feb. 4, 1775, and that twelve days later the speech, with important variations, was sent by Madison to his friend William Bradford, and was printed in a New York newspaper. Both versions are in Amer. Archives, 4th series, i. 1020. (See also Rives's Madison, i. 63, and Mayer's Logan and Cresap, p. 177.) The fact that the speech as printed was actually delivered was more difficult to prove, as it depended wholly on the statement of Gen. John Gibson, the interpreter. It will never be known what part of it was Logan's and how much of it was Gibson's. Jefferson was not successful in justifying the charges he had made against Cresap. Such of the collected evidence as answered his purpose he printed in Appendix iv. in the edition of his Notes of 1800 (Philadelphia). Some copies of the appendix were printed separately, and it was first mentioned on the title-page in the edition printed at Trenton, 1803. (See Writings, viii. 457-476.) Such of the testimony as did not answer his purpose he suppressed. One of these suppressed statements is the letter of George Rogers Clark to Dr. Samuel Brown, already quoted. It was found among his papers purchased by the United States in 1848, and is now in the State Department at Washington. Brantz Mayer vindicated Cresap in a paper read before the Maryland Historical Society in 1851, on Logan the Indian and Cresap the Pioneer, and more fully in Tah-Gah-Jute, or Logan and Cresap (Albany, 1867); Thomson, Bibliog. of Ohio, nos. 805, 806. Dr. Joseph Doddridge, in his Notes, 1824 (reprinted 1876, and used by Kercheval, Winchester, Va., 1833), made severe strictures on Cresap, but did not charge him with killing Logan's family. An extract from Doddridge, with other matter, called Logan, Chief of the Cayuga Nation, was published in Cincinnati by Wm. Dodge in 1868. Doddridge's attack on Capt. Cresap caused the Rev. John J. Jacob, who in youth had been Cresap's clerk, and had accompanied him in his Western expeditions, to write his Life (Cumberland, Md., 1826; reprinted, with notes and appendix, for Wm. Dodge, Cincinnati, 1866; Field's Ind. Bibliog., nos. 769, 770; Thomson, Bibliog. of Ohio, nos. 640-1). With slight claim to literary merit, and much inaccuracy as to dates, it contains some important documents, and is an earnest vindication of Cresap's character. Charges of baseness and cruelty against Cresap were older than any publication of Logan's speech. The early accounts which came to Sir William Johnson charged the origin of the war upon him. Writing June 20, 1774, Sir William says: "I received the very disagreeable and unexpected intelligence that a certain Mr. Cressop [sic] had trepanned and murdered forty Indians on the Ohio, ... and that the unworthy author of this wanton act is fled.... Since the news of the murders committed by Cressop and his banditti, the Six Nations have sent me two messages", etc., and much more of the same character (N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 459, 460, 461, 463, 471, 477; a biographical sketch of Cresap by Dr. O'Callaghan is on p. 459). The subject is treated in Olden Time, ii. 44, 49-67; Potter's Amer. Monthly, xi. 187; Old and New, x. 436; New Eclectic, 169; Annual Report, 1879, of the Sec. of State, Ohio, Columbus, 1880; Stone's Sir William Johnson, ii. 370; Dillon's Indiana (1859), p. 97; Atwater's Ohio, p. 116; Monette, i. 384; Jacob's Cresap (1866), 92-125; Amer. Jour. Science, xxxi. 11; Withers's Border Warfare, p. 118; Amer. Pioneer, i. 7-24, 64, 188, 331. The Amer. Pioneer, 1842-43, was the organ of the "Logan Historical Society", the object of the society being to erect a monument to Logan, on which "his speech as given by Thomas Jefferson shall be fully engraved in gilt letters." The title is a full-page woodcut, representing Logan and Gen. Gibson sitting on a log, the former making his "speech" and the latter taking it down.

Capt. Cresap, in June, 1775, enlisted a company of one hundred and thirty riflemen in Maryland, twenty-two of whom were his old companions-in-arms from the country west of the Alleghanies, and marched them to Boston in twenty-two days. Here his health gave way, and he was compelled to return. He reached New York, and there died, Oct. 18, 1775, at the age of thirty-three. His gravestone is in Trinity churchyard, New York city, opposite the door of the north transept. An accurate woodcut of his gravestone is in Mayer's Logan and Cresap, p. 144, and in Harper's Mag., Nov., 1876, p. 808. A view of his house is in Harper's Mag., xiv. 599.

[1485] See Withers's Border Warfare; Monette, i. 374; Dillon's Indiana, 93; Amer. Archives, 4th series, i. 722.

[1486] Accounts of Cornstalk by W. H. Foote are in the Southern Literary Messenger, xvi. 533, and by M. M. Jones in Potter's Amer. Monthly, v. 583. See Withers, pp. 129, 136, 156. Cornstalk's tragical death is described in Doddridge, p. 239, and Kercheval, p. 267; also in J. P. Hale's Trans-Allegheny Pioneers, p. 328.

[1487] See Amer. Archives, 4th series, i. 1016; Olden Time, ii. 33; Monette, i. 376-380; Perkins's Annals, p. 149; Amer. Pioneers, i. 381, by L. C. Draper; Virginia Hist. Reg., i. 30; v. 181; narrative of Capt. John Stuart in Mag. of Amer. Hist., i. 668, in Virginia Hist. Coll., vol. i., and separately as Memoirs of Indian Wars (Richmond, 1833); John P. Hale's Trans-Allegheny Pioneers (Cincinnati, 1886), p. 174, and a paper by S. E. Lane in Mass. Mag., Nov., 1885, p. 277. What purports to be a contemporary account in J. L. Peyton's Adventures of my Grandfather (London, 1867), p. 142, is not without suspicion.—Ed.

[1488] For particulars concerning the Dunmore War, see Amer. Archives, 4th ser., i. 345, 435, 468, 506, 774, 1013-1020; ii. 170, 301; N. Y. Col. Doc., viii. 459, 461; St. Clair Papers, i. 296, etc.; C. W. Butterfield's Washington-Crawford letters (Cinn., 1877), pp. 47, 86; Morgan's autobiographic letter in Hist. Mag., xix. 379; De Haas's West. Virginia, 142; Doddridge, pp. 229-239; Kercheval, p. 148; Withers, 104-138; Perkins's Annals, pp. 140-151; Hildreth's Pioneer History, pp. 86-94; Monette, i. pp. 368-385; Atwater's Ohio, pp. 110-119; Walker's Athens Co., Ohio, p. 8; Dillon's Indiana, p. 91; and Schweinitz's Zeisberger, p. 399. Col. Charles Whittlesey has treated the subject in his Discourse relating to the expedition of Dunmore (Cleveland, 1842); in the Olden Time, ii. 8, 37; and in his Fugitive Essays (Hudson, Ohio, 1852).—Ed.

[1489] For references to the proceedings in Parliament, see ante, chapter i., notes.

[1490] Declaration of Rights, Oct. 14, 1774 (Jour. of Old Cong., i. 22). In similar terms it was complained of in the Articles of Association, Oct. 20, 1774 (Ibid. 23), and again, without naming the act, in the Declaration of Independence, as follows: "For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies" (Ibid. 395).

[1491] "The Quebec act was one of the multiplied causes of our opposition, and finally of the Revolution." (Madison's report, January 17, 1782; Thomson Papers, N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1878, p. 134: Secret Journals of Cong., iii. 155, 192.)

[1492] Butler's Kentucky, pp. 26, 27. Just before this, in May, 1775, the few settlers of the Kentucky towns had met and organized for defence, and had called their country Transylvania. For Boone's defence of his fort in Aug., 1778, with references, see Dawson's Battles of the U. S., i. 445.—Ed.

[1493] Butler, p. 35; Perkins's Annals, p. 171.

[1494] Butler, p. 40; Dillon's Indiana, 115-118.

[1495] [Dawson gives (Battles of the U. S., i. 221) an account, with references, of the attack on Fort Logan in May, 1777, and (Ibid. i. 269) of the assault on Fort Henry (the modern Wheeling, named after Patrick Henry), Sept. 1, 1777. Cf. the account of Elizabeth Zane in Mrs. Eliot's Women of the Rev., ii. 275. There is a view of Fort Henry in Newton's History of the Pan-Handle, West Virginia (1879), p. 102.—Ed.]

[1496] In Clark's account of Nov., 1779 (Campaign in Illinois, Cincin., 1869, p. 21), he says: "I set out for Williamsburg in Aug. 1777 in order to settle my accounts." In his later and fuller account (Dillon's Indiana, 1843, p. 132; 1859, p. 119) he says: "When I left Kentucky October 1, 1777."

[1497] See Clark's Campaign, 95, 96; Butler's Kentucky, 394; Monette, i. 415; Brown's Illinois, 239; Hist. Mag., iii. 362.

[1498] Washington had trouble from the same cause in raising troops at Pittsburg for the Eastern service (Writings, v. 244).

[1499] Governor Henry, in a letter to Virginia delegates in Congress, gives the number as "170 or 180" (Butler's Kentucky, 2d ed., p. 533); Capt. Bowman, in letter of July 30, 1778, to Col. John Hite, gives the number as "170 or 180" (Almon's Remembrancer, 1779, p. 82).

[1500] Amer. Pioneer, ii. 345.

[1501] George Rogers Clark's own narratives furnish the most authentic information concerning his Illinois campaigns, three of which are accessible in print, as follow in the order of their dates: (1) Letter to the governor of Virginia, dated Kaskaskia, April 29, 1779, concerning his capture of Vincennes (in Jefferson's Writings, i. 222-226). (2) Letter to George Mason, dated Louisville, Falls of Ohio, November 19, 1779, which covers the period from setting out on his second visit to Virginia, in the autumn of 1777, to the end of his Vincennes campaign. It is printed from the original MS. in the Collections of the Hist. Soc. of Kentucky, with an introduction by Henry Pirtle; a biographical sketch of Clark; and the journal of Capt. (later Major) Joseph Bowman in the expedition against Vincennes. It is one of the Ohio Valley Series, Cincinnati, 1869, and is here quoted as Clark's Campaign. (3) "Memoirs composed by himself at the united desire of Presidents Jefferson and Madison", printed (with omissions and interpolations) in Dillon's Indiana (1843, pp. 127-184; and 2d ed., 1859, pp. 114-170). The second edition is here quoted. H. W. Beckwith used extracts from the same in his Historic Notes on the Northwest, pp. 245-259. It is the most extended of the three narratives. The original, with a large mass of other MSS. of, and relating to, Geo. Rogers Clark, is in the possession of Dr. Lyman C. Draper, of Madison, Wis. The date when it was written is not given; but it must have been written more than twelve years after the events occurred which it describes. Jefferson, writing March 7, 1791, to Col. James Innes, concerning Col. Clark, said: "We are made to hope he is engaged in writing the accounts of his expeditions north of the Ohio. They will be valuable morsels of history, and will justify to the world those who have told them how great he was" (Writings, iii. 218). Mann Butler's account of Clark's exploits (Hist. of Kentucky, pp. 35-88) is highly seasoned with popular traditions, and with incidents which are not consistent with Clark's own statements; and yet Butler has been more frequently quoted than the narratives of Clark. (4) The Canadian Archives, at Ottawa, has a journal of Clark, dated Vincennes, Feb. 24, 1779, the day of the surrender, which has never been printed nor quoted. (See report of Douglas Brymner, archivist, for 1882, p. 27, where an abstract of the report is given.) This is Clark's original report on his Vincennes campaign to the governor of Virginia. Three days after the surrender, a messenger arrived at Vincennes with despatches from the governor. On the 14th of March this messenger (whom Clark calls William Myres; Bowman, Mires; the Canadian Calendar, Moires; and Jefferson, Morris) was sent back to Williamsburg with letters to the governor. Near the Falls of the Ohio he was killed by the Indians, and the report of Clark, with nine other letters captured upon him, appear in the Haldimand Collection in the Canadian Archives. Clark, writing to Jefferson April 29th, mentions that he had heard of the killing of his messenger, "news very disagreeable to me, as I fear many of my letters will fall into the hands of the enemy at Detroit, although some of them, as I learn, were found in the woods, torn to pieces" (Jefferson's Writings, i. 222; see also Dillon, p. 159). Copies of these captured documents I have received from Ottawa. Clark's report is very interesting, and gives details of his interviews with Gov. Hamilton, while negotiating the surrender, which are omitted in his later narratives, and show that he treated Hamilton as if he believed he was responsible for the Indian barbarities inflicted upon the frontier settlers. (5) The report of Gov. Hamilton to Gen. Haldimand, July 6, 1781, which is an extended and detailed narrative of his expedition from Detroit to Vincennes in the autumn and early winter of 1778, of his capture by Clark, and of his long imprisonment in Virginia. He gives many facts and incidents which have not before appeared. He earnestly defends himself against the charges of cruelty made by Clark and the Virginia Assembly; and while admitting that, under instructions of his government, he sent out parties of Indians against the white settlements, he claims that he always gave the savages special instructions to be merciful, and that they obeyed him! This document, which has not been used by any writer, or been accessible until recently, is important, and is about the only statement we have giving the British view of the Vincennes campaign. With sixty other early manuscripts relating to the Northwest, it was kindly furnished to me by Mr. B. F. Stevens, of London, who copied it from the family papers of Lord George Germain. It now appears that it is also in the Haldimand Collection in the British Museum and in the Canadian Archives. It has lately been printed in the Michigan Pioneer Collections, ix. 489-516.

[1502] Butler (p. 52) says "two divisions crossed the river, while Clark with the third division took possession of the fort on this [the east] side of the river, in point-blank shot of the town." It is now the popular belief of the residents in the vicinity, and it has been the positive statement of all writers on the subject, that the fort in which Col. Clark captured Rocheblave was on the high bluff opposite the town, where there is still abundant evidence that a fort once existed, and now is known by the name of "Fort Gage." The spot is daily pointed out to visitors as perhaps the most noted locality in the Western country. During the past year a historical painting (40×20 feet), illustrating Col. Clark's capture of Kaskaskia, has been placed on the walls of the State House at Springfield, Ill. In the centre of the picture is the site of the old fort on the bluff, and near it stands the Jesuit church. In the foreground is Col. Clark addressing a council of Indians. There are three historical infelicities in this picture. The council of Indians which is here represented, was not held at Kaskaskia, but at Cahokia, sixty miles distant. The Jesuit church, and the actual fort which Clark captured, were on the other, the western, side of the river. Only a few points in justification of this statement can be mentioned:—

(1.) The fort on the bluff opposite the town "was burnt down in October, 1766", says Pittman (p. 43), who visited Kaskaskia about that time, or soon after, and whose book was published in London in 1770. He gives a description and detailed drawing of the town, the river, and site of the old fort. "It [the old fort] was", he says, "an oblongular quadrangle, 290 by 251 feet; it was built of very thick squared timber", etc.,—using in every instance the past tense. "An officer and 20 soldiers are quartered in the village." The evidence that the old fort was ever rebuilt is wanting.

(2.) No incident appears in the contemporary narratives that Clark occupied, or even visited, the site of the old fort; and there are many allusions to his occupying quarters in the town. On one occasion, expecting an attack from the enemy, he resolved to burn the houses around the fort. "I was necessitated", he says, "to set fire to some of the houses in town, to clear them out of the way." The people came to him in distress, fearing he would burn up their town. He took an occasion for doing this when there was snow on the roofs, and only such houses were burned as were set on fire (Campaign, p. 59). The site of the old fort was 500 yards from the river, and the river was 150 yards wide. A fire there would not have endangered the town; and Pittman's plan shows no houses on the eastern bank, around the old fort.

(3.) Setting out for Vincennes on the 5th of February, 1779, Clark says: "We crossed the Kaskaskia River with 170 men" (Dillon, p. 139). Major Bowman, in his journal of the same date, wrote: "About three o'clock we crossed the Kaskaskia with our baggage, and marched about a league from town" (p. 100). Crossing the Kaskaskia would have been unnecessary if they had been quartered on the site of the old fort.

(4.) Clark had heard from the hunters who joined him on the way, and had been in the town eight days before, that the fort was kept in good order, and that the garrison was on the alert. He was too good a soldier, on such information, to divide his scanty force of less than two hundred men into three divisions, and with one of them attack an isolated fort on the opposite side of the river, where he could have no support from his other divisions. Bowman, in a letter to Col. Hite, said: "This town was sufficiently fortified to have resisted a thousand men." That Clark passed the site of the old fort without approaching or even mentioning it, and threw his men across the river a mile north of the town, is evidence that the site of the old fort was then unoccupied.

(5.) M. Rocheblave, writing from Kaskaskia, "Fort Gage, Feb. 8, 1778", to Gen. Carleton at Montreal, shows conclusively where the fort was situated in which he was taken prisoner by Clark five months later. The MS. is in the Canadian Archives (Brymner's Report of 1882, p. 12). Rocheblave reports that "the roof of the mansion of the fort is of shingles and very leaky, notwithstanding my efforts to patch it; and unless a new roof be provided very soon, the building, which was constructed twenty-five years ago and cost the Jesuits 40,000 piastres, will be ruined." By a decree of the king, the Jesuits were suppressed in France and its colonies in 1763, and their property was confiscated to the crown. The Jesuits had a valuable estate at Kaskaskia which was taken possession of by the French commandant, and the priests were expelled. Father Watrin, Jesuit, in his Memoir of the Missions of Louisiana, 1764 or 1765 (Mag. of West. Hist. i. 265), says "When the Jesuits of the Illinois, recalled by the decree against them, passed this post [Point Coupée, on the Mississippi], Father Irenæus arpens [200 acres] of cultivated land, a very good stock of cattle, and a brewery, which was sold by the French commandant, after the country was ceded to the English, for the [French] crown, in consequence of the suppression of the order." This sale must have taken place before the English occupation, in 1765. Pittman mentions the church and the "Jesuits' house" as "the principal buildings, which are built of stone, and, considering this part of the world, make a very good appearance." The Jesuits' house was doubtless the one mentioned by Rocheblave, the fort being adjacent to it. On his plan of Kaskaskia Pittman locates the church in the centre of the town, and the Jesuits' property at the southeast corner, near the river. Pittman returned to Pensacola from Illinois in the spring of 1767, "with the plan of a fort", which, Haldimand reports to Gage, will "cost a good deal of money" (Haldimand Coll., p. 25). In 1772 Fort Chartres was abandoned in consequence of being undermined during an inundation of the Mississippi. Gen. Gage gave the order March 16, 1772, and directed that the troops be stationed at Kaskaskia. After the capture of the fort in 1778, the name was changed to "Fort Clark" (Bowman, p. 110; Canad. Arch., 1882, p. 36). I have found no instance where the old fort on the bluff, burned in 1766, and now known as "Fort Gage", had that name during the period when it existed as a fort.

(6.) Lieut. Ross's Map of the Mississippi from the Balise to Fort Chartres, made late in 1765, improved from the French surveys, and published in London in 1775, places "Ft. Caskaskias" at the southeast corner of the town, on the west bank of the river,—the spot indicated in Rocheblave's letter. It shows no fort on the eastern bank.

(7.) Major De Peyster, writing June 27, 1779, from Michilimacinac to Gen. Haldimand, reports concerning affairs at Kaskaskia, and fixes without question the location of the fort. He says: "The Kaskaskias no ways fortified; the fort being still a sorry pinchetted [picketted?] enclosure round the Jesuits' college." (Mich. Pion. Coll. ix. 388.)

It is remarkable that Gov. Reynolds, who resided at Kaskaskia in 1800, should not have known the location of "Fort Gage"; or, rather, that the local remembrances of the real spot should have faded out in twenty-one years. He says (in My Own Times, p. 31, ed. 1879): "The English government [in 1772] abandoned Fort Chartres and established its authority at Fort Gage, on the bluff east of Kaskaskia." Again, he says (Pioneer History, p. 81, ed. 1887): "The British garrison occupied Fort Gage, which stood on the Kaskaskia river bluffs opposite the village." This, in his mind, was the location of the fort which Clark captured. He says (Ibid. p. 94): "Two parties crossed the river; the other party remained with Col. Clark to attack the fort."

Capt. Bowman, in letter to Col. Hite of July 30, 1778 (Almon's Remembrancer, 1779, p. 82), describes the march and capture as follows: "Marched for Kaskaskia with four days' provisions, and in six days arrived at the place in the night of the 4th instant, having marched two days without any sustenance, in which hungry condition we unanimously determined to take the town, or die in the attempt. About midnight we marched into the town without being discovered. Our object was the fort, which we soon got possession of; the commanding officer (Philip Rocheblave) we made prisoner, and he is now on his way to Williamsburg under a strong guard, with all his instructions from time to time, from the several governors at Detroit, Quebec, etc., to set the Indians upon us, with great rewards for our scalps, for which he has a salary of £200 per year." This statement shows that the fort was in the town, and controverts the assertion of Butler (p. 53) that the public papers in the fort were not captured, out of delicacy to the wife of the commander, she "presuming a good deal on the gallantry of our countrymen by imposing upon their delicacy towards herself." ... "Better, ten thousand times better", Butler adds, "were it so, than that the ancient fame of the sons of Virginia should have been tarnished by insult to a female!"

[1503] Campaign, p. 31.

[1504] For the details of the conquest of Kaskaskia, see Clark's narrative of 1779 in Campaign (1869), pp. 24-36; and of his narrative of 1791 (?) in J. B. Dillon's Indiana (1843), pp. 127-150; (2d edition, 1859), pp. 114-136. See also Butler's Kentucky, p. 49, Withers's Border Warfare, p. 185; Perkins's Annals, p. 192; Beckwith's Historic Notes, p. 245; Davidson's Illinois, p. 173; Brown's Illinois, p. 230; Monette, i. 414.

[1505] The letter which Gov. Henry addressed to the Virginia delegates in Congress, Nov. 14, 1778, on receiving intelligence of Clark's capture of Kaskaskia, is in Butler's Kentucky, 2d. ed., p. 532; and is reprinted from the MS. in the new and excellent life of Patrick Henry (Boston, 1887), by Professor Moses Coit Tyler (p. 230).—Ed.

[1506] Of M. Rocheblave very little is known. His full name, Philippe François de Rastel, Chevalier de Rocheblave, with his nativity, appears in the parish records of Kaskaskia for April 11, 1763, in the third publication of the banns of his marriage to Michel Marie Dufresne (E. G. Mason's Kaskaskia, p. 17). He is mentioned in 1756 (N. Y. Col. Doc., x. 435) as a cadet at Fort Duquesne; in July, 1757, on the Potomac (Ibid. 581); and in July, 1759, at Niagara (Ibid. 992). Many of his letters [in French] are in the Canadian Archives. Several of them which I have, show him to have been a man of sensibility and refinement. He said he was a British subject because he had been abandoned by France at the peace. One of them is a long and interesting letter dated at "Fort Gage, July 4, 1778", which was probably sent off by boat a few hours before he was captured by Col. Clark. He was a prisoner in Virginia until the autumn of 1780, when he broke his parole and went to New York (Jefferson's Writings, i. 258). His family were left at Kaskaskia; and Gov. Henry of Virginia, in his instructions to Col. John Todd, Dec. 12, 1778, says: "Mr. Rocheblave's wife and family must not suffer for want of that property of which they were bereft by our troops. It is to be restored to them, if possible. If this cannot be done, the public must support them." (Calendar of Va. Papers, i. 314). His wife, signing her name "Marie Michel de Rocheblave", wrote from Kaskaskia, March 27, 1780, to Gen. Haldimand, appealing to his humanity for pecuniary help, as the rebels had taken everything from her but her debts. (MS. letter furnished to me by Mr. B. F. Stevens.)

[1507] The only garrison left in the fort when Gov. Hamilton and his troops appeared was Capt. Helm and his one soldier, whose name was Moses Henry. The latter placed a loaded cannon at the open gate, and Capt. Helm, standing by with a lighted match, commanded the British troops to halt. Hamilton demanded the surrender of the garrison. Helm refused, and asked for terms. Hamilton replied that they should have the honors of war, and the terms were accepted. The comical aspect of the garrison, consisting of one officer and one soldier, marching out of the fort between lines of disgusted Indians on one side and British soldiers on the other, is happily illustrated in Gay's Hist. of U. S., iii. 612. See note in Clark's Campaign, p. 52; Butler's Hist. of Kentucky, p. 80; Monette, i. 425; Perkins's Annals, p. 207. Gov. Hamilton describes the surrender without mentioning this humorous incident, thus: "The officer who commanded in the fort, Capt. Helm, being deserted by the [resident French] officers and men, who to the number of seventy had formed his garrison, and were in pay of the Congress, surrendered his wretched fort on the very day of our arrival, being the 17th day of December, 1778." (Report of July 6, 1781.)

[1508] Gov. Reynolds (Pioneer History, p. 101, ed. 1887) says Col. Vigo was sent to Vincennes by Clark as a spy; that he was captured by the Indians and taken to Hamilton, who suspected the character of his mission; and that he was released on the ground of his being a Spanish subject, and having influential friends among the French residents. Hamilton in his report makes no mention of Vigo by name, but says that men were stationed at the mouth of the Wabash to intercept boats on the Ohio; and that they at different times brought in prisoners and prevented intelligence being carried from Vincennes to the Illinois, "till the desertion of a corporal and six men from La Mothe's company, in the latter end of January, who gave the first intelligence to Col. Clark of our arrival." In Reynolds's Pion. Hist. p. 423, is a biographical sketch of Col. Vigo, by H. W. Beckwith, and a portrait. See also Law's History of Vincennes, pp. 28-30. Vigo helped Clark by cashing his drafts, and the story of a consequent suit for recovery of the money, which did not end till 1876 in the U. S. Supreme Court, is told by C. C. Baldwin in the Mag. of West. Hist., Jan., 1885, p. 230.—Ed.

[1509] Clark, in his letter to George Mason, scarcely alludes to the sufferings endured on this march. He says: "If I was sensible that you would let no person see this relation, I would give you a detail of our sufferings for four days in crossing these waters, and the manner it was done, as I am sure you would credit it; but it is too incredible for any person to believe except those that are as well acquainted with me as you are, or had experienced something similar to it. I hope you will excuse me until I have the pleasure of seeing you personally" (Campaign, p. 66). In his later narrative he spoke on the subject more freely (Dillon, 139-146), and his account is confirmed by Bowman's journal.

[1510] She arrived on the 27th, three days after the surrender, "to the great mortification of all on board that they had not the honor to assist us", says Bowman. Clark, in his captured report, writing on the same day, says: "The Willing arrived at 3 o'clock. She was detained by the strong current on the Wabash and Ohio; two Lieutenants and 48 men, with two iron four-pounders and five swivels on board."

[1511] An allusion to Gov. Hamilton's practice of paying the Indians for scalps, and not for prisoners. The proclamation is in Dillon, p. 146; Bowman's Journal, p. 104. [See ante, p. 683.—Ed.]

[1512] Bowman gives (p. 105-108) the correspondence with Hamilton, the articles of capitulation, etc., some of which are omitted in Clark's narratives. Hamilton in his Report describes Clark's demand on him to surrender thus: "About eight o'clock a flag of truce from the rebels appeared, carried by Nicolas Cardinal, a captain of the militia of St. Vincennes, who delivered me a letter from Col. Clark requiring me to surrender at discretion; adding, with an oath, that if I destroyed any stores or papers, I should be treated as a murtherer." Hamilton asserts that Clark was supplied with gunpowder by the inhabitants of Vincennes, "his own, to the last ounce, being damaged [by water] on the march;" and that "Clark has since told me he knew to a man those of my little garrison who would do their duty, and those who would shrink from it. There is no doubt he was well informed."

[1513] Hamilton in his Report enlarges on the barbarity of this transaction. The indignation and resentment felt by Clark and his men towards Hamilton, and the occasion for it, appear in a conversation concerning the terms of surrender, which Clark gives in his captured despatch: "Hamilton. 'Col. Clark, why will you force me to dishonor myself when you cannot acquire more honor by it?' Clark. 'Could I look on you as a gentleman, I would do the utmost in my power; but on you, who have imbrued your hands in the blood of our women and children—honor, my country, everything, calls aloud for vengeance.' Hamilton. 'I know, sir, my character has been stained, but not deservedly; for I have always endeavored to instill humanity, as much as in my power, in the Indians, whom the orders of my superiors obliged me to employ.' Clark. 'Sir, speak no more on this subject; my blood glows within my veins to think on the cruelties your Indian parties have committed; therefore, repair to your fort, and prepare for battle'—on which I turned off."

The following incidents illustrate the sort of humanity which Hamilton, and other British commandants at Detroit, instilled in the Indian mind: At a council, on July 3, 1778, Gov. Hamilton presented an axe to the chief, saying: "It is the king's command that I put this axe into your hands to act against his majesty's enemies. I pray the Lord of life to give you success, as also your warriors, wherever you go with your father's axe." The item "60 gross scalping-knives" are among the official "estimates of merchandise wanted for Indian presents at Detroit from Aug. 21, 1782, to Aug. 20, 1783", signed by A. S. De Peyster, Lieut.-Gov. (Farmer's Hist. of Detroit, p. 247). The same writer (p. 246) states that he has seen the original entry of sale, on June 6, 1783, of "16 gross red-handled scalping-knives, £80;" and on July 22d, of 24 dozen more to the same parties.

[1514] Among Hamilton's reasons, in the articles of capitulation, for surrender were: "The honorable terms allowed, and lastly, the confidence in a generous enemy." For this compliment to Clark he apologized in his Report as follows: "If it be considered that we were to leave our wounded men at the mercy of a man who had shown such instances of ferocity, as Col. Clark had lately done, a compliment bespeaking his generosity and humanity may possibly find excuse with some, as I know it has censure from others."

[1515] Hamilton states that Capt. Helm was the officer in command of the expedition,—a fact which Clark omitted to mention.

[1516] Hamilton says: "The day before Capt. Helm, who commanded the party sent to take the convoy, arrived at Ouattanon, Mr. Dejean heard that we had fallen into the hands of the rebels; but he had not sufficient presence of mind to destroy the papers which, with everything else, was seized by the rebels. Besides the provision, clothing, and stores belonging to the king, all the private baggage of the officers fell into the possession of Col. Clark."

[1517] Dillon, p. 158.

[1518] On March 7th, "Capt. Williams and Lieut. Rogers, with twenty-five men, set off for the Falls of Ohio to conduct the following prisoners, viz.: Lieut.-Gov. Hamilton, Major Hays [Hay], Capt. La Mothe [La Mothe], Mons. Dejean, grand judge of Detroit, Lieut. Shiflin [Scheifflin], Doct. M'Beth [McBeath], Francis M'Ville [Maisonville], Mr. Bell Fenilb [Bellefeuille], with eighteen privates" (Bowman, p. 109). Hamilton does not give a list of his fellow-prisoners, but the above names, as he gives them elsewhere in his Report, are inserted in brackets. He says: "On the 8th of March we were put into a heavy oak boat, being 27 in number, with our provision of flour and pork at common ration, and 14 gallons of spirits for us and our guard, which consisted of 23 persons, including two officers. We had before us 360 miles of water carriage and 840 to march to our place of destination, Williamsburg, Va." (Mich. Pion. Col., p. 506). "On the 16th, most of the prisoners took the oath of neutrality, and got permission to set out for Detroit" (Ibid. 110). Gov. Hamilton and his associates were sent to Williamsburg, and by sentence of the executive council were placed in close imprisonment in irons, for their treatment of captives and for permitting and instigating the Indians to practise every species of cruelty and barbarism upon American citizens, without distinction of age, sex, or condition (see Journals of Congress, ii. 340; Jefferson's Writings, i. 226-237, 258, 267; Sparks's Washington, vi. 315, 407; Corresp. of the Rev., ii. 323; Hamilton's narrative from the Royal Gazette, July 15, 1780, in Mag. Amer. Hist., i. 186; Monette, i. 431; Farmer's Hist. of Detroit, p. 252). In October, 1780, Hamilton was sent to New York on parole, in order to procure the release of some American officers (Sparks MSS., no. lxvi.).

For details of the Vincennes expedition, see Clark's Campaign (1869), p. 62-87; Dillon's Indiana (1843), pp. 151-184; 2d edition, pp. 137-167; Butler's Kentucky, p. 79; Beckwith's Hist. Notes, pp. 250-259; Davidson's Illinois, p. 193; Brown's Illinois, p. 241; Perkins's Annals, p. 208; Withers's Border Warfare, p. 188; Monette, i. 427; Hall's Sketches of the West, ii., 117; Marshall's Washington, iii. 562; Mag. of West. Hist., by Mary Cone, ii. 133; Hist. Mag., i. 168, by John Reynolds; Judge Law's address (1839), in Va. Hist. Reg., vi. 61; Ninian W. Edwards's Hist. of Illinois (1778-1833). There is a map of the campaign in Blanchard's North-West.

[1519] The enactment is in Hening's Virginia Statutes, ix. 552, and in Legal Adviser (Chicago, 1886), vii. 284. Cf. "Virginia's Conquest—the Northwest Territory", by J. C. Wells, in the Mag. of Amer. Hist., Nov., 1886.

[1520] Clark's Campaign, p. 84. "I am glad to hear of Col. Todd's appointment", he wrote to Jefferson (i. 225).

[1521] His proclamation of June 15, 1779, is in Dillon, p. 168; Davidson's Illinois, p. 202.

[1522] See lists of the officials in Edward G. Mason's Col. John Todd's Record-Book (no. 12 Fergus's Historical Series, 1882), p. 54. Mr. Mason's paper is an interesting account of Col. Todd's administration, and of the state of the Illinois county at that time. Col. Todd was killed in battle with the Indians at Blue Licks, Ky., Aug. 18, 1782. See Col. Logan's account of the battle, Col. Va. State Papers, iii. 280, 300; Perkins's Annals, p. 270.

[1523] Butler's Kentucky, p. 108; Withers's Border Warfare, p. 197.

[1524] An autograph letter of Jefferson to Washington, Feb. 10, 1780, urging reinforcements for Clark, is in the Sparks MSS., xlix. vol. iii. Various intercepted letters of Clark, including one of Sept. 23, 1779, to Jefferson, about fortifying the mouth of the Ohio, are among the Carleton Papers, in the London Institution, and are copied in the Sparks MSS., xiii. On May 26, 1780, St. Louis had been attacked by the English with Indian allies (Mag. Western Hist., Feb., 1785, p. 271, by Oscar W. Collet). It was through Vigo that Clark established intimate relations with the Spanish lieutenant-governor De Leyba, and Clark is said to have offered assistance in the defence of that Spanish post.—Ed.

[1525] Withers's Border Warfare, p. 213; Perkins's Annals, p. 235; Butler's Kentucky, p. 110.

[1526] [See ante, p. 681.—Ed.]

[1527] Writings, i. 259. The letter abridged is in Sparks's Corresp. of the Am. Rev., iii. 98.

[1528] Writings, i. 280; Sparks's Corresp., etc., iii. 175.

[1529] Gen. Washington instructed Col. Brodhead to see that no Continental officer outranked Col. Clark. "I do not think", he wrote, "that the charge of the enterprise could have been committed to better hands. I have not the pleasure of knowing the gentleman personally; but independently of the proofs he has given of his activity and address, the unbounded confidence which, I am told, the Western people repose in him is a matter of vast importance.... In general, give every countenance and assistance to this enterprise. I shall expect a punctual compliance with this order. Col. Clark will probably be the bearer of this himself" (Writings, vii. 343-345).

[1530] Sparks's Corresp., etc., iii. 244.

[1531] [See ante, pp. 495, 546.—Ed.]

[1532] Writings, i. 288. See Steuben's report to Washington, Sparks's Corresp., etc., iii. 204. At the time of Arnold's descent on Virginia, a scheme was devised by Jefferson and Baron Steuben to capture the arch-traitor alive, and hang him. The scheme is set forth in a letter of Jefferson, with no address (Writings, i. 289), dated Richmond, Jan. 21, 1781; and it immediately follows the one describing Col. Clark's ambuscade. The purpose of the letter is to enlist the services of the person addressed in this hazardous enterprise. The writer says he has "peculiar confidence in the men from the western side of the mountains, whose courage and fidelity would be above all doubt. Your perfect knowledge of those men personally, and my confidence in your discretion, induces me to ask you to pick from among them proper characters, in such numbers as you think best, and engage them to undertake to seize and bring off this greatest of all traitors. Whether this may be best effected by their going in as friends and awaiting their opportunity, or otherwise, is left to themselves. The smaller the number the better, so that they be sufficient to manage him." He offers them a reward of five thousand guineas for bringing him off alive, and says "their names will be recorded with glory in history with those of Vanwert, Paulding, and Williams." The editor states in a note that the person addressed "was probably Gen. [John Peter Gabriel] Mühlenberg." Gen. Mühlenberg was a Pennsylvanian, and never resided west of the mountains. The person was doubtless George Rogers Clark, who was then in Virginia, and was too deeply interested in his Detroit expedition to engage in the scheme.

[1533] Sparks's Corresp., etc., iii. 323.

[1534] Ibid. iii. 455. "I think", Gen. Irvine adds, "there is too much reason to fear that Gen. Clark's and Col. Gibson's expeditions falling through will greatly encourage the savages to fall on the country with double fury, or perhaps the British from Detroit to visit this post [Fort Pitt], which, instead of being in a tolerable state of defence, is, in fact, nothing but a heap of ruins." The relations of Detroit to the war in the Northwest, as the centre of British intrigues among the Indians, and of British instigation of the savages to make forays on the region of the Ohio, is well set forth in Charles I. Walker's Northwest during the Revolution, the annual address before the Wisconsin Hist. Soc. in 1871 (Madison, 1871; also in Pioneer Soc. of Michigan Coll., iii., Lansing, 1881). A plan of the Detroit River at this time is given in Parkman's Pontiac, vol. i. Col. Arent Schuyler De Peyster, who commanded at Detroit, 1776-1785, gives something of his experiences in his Miscellanies by an Officer (Dumfries, 1813). The latest history of Detroit is Silas Farmer's Detroit and Michigan (Detroit, 1884), where, in ch. 39, the revolutionary story is told. He has retold it in the Mag. of Western Hist., Jan., 1886.

Brymner's Report on the Canadian Archives, 1882, p. 11, calendars the correspondence and papers relating to Detroit, 1772-1784, being in large part the correspondence of Gov. Hamilton and Carleton, including letters from Vincennes and intercepted letters of G. R. Clark. Much of the military correspondence with the commandants at Detroit and Quebec, during this period, are in the series "America and West Indies" of the Public Record Office, vols. cxxi., etc., which are calendared in Brymner's Report, 1883, p. 50, etc., as well as in the series "Canada and Quebec", vols. lv., etc. (Ibid. p. 73, etc.). There is also among the Haldimand Papers (Calendar, p. 204) a description of the route from Detroit to the Illinois and Mississippi country, 1774.—Ed.

[1535] Virginia, later, made amends for this wrong. See Butler's Kentucky, 2d edition, p. 537.

[1536] See his report to Gov. Harrison, in Butler's Kentucky, 2d edition, p. 536; Almon's Remembrancer (1783), part 2, p. 93.

[1537] See Dillon, p. 179; Perkins's Annals, p. 278. In Jefferson's Writings, iii. 217, 218, and Cal. Va. State Papers, iv. 189, 202, will be found some sad incidents which throw light on the habits and subsequent record of Col. Clark. In 1793 he imprudently accepted from Genet, the French minister, a position in the service of France, with the rank of major-general and commander-in-chief of the French revolutionary legions on the Mississippi River. The purpose of this revolutionary scheme, which had many supporters in Kentucky and the West, was "to open the trade of the said river and give freedom to the inhabitants", by capturing and holding the Spanish settlements on the Mississippi. The troops were to receive pay as French soldiers, and donations of land in the conquered districts. Before the scheme could be put into execution, a counter-revolution occurred in France, Genet was recalled, and Clark's commission was cancelled. See Collins's Kentucky, i. 277; ii. 140; McMaster, Hist. of U. S., ii. 142; Washington's Message against Genet and his scheme is in Writings, xii. 96. For Clark's reputation and the achievements up to 1781, see Marshall's Washington, iii. 562; Rives's Madison, i. 193; Withers's Border Warfare, p. 190; Harper's Mag. (by R. F. Colman), xxii. 784; xxxiii. 52; xxviii. 302; Potter's Am. Monthly (by W. W. Henry), v. 908; vi. 308; vii. 140; Ibid. (by S. Evans), vi. 191, 451; Western Jour. (St. Louis, 1850), iii. 168, 216; John Reynolds in Hist. Mag., June, 1857; Collins's Kentucky. He was styled by John Randolph "the Hannibal of the West", and by Gov. John Reynolds "the Washington of the West." He was never married. He died February 13, 1818, and was buried at Locust Grove, near Louisville, Ky.

The only portrait of him extant was painted by John W. Jarvis, an English artist, who began business in New York in 1801, and painted the heads of many distinguished Americans. He made a trip West and South, during which he made many portraits. The picture of Clark represents him about sixty years of age. The best engraving of it is in the National Portrait Gallery, iv., with a biography. It is the frontispiece of Butler's Kentucky, 1834, of Dillon's Indiana, 1859, and in the Cincinnati edition of Clark's Campaign; and woodcuts are in Lossing's Field-Book, ii. 287; Mag. of Western Hist., ii. 133; Harper's Mag., xxviii. 302, etc. It has been many times reproduced, with a modification of details. There have been many rumors as to the existence of a portrait taken earlier in life. Every alleged portrait of an earlier date which I could hear of, I have looked up, and find that they are all copies or modifications of the Jarvis picture.

[1538] In 1772, the whole community of Moravian missionaries and their Indian converts at Friedenshütten, in Pennsylvania, where they had dwelt for seven years, removed to the valley of the Muskingum, on the cordial invitation of the Delawares. For many years, when living in the vicinity of the English settlements, they had suffered much from persecution; but now that they had their home among savages, it seemed to them that their trials were ended.

[1539] The Sandusky of that period was on the head-waters of the Sandusky River, about seventy-five miles east of south from the modern Sandusky City on Lake Erie. Its location was near what is now known as Upper Sandusky, in Wyandot County, Ohio. The region was a fertile plain, and the home of the Wyandots.

[1540] See "The Identity and History of the Shawanese Indians", by C. C. Royce, in the Mag. of Western Hist., ii. 38.

[1541] The fact that the Moravians had accompanied the Wyandots to the country of Sandusky was used as evidence against them.

[1542] It is to the credit of the British officers at Detroit that they befriended the Moravians, and assigned them a tract of land in Michigan.

[1543] See C. F. Post's first visit to the Western Indians by T. J. Chapman, in Mag. of Western Hist., iii. 123. For the general subject of the Moravian missions in Ohio, see Loskiel, Memoirs of the United Brethren, Part II.; Heckewelder, Narrative, pp. 213-328; Holmes, Missions of the United Brethren, p. 110; Schweinitz, Life of Zeisberger, pp. 368-590; Rondthaler, Life of Heckewelder, p. 66; Gnadenhütten, by W. D. Howells, in Atlantic Monthly, xxiii. 95; Withers, p. 230; Doddridge, p. 248; Monette, ii. 129; Amer. Pioneer, ii. 425; Perkins, Annals, p. 258. Cf. also the Diary of David Zeisberger, a Moravian missionary among the Indians of Ohio (1781-1798); translated from the original German manuscript and edited by E. F. Bliss, 2 vols. (Cincinnati, 1885).

[1544] Col. Crawford was a friend of Washington, and had been one of his surveyors. "It is with the greatest sorrow", wrote Washington, "that I have learned the melancholy tidings of Col. Crawford's death. He was known to me as an officer of much prudence, brave, experienced, and active. The manner of his death was shocking to me, and I have this day communicated to Congress such papers as I have regarding it." Cf. C. W. Butterfield's Washington-Crawford letters, 1767-1781 (Cincinnati, 1877,—Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 147).

[1545] See Narratives of the perils and sufferings of Dr. Knight and John Slover, among the Indians, during the Revolutionary war; with short memoirs of Col. Crawford and John Slover, and a letter from H. Brackinridge, on the rights of the Indians, etc. (Cincinnati, 1867), pp. 12-31; (for earlier editions see Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, nos. 682-685;) Perkins's Annals, p. 262; Doddridge, p. 264; Withers, p. 242; "Crawford's Campaign", by N. N. Hill, Jr., in the Mag. of West. Hist., ii. 19; McClung's Sketches, p. 128. Schweinitz's Zeisberger, p. 564; Amer. Pioneer, ii. 177; Hist. Mag., xxi. 207; Isaac Smucker's "Ohio Pioneer History" in Ohio Sec. of State's Annual Report, 1879, pp. 7-28. Cf. also C. W. Butterfield's Hist. Acc. of the Exped. against Sandusky (Cincinnati, 1873,—Thomson's Bibliog. of Ohio, no. 146); and, on the general military transactions of this period in the West, the same editor's Washington-Irvine correspondence. The official letters which passed between Washington and William Irvine and between Irvine and others concerning military affairs in the West from 1781 to 1783. Arranged and annotated. With an introduction containing an outline of events occurring previously in the trans-Alleghany country (Madison, Wis., 1882). Cf. Penna. Mag. of Hist., vi. 371. Sparks made copies of many of these Irvine papers in 1847 (Sparks MSS., no. liv.).—Ed.

[1546] For a summary of these discussions, see Perkins, Annals (Peck's ed., 1850), pp. 242-250. Judge Hall, Sketches of the West, i. 171, gives the date "May 6, 1778"; Wilson Primm, Historical Address, 1847 (reprinted in Western Journal, 1849, ii. 71), gives "May, 1779", as the date, and says 1779 is an era in the history of St. Louis, and is designated as "L'Année du coup." Nicollet, Early St. Louis, gives "May, 6, 1780", and Martin, Louisiana, "the fall of 1780." Stoddard, Sketches of Louisiana, without naming the month and day, gives the year and the main facts correctly; but errs in stating that "the expedition was not sanctioned by the English court, and the private property of the commandant was seized to pay the expenses of it." As to the casualties, Stoddard (p. 80) says, "60 killed and 30 prisoners;" Nicollet (p. 85), "60 killed and 13 prisoners;" Primm, "20 killed;" and Billon, Annals of St. Louis, 1886 (p. 196), "seven persons were killed", and he furnishes a list of their names. Sinclair, in report to Haldimand, July 8, 1780, says: "At Pencour [St. Louis], 68 were killed, and 18 blacks and white people taken prisoners; 43 scalps were brought in. The rebels lost an officer and three men killed at the Cahokias, and five prisoners" (Mich. Pion. Col., ix. 559). Martin (ii. 53) says "Clark released about 50 prisoners that had been made."

[1547] Brymner's Calendar of the Canadian Archives, including (1) the Haldimand collection; (2) the publication of some of the Haldimand papers in Michigan Pioneer Collec., ix.; and (3) the Calendar of Virginia State Papers, Richmond, v. i., vi.

[1548] In March, 1766, Ulloa, from Havana, landed at New Orleans, and in the name of Spain took possession of Louisiana; but found himself obliged to administer the government under the old French officers, and in 1768 the French set up for a while a republic independent of Spain. Cf. Gayarré's Louisiana, and Lieutenant John Thomas's account of Louisiana in 1768 in Hist. Mag., v. 65.

Congress maintained an agent, Oliver Pollock, at New Orleans during the war, who, with the aid of the Spanish authorities, sent powder and supplies at intervals up the river, to be landed on the Ohio (George Sumner's Boston Oration, 1859, p. 14). The correspondence of Pollock and Congress is in the archives of the State Department at Washington, and copies are in the Sparks MSS., no. xli. An account of an expedition under Col. David Rogers in 1778, to bring up stores to Fort Pitt, is in Hist Mag., iii. 267.

Various letters about and from New Orleans during the war are in the Sparks MSS. (no. xxiii.), copied from the Grantham correspondence. Intercepted letters between the Spanish governor at New Orleans and Patrick Henry (1778-1779), found among the Carleton papers, are in the Sparks MSS., no. xiii.—Ed.

[1549] Gayarré, History of Louisiana, Spanish Domination, p. 121.

[1550] Brymner, 1885, p. 276.

[1551] "In compliance with my Lord George Germain's requisition in the circular letter sent from Detroit on 22d January, I sent a war party of Indians to the country of the Sioux to put that nation in motion under their own chief, Wabasha, a man of uncommon abilities.... They are directed to proceed with all despatch to the Natchez, and to act afterwards as circumstances may require. I shall send other bands of Indians from thence on the same service as soon as I can with safety disclose the object of their mission. I am at a loss to judge in point of time, and can only hazard an opinion that the Brigadier [Campbell] and his army will be at the place of their destination some time in May" (Michigan Pioneer Coll., ix. 544).

The same day, Sinclair wrote to Capt. Brehm, Haldimand's aide-de-camp: "I will use my utmost endeavors to send away as many as I can of the Indians to attack the Spanish settlements as low down [the Mississippi] as they possibly can, in order to procure the assistance of the others at home. I am so perfectly convinced of the general's [Haldimand's] geographical knowledge that I do not know where to look for the cause of a doubt about giving some aid to General Campbell from this quarter.... I am at a loss to know whether this preparation may not be too early, on account of want of secrecy in the people I have employed, and from their getting too near [New] Orleans before the arrival of the brigadier. I have confidence in and hopes of their leader, as Wabasha is allowed to be a very extraordinary Indian, and well attached to his majesty's interest" (Ibid. pp. 541-543).

February 17, he writes again to Haldimand, that the Minomines, Puants, Sacs, and Rhenards were to assemble at the portage of the Wisconsin and Fox rivers under a Mr. Hesse, a trader; and later to rendezvous at the confluence of the Mississippi and Wisconsin rivers, Prairie du Chien. "The reduction of Pencour [pain court (short bread), the common nickname of St. Louis] by surprise, from the easy admission of the Indians of that place, will be less difficult than holding it afterwards.... The Sioux shall go with all dispatch as low down as the Natchez, and as many intermediate attacks as possible shall be made" (Ibid. pp. 546, 547).

May 29, he again writes that seven hundred and fifty men, including traders, servants, and Indians, proceeded down the Mississippi on the second day of May, with the Indians engaged at the westward, for an attack on the Spanish and Illinois country. He mentions Prairie du Chien as the place of assembling. "Capt. Hesse will remain at Pencour; Wabasha will attack Misère [wretchedness, the popular nickname for Ste. Geneviève] and the rebels at Kacasia [Kaskaskia]. Two vessels leave this place on the 2d of June to attend Machigwawish, who returns by the Illinois River with prisoners. All the traders who will secure the posts on the Spanish side of the Mississippi during the next winter have my promise for the exclusive trade of the Missouri during that time, and that their canoes will be forwarded" (Ibid. 548, 549).

[1552] Brymner, Report, 1882, p. 34. He writes to Sinclair, March 12: "Your movements down the [Mississippi] shall be seconded from this place by my sending a part of the garrison with some small ordnance. Their route shall be to the Ohio, which they shall cross, and attack some of the forts which surround the Indian hunting-ground of Kentucky. I have had the Wabash Indians here by invitation; they have promised to keep Clark at the Falls" (Michigan Pioneer Coll., p. 580). His allusions are to Capt. Byrd's expedition. May 18, he again writes to Sinclair: "Capt. Byrd left this place (Detroit) with a detachment of about 150 whites and 1000 Indians. He must be by this time nigh the Ohio" (Ibid. P. 582).

[1553] Among his prisoners were Col. Dickson, in command of the British settlements on the Mississippi; 556 regulars, and many sailors.

[1554] Gayarré, Louisiana, Span. Dom., pp. 121-147. Galvez discovered, by intercepted letters from Natchez, the scheme of the English to attack the Spanish settlements as early as it was known by Sinclair (p. 122), and he was earnest to strike the first blow. Clark also heard of it very early. Sinclair, writing to Haldimand, says: "No doubt can remain, from the concurrent testimony of the prisoners, that the enemy received intelligence of the meditated attack on the Illinois about the time I received a copy of my Lord George Germain's circular letter" (Mich. Pion. Coll., ix. 559). In the same letter he gives some details of the raids on St. Louis and Cahokia, which do not appear elsewhere: "Twenty of the volunteer Canadians from this place and a very few of the traders and servants made their attack on Pencour and the Cahokias. The Winnipigoes and Sioux would have stormed the Spanish lines, if the Sacs and Outagamies, under their treacherous leader Mons. Calvé, had not fallen back so early. A Mons. Ducharme and others who traded in the country of the Sacs kept pace with Mons. Calvé in his perfidy. The attack, unsuccessful as it was, from misconduct, and unsupported, I believe, by any other against New Orleans, with the advances made by the enemy on the Mississippi, will still have its good consequences. The Winnepigoes had a chief and three men killed and four wounded. The traders who would not assist in extending their commerce cannot complain to its being confined to necessary bounds." Writing later to De Peyster (Ibid. 586), he says: "The attack upon the Illinois miscarried from the treachery of Calvé and Ducharme, traders, and from the information received by the enemy so early as March last." For statements that the expedition against St. Louis was organized and led by Jean Marie Ducharme, see Wis. Hist. Coll., iii. 232; vii. 176. It is evident that the objective point of the attack, in Sinclair's mind, was the Illinois country, rather than the Spanish settlements. Haldimand, writing to De Peyster, Feb. 12, 1779, said: "Sinclair should strike at the Illinois" (Brymner, 1882, p. 33). Sinclair, writing to Brehm, Feb. 17, 1780, concerning the attack on St. Louis, said: "Afterwards they can act against the rebels on this side [of the Mississippi], which I have pointed out to them" (Mich. Pion. Coll., ix. 543).

[1555] Sinclair seems not to have heard of the capture of Natchez by the Spaniards, which occurred Sept. 21, 1779, until July 30, 1780, when he wrote to De Peyster: "The report of the Natchez seems too well founded" (Ibid. 587).

[1556] Ibid. 547, 548.

[1557] Stoddard and Martin state that Clark was present; Nicollet denies the statement, on the ground that Clark was then at Kaskaskia, and "that gallant officer could not have had time to aid in that affair." Hall and Billon make no mention of Clark; and Primm and Peck (in Perkins) say that Clark tendered aid to Leyba in 1779, but not in 1780. It was a part of Clark's policy to be always on friendly terms with the Spanish commandant at St. Louis (Campaign, p. 35), and to give aid whenever he needed it. In so doing, as they were fighting a common enemy, he served his own interests. Mr. O. W. Collet, in Mag. of Western Hist., i. 271, has discussed the friendly relations between Clark and Leyba before the attack on St. Louis, but is unmindful of the significance given to it in the text. See also Scharff's Hist. of St. Louis, p. 217.

[1558] The expedition of Captain Byrd from Detroit.

[1559] Sinclair reported to Haldimand, July 8th, "Two hundred Illinois cavalry arrived at Chicago five days after the vessels left" (Mich. Pion. Coll., ix. 558).

[1560] Dr. Lyman C. Draper (Wisconsin Hist. Coll., ix. 291) says: "There was a party of Spanish allies sent out with Montgomery's expedition from Cahokia in the latter part of May, 1780, in the direction of Rock River." See also his note (Ibid. vii. 176). He thinks that the Spaniards and some of the Americans probably returned by way of Prairie du Chien, and that they were the party mentioned by Long in his Voyages, 1791.

[1561] Michigan Pioneer Col., ix. 541. Capt. Byrd, writing to De Peyster, May 21, 1780, reports that a Delaware Indian has come in from the Falls with this information: "Col. Clark says he will wait for us, instead of going to the Mississippi; his numbers do not exceed 200; his provisions and ammunition short" (Ibid. 584). Clark was on his way to St. Louis before this date, and was back to Kentucky in season to block Byrd's plans.

[1562] Perkins's Annals, p. 245.

[1563] It is noticeable that in these decisive campaigns efficient aid was furnished in the West by Spain, and in the East by France; and that both these powers, in the negotiations for a treaty of peace with Great Britain, threw their influence against the interests of the United States.

[1564] See Gayarré, Louisiana, Span. Dom., p. 134; Pitkin's United States, ii. 88, App. 512; Secret Jour. of Cong., ii. 326.

[1565] Sparks's Dipl. Corresp., viii. 156. The Spanish claims and the Western boundary question are very fully discussed in this eighth volume.

[1566] Mr. Jay (Sparks's Dipl. Corres., viii. 76-78) gives the main facts concerning the Spanish expedition to St. Joseph, which he translated from the Madrid Gazette of March 12, 1782. Mr. E. G. Mason (Mag. of Amer. Hist., xv. 457) has treated the subject more fully in a paper entitled "March of the Spaniards across Illinois in 1781." See also Reynolds's Illinois, ed. 1887, p. 126; Dillon's Indiana, ed. 1843, p. 190; Perkins's Annals, ed. 1851, p. 251.

Dr. Franklin, writing from Passy, April 12, 1782, to Secretary Livingston, said: "I see by the newspapers that the Spaniards, having taken a little post called St. Joseph, pretend to have made a conquest of the Illinois country. In what light does this proceeding appear to Congress? While they decline our offered friendship, are they to be suffered to encroach on our bounds, and shut us up within the Appalachian Mountains? I begin to fear they have some such project" (Works, Sparks, ix. 206).

[1567] The diplomacy of the war and the final negotiations for peace, form the subjects of the opening chapters of the succeeding volume of the present History.—Ed.

[1568] Some of the copies bear other dates.

---

TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE:

—Obvious errors were corrected.

—The transcriber created the book cover image using the title page of the original book. The image is placed in the public domain.