While the army was at Valley Forge, in the winter of 1777-78, the difficulties between General Washington and General Gates, and their respective friends, became, in a great measure, matter of publicity. At this period there were two parties among the officers. Washington had his warm friends and supporters. Lee and Gates had theirs.
Colonel Burr was of the latter. The merits of the question will not be discussed; and the subject will only be referred to so far as Burr is concerned.
In the spring of 1776, at the request of the commander-in-chief, Burr joined his military family for a short space of time, but soon became dissatisfied and retired. On the 29th of August, 1776, the American army retreated from Long Island. This retreat Burr had pressed upon Putnam, Mifflin, and others. In his letter to T. Edwards, [2] dated the 10th of August, nearly three weeks before it took place, he says: "They (the British) are to come through the Sound, and thus invest us by the North and East rivers. They are then to land on both sides of the island, join their forces, and draw a line across, which will hem us in, and totally cut off all communication, after which they will have their own fun."
During the night of the retreat, Burr was actively engaged aiding McDOUGALL in the embarcation of the troops at Brooklyn; and, from a personal knowledge of the localities of it and the adjacent places, he imagined that he had rendered some service. It has been shown that, by his intrepidity and perseverance in the retreat from New-York, he rescued from impending danger the brigade of General Silliman. In neither of these cases was his conduct noticed by the commander-in-chief, either in general orders or otherwise. Young, ardent, ambitious, and of a fiery temperament, he thought that justice was not done to his efforts, and construed these, with other minor occurrences about the same time, into acts of hostility towards him. In September, 1776, therefore, his prejudices against General Washington became fixed and unchangeable; and to the latest hour of his life he recurred to the retreat from Long Island, and from the city of New-York, with acrimonious feelings towards the commander-in-chief. Whatever may be said to the contrary, as early as this period those prejudices were formed and confirmed. That General Washington placed no confidence in Burr, and that, for some reason, he was exceedingly hostile towards him, is equally certain. Whether his hostility commenced at this period is matter of more uncertainty. Events already noticed demonstrate that the general considered him an intrepid, efficient, and vigilant officer.
Thus, in 1777, Burr was the friend of Lee and Gates in opposition to General Washington. In the beginning of January, 1778, it was reported to Burr that Lord Stirling had made some remarks respecting the manner in which the colonel had contributed to arrange the rank of his (Burr's) subaltern officers. Lord Stirling at this time commanded the division. It will be recollected that, a few weeks previous, Colonel Burr had proposed to the commander-in-chief an enterprise against Staten Island, which was rejected; but, immediately after, it was unsuccessfully attempted by Lord Stirling. The difficulty, therefore, in fact, between these gentlemen, grew out of the latter circumstance. On the 7th of January, 1778, Burr addressed Lord Stirling, requesting an explanation, which was promptly given in the following note, and thus the matter terminated.
Camp, January 8th, 1778.
SIR,
The receipt of your letter of yesterday's date not a little surprised me, for I can assure you that I have never made use of a word in censure of yourself, or of the court you mention. I some days ago ordered a return to be brought in of the names and rank of the officers of the division, independent of what the two courts were doing, and desired Major Monroe [3] to direct the brigade-majors to make them out as soon as possible: from this, I suppose, some mistake has arose, which I will call upon Major Stagg to explain.
I am,
Your most obedient humble servant,