One of the few monuments of Braddock’s days stands beside the Potomac, within the limits of the city of Washington. It is a gigantic rock, the “Key of Keys,” now almost lost to sight and forgotten. It may still be found, and efforts are on foot to have it appropriately marked. It is known in tradition as “Braddock’s Rock”—on the supposition that here some of Braddock’s men landed just below the mouth of Rock Creek en route to Frederick and Fort Cumberland. It is unimportant whether the legend is literally true.[18] A writer, disputing the legend, yet affirms that the public has reason “to require that the destructive hand of man be stayed, and that the remnants of the ancient and historic rock should be rescued from oblivion.” The rock may well bear the name of Braddock, as the legend has it. Nothing could be more typical of the man—grim, firm, unreasoning, unyielding.
CHAPTER IV
A SEAMAN’S JOURNAL
One of the most interesting documents relative to Braddock’s expedition is a Journal kept by one of the thirty seamen sent with Braddock by Commodore Keppel. The original manuscript was presented by Colonel Macbean to the Royal Artillery Library, Woolwich, and is first published here.
An expanded version of this document was published in Winthrop Sargent’s History of Braddock’s Expedition, entitled “The Morris Journal”—so called because it was in the possession of the Rev. Francis-Orpen Morris, Nunburnholme Rectory, Yorkshire, who had published it in pamphlet form.[19] Concerning its authorship Mr. Sargent says, “I do not know who was the author of this Journal: possibly he may have been of the family of Capt. Hewitt. He was clearly one of the naval officers detached for this service by Com. Keppel, whom sickness detained at Fort Cumberland during the expedition.”[20]
A comparison of the expanded version with the original here printed shows that the “Morris Journal” was written by Engineer Harry Gordon of the 48th Artillery. The entry in the expanded version for June 2 reads: “Col. Burton, Capt. Orme, Mr Spendlowe and self went out to reconnoitre the road.”[21] In the original, under the same date, we read: “Colonel Burton, Capt. Orme, Mr Engineer Gordon & Lieut Spendelow were order’d to reconnoitre the Roads.” Why Mr. Gordon desired to suppress his name is as inexplicable as the failure of the Rev. Francis-Orpen Morris, who compared the expanded and the original manuscripts, to announce it. The proof is made more sure by the fact that Mr. Gordon usually refers to himself as an “Engineer,” as in the entry for June 3: “This morning an Engineer and 100 men began working on the new road....” In the original the name is given: “Engineer Gordon with 100 Pioneers began to break Ground on the new Road....”[22] He refers to himself again on July 9 as “One of our Engineers”: “One of our Engineers, who was in the front of the Carpenters marking the road, saw the Enemy first.”[23] It is well known that Gordon first caught sight of the enemy and the original journal affirms this to have been the case: “Mr Engineer Gordon was the first Man that saw the Enemy.” Mr. Sargent said the author “was clearly one of the naval officers detached ... by Com. Keppel.” Though Mr. Gordon, as author, impersonated a seaman, there is certainly very much more light thrown on the daily duties of an engineer than on those of a sailor; there is far more matter treating of cutting and marking Braddock’s Road than of handling ropes and pulleys. It is also significant that Gordon, from first to last, was near the seamen and had all the necessary information for composing a journal of which one of them might have been the author. He was in Dunbar’s regiment on the march from Alexandria—as were the seamen. He, with the carpenters, was possibly brigaded in the Second Brigade, with the seamen, and in any case he was with the van of the army on the fatal ninth as were the seamen.
As to the authorship of the original journal the document gives no hint. From Mr. Gordon’s attempt to cover his own identity by introducing the word “self” in the latter part of the entry of June 3, it might be supposed the original manuscript was written by the “Midshipman” referred to under that date in the original journal. But the two midshipmen given as naval officers in the expedition, Haynes and Talbot, were killed in the defeat.[24]
The original journal which follows is of interest because of the description of the march of Dunbar’s brigade through Maryland and Virginia to Fort Cumberland. The remainder was evidently composed from descriptions given by officers after their return to Fort Cumberland:[25]