May there not be a middle line between these two extremes? Was it not possible for the men to search for money, and still be true to their country, which is the only point at issue? When they stopped the traveller, the idea of a spy seems not to have occurred to them. They took him for a merchant, or a person engaged in mercantile business, not legally and openly, but in the manner practised by too many of the borderers of the neutral ground. They would naturally expect him to have money, and would search for it, especially after the confused manner in which he had spoken of himself, and since, if he was an enemy and had money, it would be theirs by the same prize-law, that afterwards assigned to them the horse, saddle, bridle, and watch. Their virtue cannot be impeached, therefore, merely on the score of their searching for money, although this incident, it must be confessed, contributes no special lustre to their motives or acts.
According to their testimony before the court at Smith's trial, they did not suspect André of being a spy, till his boots had been pulled off and the papers discovered; nor is there any direct proof, that he offered them money to release him till after that discovery. Williams then asked him what he would give them to let him go, evidently having no other aim, than to obtain further knowledge of his character. André offered to give any sum of money, or quantity of dry goods, that they would name. Here was the trial of their virtue. Ten thousand guineas, they said, should not tempt them to let him escape.
Major André believed, that, when he made the offer, they would have accepted it, if he could have given any security for the fulfilment of his promise. As he could only pledge his word, and as either he or some other person in his name must go into the city and bring out the money and goods, they distrusted his ability to execute his engagement, and feared that some cross accident would in the mean time lead them into difficulty, and prevent their getting any thing. As the surest course, or the one from which they were the most likely to obtain a reward, they resolved to take him within the American lines, and deliver him up to an officer.
Such was Andre's belief, and it was perhaps favored by appearances. But all the prominent circumstances of the case are decidedly against it. Whatever the captors thought of their prisoner, they could not have imagined his real importance, nor foreseen the consequences that followed. They looked upon him as a common spy, and supposed that they would be suitably but not extravagantly rewarded for giving him up. If they were influenced only by motives of gain, it is hardly possible that they should not have been tempted by the golden offers of André, notwithstanding the uncertainty attending them, which could not be very great, since he proposed to stay where he was, till one of them should go into the city and bring out the money and other articles. Had they known Andre's character, the affair would assume a different aspect; but, as they did not, we must look for a higher determining principle, than a mere pecuniary calculation.
The exact degree in which we are to expect patriotism and genuine public virtue in men, who stand in the same class of society and follow the same pursuits as the captors of André, may be a question for casuistry to settle. But it will require more than the casuist's art to prove, that these men did not believe they were doing a valuable service to their country, distinct from any ulterior consideration, in committing to custody a person, whom they knew to be a spy, and who had offered them a large bribe for his release. We need not scrutinize motives too closely. The act was noble in itself, immensely important to the nation in its effects, and worthy of all praise as an example. This meed of justice let it receive from history, and from every citizen, who would by his approbation encourage instances of generous self-sacrifice for the public good.
The reader may be curious to know what became of Joshua H. Smith. We left him at Tappan under guard. He was tried by a court-martial, which was assembled the day after the examination of André, and continued by adjournments for about four weeks. Many witnesses were brought before the court, among whom were Lafayette, Knox, Hamilton, Harrison, Colonel Livingston, Colonel Hay, Captain Boyd, Paulding and Williams, and the two boatmen, who went on board the Vulture. The testimony was voluminous, as written out by the judge-advocate, and formed a mass of facts developing many of the secret incidents of the conspiracy.
The charge presented against Smith ran in these words; "For aiding and assisting Benedict Arnold, late major-general in our service, in a combination with the enemy to take, kill, and seize such of the loyal citizens or soldiers of these United States, as were in garrison at West Point and its dependencies." Smith drew up in writing a long defence, which he read to the court, and in which he first objected to its jurisdiction, saying that, being a citizen and not a soldier, he could not properly be subject to a military tribunal; he then summed up the evidence with considerable ability, and argued his cause. He was acquitted by the court.
That he had aided and assisted Arnold there was no doubt; this he confessed before the trial; but it was not proved by the evidence, that he had any knowledge of Arnold's traitorous designs. Considering the part he performed, this was extraordinary; but the court were fully justified in their decision. Some points in Smith's conduct, however, were never cleared up, especially his refusing to go back with André to the Vulture. The reason he assigned was improbable, and his attempts at an explanation only threw a deeper shade over his candor. Although no one would be willing to condemn Smith, upon the testimony adduced to the court, yet whoever reads it will be satisfied, that he could not have fallen into such extreme stupidity, as not to suspect something wrong in the business he was engaged in carrying on. Nor is it easy to imagine how a man of his intelligence and character could have been made a passive tool, even in the hands of so artful a hyprocrite as Arnold, for effecting purposes obviously of great moment, concerning which he was not allowed to have any knowledge.
These impressions are strengthened by Smith's book, which he published many years afterwards in England, evidently with a copy before him of all the written testimony produced to the court at his trial; and in which he utters innumerable assertions widely different from the testimony itself and from his original defence, mingled with severe and bitter reflections upon several of the witnesses. *
* The book is entitled An Authentic Narrative of the Causes which led to the Death of Major André. London. 1808.—Whether from a defect of memory in the author, or from whatever reason, needs not be inquired; but as a work of history this volume is not worthy of the least credit, except where the statements are confirmed by other authority.