Third—It is claimed that “one Smith” stole the horse in question from Colonel De Lancey and sold him to Mr. Ward, of Hartford, Connecticut, who kept him a few years and sold him to Selah Norton, of the same place, and remained his till he died. Who was this “one Smith” and where did he belong? Where is the evidence that this “one Smith” stole a horse from Colonel De Lancey?
Fourth—In the New York Packet, then published at Fishkill, under date of October 19, 1780, we find the following: “Last week Lieutenant Wright Carpenter and two others went down to Colonel James De Lancey’s quarters and lay in wait for his appearance. He accordingly came and having tied his horse at the door, went into the house; upon which Carpenter seized the horse and mounted. When De Lancey discovered him, he immediately alarmed his men, who pursued him to White Plains, but in vain,” etc., etc. This Lieutenant Carpenter was a dashing young fellow and was promoted next month to the position of first lieutenant in Captain Lyons’ company, of the Second Regiment of New York Militia, of Westchester County, and still commanded by Colonel Thomas. This is the man who stole the horse, this is the contemporaneous evidence of it, and “one Smith” had nothing to do with it.
In these four points we have what may be considered the first chapter of this investigation and, as will be readily seen, each of them must be fatal to the pretentious claim that has been maintained for about a hundred years. Avoiding all circumlocution, I think it is safe to say that this so-called pedigree did not originate this side of Hartford. The Second Regiment of New York Militia, called “The Skinners,” was made up of Westchester County men, and as Colonel De Lancey had been sheriff of that county, everybody knew him and knew that he was not the race horse James. We must, therefore, look further on for the time when and the person by whom this pedigree was manufactured.
In 1784 this horse was advertised at Lanesboro, Massachusetts, under the name of Beautiful Bay, and no attempt was made to give a pedigree or origin of the horse.
In 1785 he was at West Springfield, Massachusetts, in charge of Justin Morgan, still called Beautiful Bay, and still no pedigree.
In 1788 and 1789 he was in charge of John Morgan, Jr., of Springfield, Massachusetts, and here, for the first time, he is designated as “the famous full-blooded English horse, called True Briton or Beautiful Bay,” but no pedigree is given.
In 1791 he was advertised at East Hartford, Connecticut, by his owner, Selah Norton, and his pedigree is here given for the first time as follows: “True Briton, or Beautiful Bay, got by imported Traveler, dam De Lancey’s racer.” After advertising the horse for seven years without a pedigree, at last Mr. Selah Norton manufactures one and gives it over his own signature.
In 1793 he is again called Beautiful Bay, but no pedigree, at South Hadley, Massachusetts.
In 1794 and 1795 he was kept at Ashfield, Massachusetts, by Mr. Norton himself, and called Traveler, and his pedigree is again given in amended form as follows: “Sired by the famous old Traveler, imported from Ireland, dam Colonel De Lancey’s imported racer.”
This is the last trace we have of the horse Beautiful Bay, for that seems to be his honest name, and now I must ask some questions. These advertisements cover a period of eleven years and they are worthy of careful study. From 1784 to 1791 there is no attempt at giving any pedigree at all. With the exception of three seasons he seems to have been let, probably on shares, to different keepers, in different parts of the country. From first to last Selah Norton seems to have been his owner. If he had received the pedigree, and the romantic story of his theft, from “one Smith,” as claimed, is it conceivable that he would have concealed that story from the public when it would have added so much to the patronage of his horse? How does it come that not a single man having this stallion in charge, except Selah Norton himself, ever gave his pedigree? What prompted Selah Norton to withdraw the horse from public service, in Hartford, immediately after he first gave his pedigree? Was it because everybody there knew it was a fraud? When the horse was taken to South Hadley in 1793, why did his keeper there refuse to accept either the name True Briton or the new pedigree? It will be observed he was advertised there simply as Beautiful Bay and no pedigree given. The next two years we find him at Ashfield, Massachusetts, to which point it would seem his owner had removed from Hartford. For some reason that can be better imagined than explained, the names Beautiful Bay and True Briton are there dropped and he is rechristened as Traveler. To this change of name the old pedigree is attached, with a very important change in that also, as follows: “Sired by famous old Traveler, imported from Ireland, dam Colonel De Lancey’s imported racer.” These three words, “imported from Ireland,” are very important in two particulars, for they not only knock out the “featherheads” who have been always maintaining that the imported Traveler meant Lloyd’s Traveler of New Jersey, son of Morton’s Traveler, that was imported from Yorkshire into Virginia about 1750, but it convicts Selah Norton of inventing this pedigree, for there was no such horse brought from Ireland. It is certainly unnecessary to say another word in illustration of Selah Norton’s character. When we study these advertisements it becomes as clear as the light of day that nobody believed him or the story that “one Smith” stole the horse from Colonel De Lancey. The crimes of horse stealing and desertion were exceedingly common during the period of the revolution and it is quite possible that “one Smith” may have stolen a horse out of somebody’s stable and sold him to Mr. Ward or Mr. Norton as the same horse that Lieutenant Carpenter stole from Colonel De Lancey, but neither “one Smith” nor “one Norton” knew anything more about his pedigree than he did about the man in the moon, and I will here end the second chapter of this investigation.