"As is well known, the crescent, or, as it is usually designated, the
_crescent montant_, has become the symbol of the Turkish Empire,
which has thence been frequently styled the Empire of the Crescent.
This symbol, however, did not originate with the Turks. Long before
their conquest of Constantinople, the crescent had been used _as
emblematic of sovereignty_, as may be seen from the still-existing
medals struck in honor of Augustus, Trajan, and others; and it formed
from all antiquity the symbol of Byzantium. On the overthrow of this
empire by Mohammed II., the Turks, regarding the crescent, which
everywhere met their eye, as a good omen, adopted it as their chief
bearing."[11] It was, doubtless, "as the emblem of sovereignty," that it
was adopted by Colonel Moultrie.
[11] Brande's Dictionary of Literature, &c. _Crescent._
5. The flag of the floating batteries.--Colonel Joseph Reed to Colonel
Glover and Stephen Moylan, says: "Head-quarters, October 20, 1775:
Please to fix upon some particular color for a flag, and a signal by
which our vessels may know one another. What do you think of a flag
with a white ground, a tree in the middle, the motto, 'Appeal to
Heaven?' This is the flag of our floating batteries."[12]
[12] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iii. p. 1126.
6. The flag called _The Great Union Flag_, hoisted January 2, 1776,
the day which gave being to the new army.--General Washington's letter
of January 4, 1776, to Joseph Reed.[13] This flag, which we shall
designate in this way, was the basis of our National Flag of the
present day.
[13] Ibid. vol. iv. p. 570.
7. The flag presented by Colonel Gadsden, a member of the Naval
Committee of the Continental Congress, to the Provincial Congress of
South Carolina, February 9, 1776, as the standard to be used by the
Commander-in-chief of the American Navy, "being a yellow field, with a
lively representation of a rattlesnake in the middle, in the attitude
of going to strike; and the words underneath, Don't tread on me."[14]
[14] American Archives, 4th series, vol. v. p. 568.
8. The flag of the cruisers of the colony of Massachusetts.--"And the
colors to be a white flag with a green pine-tree, and an inscription,
'Appeal to Heaven.'"--Resolution of Massachusetts Provincial Congress,
April 29, 1776.[15]
[15] Ibid. vol. v. p. 1299.
9. The National Flag of the United States, "The Stars and Stripes,"
adopted as such by a Resolution of Congress, passed June 14,
1777.--"_Resolved_, That the flag of the Thirteen United States be
thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the Union be thirteen
stars, white, in a blue field, representing a new constellation."[16]
[16] Journal of Congress, vol. ii. p. 165.
This Resolution, though passed June 14, 1777, was not made public until
September 3, 1777.[17]
[17] Boston Gazette and Country Journal, Sept. 15, 1777.
With this Table before us, we shall proceed to consider certain badges
intimately connected with the devices on the national flag of England,
afterwards embodied in the national flag of Great Britain, a
modification of which we shall show was, for a time, the flag of the
United States, and the basis of the "Stars and Stripes."
"In the first crusade, the Scots, according to Sir George Mackenzie,
were distinguished by the Cross of St. Andrew; the French, by a white
cross; and the Italians, by a blue one. The Spaniards, according to
Columbiere, bore a red cross, which, in the third crusade (A.D.
1189), was appropriated by the French, the Flemings using a green
cross, and the English a white one. The adherents of Simon Montfort,
the rebellious earl of Leicester, assumed the latter as their
distinguishing mark, thus making the national cognizance the badge
of a faction.
[Illustration: Pl. I.]
"The cross of St. George has been the badge, both of our kings and the
nation, at least from the time of Edward III. Its use was for a while
nearly superseded by the roses, but revived upon the termination of the
wars between the rival houses. It still continues to adorn the banner
of England."[18]
[18] Parker. Terms used in British Heraldry, p. 40.
Of the arms and banner of St. George, we have the following account:
"Saynte George, whyche had whyte arms with a red cross." (Fig. 1, Plate
I.)
"This blessed and holy martyr Saynte George is patrone of the realme of
England; and ye crye of men of warre."[19]
[19] Parker. Terms used in British Heraldry, p. 148.
"With reference to the cross of St. George, Sir N. H. Nicholas
observes: 'That in the fourteenth and subsequent centuries, even if the
custom did not prevail at a much earlier period, every English soldier
was distinguished by wearing that simple and elegant badge over his
armor.'
"The following extract," he adds, "from the ordinances made for the
government of the army with which Richard II. invaded Scotland in 1386,
and which were also adopted by Henry V., will best show the regulations
on the subject.
"Also, that everi man of what estate, condition, or nation thei be of,
so that he be of oure partie, bere a signe of the armes of Saint
George, large, both before and behynde, upon parell that yf he be
slayne or wounded to deth, he that hath so done to him shall not be put
to deth, for default of the cross that he lacketh. And that non enemy
do bere the same token or cross of St. George, notwithstanding if he be
prisoner, upon payne of deth."
"The banner of St. George is white, charged with the red cross."[20]
[20] Ibid. p. 149.
"Banner. A banner is a square flag painted or embroidered with arms,
and of a size proportioned to the rank of the bearer."[21]--See the
Banner of St. George, Fig. 2, Plate I.
[21] Parker. Terms used in British Heraldry, p. 42.
We now come to the description of the arms and banner of Saint Andrew.
The cross of St. Andrew is called a saltire, and is thus described:--
"Saltire, or _saltier_. This honorable ordinary probably represents
the cross whereon St. Andrew was crucified."[22]
[22] Ibid. p. 273.
"Andrew, S., the Apostle: the patron saint of Scotland.
"The arms attributed to him, and emblazoned on the banner bearing his
name, are azure, a saltire argent."[23]--See Fig. 3, Plate I., Arms of
Saint Andrew; and for the banner of Saint Andrew, Fig. 4, Plate I.
[23] Ibid. p. 9.
"Union Jack: the national flag of Great Britain and Ireland.
"The ancient national flag of England was the banner of St. George
(argent, a cross gules), to which the banner of St. Andrew (azure, a
saltire argent), was united (instead of being quartered, according to
ancient custom), in pursuance of a royal proclamation, dated April 12,
1606. An extract from this proclamation follows:--
"Whereas, some difference hath arisen between our subjects of South and
North Britain, travelling by seas, about the bearing of their flags:
for the avoiding of all such contentions hereafter, we have, with the
advice of our council, ordered, that henceforth all our subjects of
this Isle and kingdom of Great Britain, and the members thereof, shall
bear in their maintop the red cross, commonly called St. George's
Cross, and the white cross, commonly called St. Andrew's Cross, joined
together, according to a form made by our heralds, and sent by us to
our admiral, to be published to our said subjects; and in their foretop
our subjects of South Britain shall wear the red cross only, as they
were wont; and the subjects of North Britain, in their foretop, the
white cross only, as they were accustomed."[24]
[24] Parker. Terms used in British Heraldry, p. 315.
The union of the crosses described above may naturally be called the
_king's colors_, though in fact, as James was king both of Scotland
and England, the national flags of either of those kingdoms would also
be the king's colors, in an extended sense; but would be likely to be
designated as the red or white crosses, or the crosses of St. George
or St. Andrew, while this form prepared by the heralds, and only
prescribed for "subjects travelling by seas," would be by those
subjects called, _par excellence_, the king's colors.
"There is," says Sir N. H. Nicholas, "every reason to believe that the
flag arranged by the heralds on this occasion was the same as, on the
union with Scotland [1707], became the national banner." It may be
emblazoned azure, a saltire argent surmounted by a cross gules, edged
of the second. (See Fig. 5, Plate I.) The white edging was no doubt
intended to prevent one color from being placed upon another; but this
precaution was, to say the least, unnecessary; for surely no heraldic
rule would have been broken, if the red cross had been placed upon the
white satire. The contact of the red cross and blue field would have
been authorized by numerous precedents. This combination was
constituted the national flag of Great Britain by a royal proclamation,
issued July 28, 1707.[25]
[25] Note by AUTHOR.--This white edging would, however, show
the union of the two flags, which otherwise might not have
been apparent. We are told, in De Foe's History of the Union,
that great jealousy for the ancient banners of their
respective kingdoms, was shown both by Scots and English.
"No further change was made until the union with Ireland, January 1,
1801, previous to which instructions were given to combine the banner
of St. Patrick (argent, a saltire gules) with the crosses of St. George
and St. Andrew. In obedience to these instructions, the present
National Flag of Great Britain and Ireland was produced."[26]--See Fig.
6, Plate I.
We would observe that, as this last form of the _union_ was only
adopted in 1801, which was the first time that a change was made in the
flags proscribed in 1707, it is only of interest as completing the
account of the Union Jack.
"The word Jack is most probably derived from the surcoat, charged with
a red cross, anciently used by the English soldiery. This appears to
have been called a jacque, whence the word jacket, anciently written
jacquit."[27]
[26][27] Parker. Terms used in British Heraldry, pp. 315-16.
We desire to impress this last remark upon the mind of the reader, as,
in the course of our inquiry, we shall meet more than once with
allusions to the "Jack," the "St. George's Jack," &c., and to invite
special attention to the fact that the badge on the clothes of the
soldiery furnished a badge to the flag of their country. Thus the cross
of St. Andrew, worn by the Scots, was emblazoned on the banner of
Scotland, and the cross of St. George, worn by the English soldiery,
was emblazoned on the banner of England.
This last, the national flag of England, the Red Cross flag, has now,
for us, especial interest.
A singular circumstance furnishes us with proof that this Red Cross
flag was in use in the colonies. We find in the "Journal of John
Winthrop, Esq., the first governor of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay,"
the following memoranda in reference to it:--
"Anno 1634, November 5.] At the Court of Assistants, complaint was made
by one of the country (viz., Richard Brown, of Watertown, in the name
of the rest), that the ensign at Salem was defaced, viz.: one part of
the red cross taken out. Upon this, an attachment was issued against
Richard Davenport, ensign-bearer, to appear at the next court to
answer. Much matter was made of this, as fearing it would be taken as
an act of rebellion, or of like high nature, in defacing the king's
colors;" [_i.e._ the Banner of St. George;] "though the truth were,
it was done upon this opinion, that the red cross was given to the
King of England, by the pope, as an ensign of victory, and so a
superstitious thing, and a relic of antichrist. What proceeding was
hereupon, will appear after, at next court in the first month; for by
reason of the great snows and frosts, we used not to keep courts in
the three winter months."[28]
[28] Winthrop's New England, vol. i. p. 146.
"Anno 1685, mo. 1, 4.] A General Court at Newtown."
"Mr. Endecott was called to answer for defacing the cross in the
ensign; but, because the court could not agree about the thing, whether
the ensigns should be laid by, in regard that many refused to follow
them, the whole case was deferred till the next general court; and the
commissioners for military affairs gave order, in the mean time, that
all ensigns should be laid aside," &c.[29]
[29] Ibid. vol. i. pp. 155-6.
"Anno 1685, mo. 3, 6.] A General Court was held at Newtown, where John
Haynes, Esq., was chosen governor; Richard Bellingham, Esq., deputy
governor; and Mr. Hough, and Mr. Dummer, chosen assistants to the
former; and Mr. Ludlow, the late deputy, left out of the magistracy.
The reason was, partly, because the people would exercise their
absolute power, &c., and partly by some speeches of the deputy, who
protested against the election of the governor as void, for that the
deputies of the several towns had agreed upon the election before they
came, &c. But this was generally discussed, and the election adjudged
good."[30]
[30] Ibid. vol. i. pp. 158.
"Mr. Endecott was also left out, and called into question about the
defacing the cross in the ensign; and a committee was chosen, viz.:
every town chose one (which yet were voted for by all the people), and
the magistrates chose four, who, taking the charge to consider the
offence, and the censure due to it, and to certify the court, after one
or two hours time, made report to the court, that they found the
offence to be great, viz.: rash and without discretion, taking upon him
more authority than he had, and not seeking advice of the court, &c.;
uncharitable, in that he, judging the cross, &c., to be a sin, did
content himself to have reformed it at Salem, not taking care that
others might be brought out of it also; laying a blemish, also, upon
the rest of the magistrates, as if they would suffer idolatry, &c., and
giving occasion to the state of England to think ill of us. For which
they adjudged him worthy admonition, and to be disabled for one year
from bearing any public office; declining any heavier sentence because
they were persuaded he did it out of tenderness of conscience, and not
of evil intent."[31]
[31] Winthrop's New England, vol. i. p. 158.
"The matter of altering the cross in the ensign was referred to the
next meeting (the court having adjourned for three weeks), it being
propounded to turn it to the red and white rose, &c."
[We have seen, under our first notice of the Cross of St. George, that
"its use was, for a while, nearly superseded (in England) by the roses,
but revived upon the termination of the wars between the rival
houses."] "And every man was to deal with his neighbors to still their
minds, who stood so stiff for the cross, until we should fully agree
about it, which was expected, because the ministers had promised to
take pains about it, and to write into England to have the judgment of
the most wise and godly there."[32]
[32] Winthrop's New England, vol. i. p. 158.
"Anno 1635, mo. 12, 1.] At the last General Court it was referred to
the military commissioners to appoint colors for every company; who did
accordingly, and left out the cross in all of them, appointing the
king's arms to be put into that of Castle Island, and Boston to be the
first company."[33]
[33] Ibid. vol. i. p. 180.
"Anno 1636, mo. 8, 15.] Here arrived a ship called the St. Patrick,
belonging to Sir Thomas Wentworth [afterwards the great Earl of
Strafford], deputy of Ireland [_i.e._ viceroy], one Palmer, master.
When she came near Castle Island, the lieutenant of the fort went
aboard her and made her strike her flag, which the master took as a
great injury, and complained of it to the magistrates, who, calling
the lieutenant before them, heard the cause and declared to the master
that he had no commission so to do. And because he had made them
strike to the fort (which had then no color abroad), they tendered the
master such satisfaction as he desired, which was only this, that the
lieutenant, aboard their ship, should acknowledge his error, that so
all the ship's company might receive satisfaction, lest the lord
deputy should have been informed that we had offered that discourtesy
to his ship which we had never offered to any before."
"Mo. 8, 31.] One Miller, master's mate in the Hector, spake to some of
our people aboard his ship, that, because we had not the king's colors
at our fort, we were all traitors and rebels, &c. The governor sent for
the master, Mr. Ferne, and acquainted him with it, who promised to
deliver him to us. Whereupon, we sent the marshal and four sergeants to
the ship for him, but the master not being aboard they would not
deliver him; whereupon, the master went himself and brought him to the
court; and, the words being proved against him by two witnesses, he was
committed. The next day the master, to pacify his men, who were in a
great tumult, requested he might be delivered to him, and did undertake
to bring him before us again the day after, which was granted him, and
he brought him to us at the time appointed. Then, in the presence of
all the rest of the masters, he acknowledged his offence, and set his
hand to a submission, and was discharged."
We will break the thread of this extract to introduce this curious
paper, which, taken from the _Colonial Record,_ i. 179, we, find
given at length in a note to Winthrop's _New England_.
"Whereas I, Thomas Millerd, have given out most false and reproachful
speeches against his majesty's loyal and faithful subjects, dwelling in
the Massachusetts Bay in America, saying that they were all traitors
and rebels, and that I would affirm so much before the governor
himself, which expressions I do confess (and so desire may be
conceived) did proceed from the rashness and distemper of my own brain,
without any just ground or cause so to think or speak, for which my
unworthy and sinful carriage being called in question, I do justly
stand committed. My humble request, therefore, is that, upon this my
full and ingenuous recantation of this my gross failing, it would
please the governor and the rest of the assistants to accept of this my
humble submission, to pass by my fault, and to dismiss me from further
trouble; and this, my free and voluntary confession, I subscribe with
my hand, this 9th June, 1686."
We now resume our extract from Winthrop.
"Then the governor desired the masters that they would deal freely, and
tell us, if they did take any offence, and what they required of us.
They answered, that in regard they should be examined upon their
return, what colors they saw here; they did desire that the king's
colors might be spread at our fort. It was answered, we had not the
king's colors. Thereupon, two of them did offer them freely to us."
This was about June, 1636, and we have seen that it was only in the
year 1635, that the commissioners for military affairs had ordered the
red cross ensigns to be laid aside; hence, it is altogether improbable
that they could not have procured one of these, but, what we have
styled the king's colors _par excellence_, being prescribed only
for ships, was not likely to be owned by the colonial authorities. Its
device, a modification of the cross, about which the question had
arisen, might possibly have served as a device to relieve the
tenderness of the consciences of the authorities, and would also enable
the masters to say, on their return, that they had seen the king's
colors spread at the castle at Boston.
As we see above, "it was answered we had not the king's colors.
Thereupon, two of them did offer them freely to us. We replied, that
for our part, we were fully persuaded that the cross in the ensign was
idolatrous, and, therefore, might not set it up in our ensign; but,
because the fort was the king's, and maintained in his name, we thought
his own colors might be spread there. So the governor accepted the
colors of Captain Palmer, and promised they should be set up at Castle
Island. We had conferred over night with Mr. Cotton, &c., about the
point. The governor, and Mr. Dudley, and Mr. Cotton, were of opinion
that they might be set up at the fort upon this distinction, that it
was maintained in the king's name. Others, not being so persuaded,
answered that the governor and Mr. Dudley, being two of the council,
and being persuaded of the lawfulness, &c., might use their power to
set them up. Some others being not so persuaded, could not join in the
act, yet would not oppose, as being doubtful, &c."[34]
[34] Winthrop's New England, vol. i. p. 187.
"Anno 1636, mo. 4, 16.] The governor, with consent of Mr. Dudley, gave
warrant to Lieutenant Morris, to spread the king's colors at Castle
Island, when the ships passed by. It was done at the request of the
masters of the ten ships which were then here; yet with this
protestation, that we held the cross in the ensign idolatrous, and,
therefore, might not set it up in our own ensigns; but this being kept
as the king's fort, the governor and some others were of opinion that
his own colors might be spread upon it. The colors were given us by
Captain Palmer, and the governor, in requital, sent him three
beaver-skins."[35]
[35] Winthrop's New England, vol. ii. p. 344.
The following order of the Court of Massachusetts, leads us to conclude
that these colors, or those containing the king's arms, were continued
in use until they were likely to bring the colony under the displeasure
of the Parliament of England, which, in arms against the king, used the
Red Cross flag, or St. George's banner. We then find the colony of
Massachusetts giving orders on this matter as follows:--
"MASSACHUSETTS RECORDS, 1651.[36]
"Forasmuch as the court conceives the old English colors now used
by the Parliament of England to be a necessary badge of distinction
betwixt the English and other nations in all places of the world,
till the state of England shall alter the same, which we much
desire, we being of the same nation, have, therefore, ordered that
the captain of the castle shall presently advance the aforesaid
colors of England upon the castle upon all necessary occasions."
[36] Hazard, vol. i. p. 554.
These extracts show the importance attached to _colors_ in those
times.
[Illustration: Pl. II.
This question, and indeed all questions, as to the flags to be used
both at sea and land by the subjects of Great Britain, and the
dominions thereunto belonging, were, however, set at rest, by the 1st
article of the treaty of union between Scotland and England, from which
fact the flags then prescribed were called _Union flags_.
"Act of Parliament ratifying and approving the treaty of the two
kingdoms of Scotland and England, Jan. 16, 1707."
"I. Article. That the two kingdoms of Scotland and England shall, upon
the first day of May next, ensuing the date hereof, and forever after,
be united into one kingdom by the name of Great Britain; and that the
ensigns armorial of the said united kingdom be such as her majesty
shall appoint; and the crosses of St. Andrew and St. George be
conjoined in such manner as her majesty shall think fit, and used
in _all_ flags, banners, standards, and ensigns, both at sea and
land."[37]
[37] History of the Union of Scotland and England, by Danl.
De Foe, p. 528.
Under the head of Union Jack, we have shown how these crosses were
conjoined. We now give a portion of the proclamation of July 28, 1707,
referred to in that account of the Union Jack.
"BY THE QUEEN: PROCLAMATION.
"Declaring what ensigns and colors shall be borne at sea in
merchant ships, and vessels belonging to any of her majesty's
subjects of Great Britain, and the dominions thereunto belonging.
"ANNE R.
"Whereas, by the first article of the treaty of union, as the same
hath been ratified and approved by several acts of Parliament, the
one made in our Parliament of England, and the other in our
Parliament of Scotland, it was provided and agreed that the ensigns
armorial of our kingdom of Great Britain be such as we should
appoint, and the crosses of St. George and St. Andrew conjoined in
such manner as we should think fit, and used in all flags, banners,
standards, and ensigns, both at sea and land, we have therefore
thought fit, by, and with the advice of our privy council, to order
and appoint the ensign described on the side or margent hereof [see
Fig. 7, Plate I.], to be worn on board of all ships or vessels
belonging to any of our subjects whatsoever; and to issue this, our
royal proclamation, to notify the same to all our loving subjects,
hereby strictly charging and commanding the masters of all merchant
ships and vessels belonging to any of our subjects, whether
employed in our service or otherwise, and all other persons whom it
may concern, to wear the said ensign on board their ships and
vessels. And whereas, divers of our subjects have presumed, on
board their ships, to wear our flags, jacks, and pendants, which,
according to ancient usage, have been appointed to a distinction
for our ships, and many times thinking to avoid the punishment due
for the same, have worn flags, jacks, and pendants in shape and
mixture of colors, so little different from ours, as not without
difficulty to be distinguished therefrom, which practice has been
found attended with manifold inconveniences: for prevention of the
same for the future, we do, therefore, with the advice of our privy
council, hereby strictly charge and command all our subjects
whatsoever, that they do not presume to wear on any of their ships
or vessels, our jack, commonly called the Union Jack, nor any
pendants, nor any such colors as are usually borne by our ships
without particular warrant for their so doing from us, or our high
admiral of Great Britain, or the commissioners for executing the
office of high admiral for the time being; and do hereby further
command all our loving subjects, that, without such warrant as
aforesaid, they presume not to wear on board their ships or
vessels, any flags, jacks, pendants, or colors, made in imitation
of ours, or any kind of pendant, whatsoever, or any other ensign,
than the ensign described in the side or margent hereof, which
shall be worn instead of the ensign before this time usually worn
in merchant vessels. Saving that, for the better distinction of
such ships as shall have commissions of letters of mart or
reprisals against the enemy, and any other ships or vessels which
may be employed by principal officers and commissioners of our
navy, the principal officers of our ordnance, the commissioners for
victualling our navy, the commissioners for our customs, and the
commissioners for transportation for our service--relating
particularly to those offices our royal will and pleasure is, That
all such ships as have commissions of letters of mart and
reprisals, shall, besides the colors or ensign hereby appointed to
be worn by merchant ships, wear a red jack, with a Union Jack
described in a canton at the upper corner thereof, next the staff
[see Fig. 1, Plate II.], and that such ships and vessels as shall
be employed for our service by the principal officers and
commissioners of our navy, &c. [same enumeration as before], shall
wear a red jack with a Union Jack in a canton at the upper corner
thereof, next the staff, as aforesaid; and in the other part of the
said jack, shall be described the seal used in such of the
respective offices aforesaid, by which the said ships and vessels
shall be employed. [This flag was the same as Fig. 1, Plate II.,
except the seal of the office by which employed.] And we do
strictly charge and command, &c., (and the residue orders, seizure
of vessels not obeying this proclamation, by wearing other ensigns,
&c., and to return the names of such ships and vessels, and orders
strict inquiry into any violation of the proclamation, and then
directs it to take effect in the Channel or British seas and in the
North Sea, after twelve days from the date of the proclamation, and
from the mouth of the Channel unto Cape St. Vincent after six weeks
from the date, and beyond the cape, and on this side the
equinoctial line, as well in the ocean and Mediterranean as
elsewhere, after ten weeks from the date, and beyond the line,
after the space of eight months from the date of these presents.)
"Given at our court at Windsor, the 28th day of July, in the sixth
year of our reign.[38]
"GOD SAVE THE QUEEN."
[38] The Boston News Letter, No. 197, from Monday, Jan. 19,
to Monday, Jan. 26, 1707.
In a description of Boston Harbor, in 1720, thirteen years after the
date of this proclamation, we learn that, "to prevent any possible
surprise from an enemy, there is a light-house built on a rock
appearing above water, about three long leagues from the town, which,
in time of war, makes a signal to the castle, and the castle to the
town, by hoisting and lowering the Union flag so many times as there
are ships approaching."[39]
[39] Neal's History of New England, p. 585.
After having given the first article of the treaty, and the above
proclamation, this description is only useful as proving that the term
"Union Flag" was the familiar one applied to describe the flags
established under the union, as well in the colonies as the mother
country, and explains the following note in Frothingham's _Siege of
Boston_.
Frothingham says: "In 1774, there are frequent notices of Union flags
in the newspapers, but I have not met with any description of the
devices on them."[40] After the history of Union flags already given,
this will not appear surprising; for who, in our day, speaking of the
"Stars and Stripes," would pause to describe its devices. We, however,
are inclined to the opinion that the flags spoken of in the newspapers,
referred to by Mr. Frothingham, were the ensigns described in the
proclamation of Queen Anne, as being the common ensign of the
commercial marine of "Great Britain, and the dominions thereof." For,
as such, they must have been more easily procurable than the Union
Jacks, and more familiar to the people, and therefore would appeal with
most force to the popular sentiment.
[40] Siege of Boston, p. 104, note.
That this was the case in the colony of New York, we learn from the
following: "In March, 1775, 'a Union flag with a red field' was hoisted
at New York upon the liberty-pole, bearing the inscription 'George Rex,
and the Liberties of America,' and, upon the reverse, 'No Popery.'"[41]
With the exception of the mottoes, this was the same flag as is
represented, Fig. 7, Plate I.
[41] T. Westcott, Notes and Queries. Literary World, Oct. 2,
1852.
Frothingham gives us to understand that they were displayed on
liberty-poles and on the famous "Liberty Tree" on Boston Common. In
this connection, we will quote a few lines from a letter, dated
Philadelphia, December 27, 1775, to show the temper of the public mind
at that time, and to indicate the name given to the colonies, whose
flag we are now about to consider.
"TO THE PEOPLE OF NORTH AMERICA:
"PHILADELPHIA, December 27, 1775.
"Those who have the general welfare of the United English Colonies
in North America sincerely at heart, who wish to see peace
restored, and her liberties established on a solid foundation, may,
at present, be divided into two classes, viz.: those who 'look
forward to an independency as the only state in which they can
perceive any security for our liberties and privileges,' and those
who 'think it not impossible that Britain and America may yet be
united.'
"If the present struggle should end in the total independence of
America, which is not impossible, every one will acknowledge the
necessity of framing what may be called the 'Constitution of the
United English Colonies.' If, on the other hand, it should
terminate in a reunion with Great Britain, there yet appears so
evident a necessity of such a constitution that every good man must
desire it."[42]
[42] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iv. p. 467.
This letter shows the importance the Union of the Colonies, lately
entered into, held in the mind of the public. Prior to its being
entered into, its necessity was thus forcibly indicated to the public
mind. The newspapers commonly bore the device of a disjointed snake,
represented as divided into thirteen portions. Each portion bearing the
initials of one of the colonies, and under it the motto, "Join, or
die." Thus impressed, we can readily perceive how naturally they seized
upon the flag in use in the mother country and its dominions, as an
emblem of union among the members of that mother country, to indicate
the necessity of it among the colonies, and, by displaying it from
liberty-poles, &c., indicated the object for which union was necessary,
viz.: to secure the liberty of British subjects.
The first authentic account of the display of the Union flag, as the
flag of the united colonies, is from the pen of General Washington, in
a letter addressed to Colonel Joseph Reed, his military secretary.
"CAMBRIDGE, January 4, 1776.
"DEAR SIR: We are at length favored with a sight of his majesty's
most gracious speech, breathing sentiments of tenderness and
compassion for his deluded American subjects. The echo is not yet
come to hand, but we know what it must be; and, as Lord North said
(and we ought to have believed and acted accordingly), we now know
the ultimatum of British justice. The speech I send you. A volume
of them was sent out by the Boston gentry; and, farcical enough, we
gave great joy to them, without knowing or intending it; for, on
that day, the day which gave being to the new army, but before the
proclamation came to hand, we had hoisted the Union flag in
compliment to the united colonies. But, behold! it was received in
Boston as a token of the deep impression the speech had made upon
us, and as a signal of submission. So we hear, by a person out of
Boston, last night. By this time, I presume, they begin to think it
strange that we have not made a formal surrender of our lives."
[From _Philadelphia Gazette_], note to the above, in _American
Archives_.
"PHILADELPHIA, January 15, 1776.
"Our advices conclude with the following anecdote: That, upon the
king's speech arriving at Boston, a great number of them were
reprinted and sent out to our lines on the 2d of January, which,
being also the day of forming the new army, The Great Union Flag
was hoisted on Prospect Hill, in compliment to the United Colonies.
This happening soon after the speeches were delivered at Roxbury,
but before they were received at Cambridge, the Boston gentry
supposed it to be a token of the deep impression the speech had
made, and a signal of submission. That they were much disappointed
at finding several days elapse without some formal measure leading
to a surrender, with which they had begun to flatter themselves."
We observe, in General Washington's letter, that the Americans,
"farcical enough," "without knowing or intending it," led the Boston
gentry to imagine them about to surrender, because a Union flag was
displayed, which was only displayed in compliment to the United
Colonies on the day the army, organized under the orders of Congress,
_subsequent_ to the union of the thirteen colonies, came into being.
And, in the extract from the newspaper account of this, that the
flag was displayed on Prospect Hill, and that it must have been a
peculiarly marked Union flag, to be called The Great Union Flag. As
this was the name given to the national banner of Great Britain, this
indicates this flag as the national banner of the United Colonies.
Lieutenant Carter, a British officer, very naturally explains both
these circumstances. He was on Charlestown Heights, and says: January
26, 1776: "The king's speech was sent by a flag to them on the 1st
inst. In a short time after they received it, they hoisted an Union
flag (above the continental with thirteen stripes) at Mount Pisgah;
their citadel fired thirteen guns, and gave the like number of
cheers."[43]
[43] Siege of Boston, p. 283.
This account of the flag, from Lieut. Carter, is corroborated by the
following from the captain of an English transport, to his owners in
London, when taken in connection with the extract subjoined to it,
taken from the _British Annual Register_ for 1776. The captain
writes:--
"BOSTON, Jan. 17, 1776.
"I can see the rebels' camp very plain, whose colors, a little
while ago, were entirely red; but, on the receipt of the king's
speech (which they burnt), they have hoisted the Union Flag, which
is here supposed to intimate the union of the provinces."[44]
[44] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iv. p. 711.
The _Annual Register_ says: "The arrival of a copy of the king's
speech, with an account of the fate of the petition from the
Continental Congress, is said to have excited the greatest degree of
rage and indignation among them; as a proof of which, the former was
publicly burnt in the camp; and they are said, on this occasion, to
have changed their colors from a plain red ground, which they had
hitherto used, to a flag with thirteen stripes, as a symbol of the
number and union of the colonies."[45]
[45] British Annual Register, 1776, p. 147.
We have already shown that the first flag spoken of in both the above
accounts (Flag No. 3) in our Table, bore certain mottoes; and not being
precise in the description of the flag, which for months had been
displayed before their eyes, we may expect inaccuracies in the
description of a flag newly presented to them, and which, even to an
officer on Charlestown Heights, who, as appears, was at some pains to
describe it, appeared to be _two_ flags; and remembering that this
flag was supposed to be displayed on the receipt of the king's speech,
the following account of the colors of British regiments explains why
it was especially regarded by the British as a token of submission.
"The kings, or _first_ color of every regiment, is to be the Great
Union throughout.
"The _second_ color is to be the color of the facing of the regiment,
with the Union in the upper canton, except those regiments which are
faced with red, white, or black.
"The first standard, Guidon, or color of regiments of the line, is not
to be carried by any guard but that of the King, Queen, Prince of
Wales, Commander-in-chief, or Admiral of the Fleet, being of the royal
family; and, except in those cases, it is always to remain with the
regiment."[46]
[46] King's Regulations for the British Army, Colors, &c.
From the above we see that, to the mind of a British officer, the Union
flag, supposed to have been displayed in connection with the receipt of
the king's speech, above a flag with thirteen stripes, would indicate
an acknowledgment of the supremacy of the king over the United
Colonies, supposed to be represented in the thirteen stripes.
Without further proof, therefore, we may conclude that the "Union"
flag, displayed by General Washington, was the union of the crosses of
St. George and St. Andrew, with thirteen stripes through the field of
the flag. (See Fig. 2, Plate II.)
On the evacuation of Boston by the British, this standard was, on the
entrance of the American army into Boston, carried by Ensign
Richards.[47]
[47] American Archives, 4th series, vol. v. p. 423.
While we may fairly infer from General Washington's letter, that this
emblem of union had presented itself to his mind as such, we may also
infer from his not describing its accompanying devices, to mark the
compliment to the United Colonies, that he supposed Colonel Joseph
Reed, his military secretary, fully acquainted with them; and from this
we may conclude Colonel Reed had something to do with its preparation.
This conclusion is strengthened by the fact, that Colonel Joseph Reed
was Secretary to the Committee of Conference sent by Congress to
arrange with General Washington the details of the organization of the
army, which went into being January 2, 1776. And, at the very time that
Committee was in session at the camp at Cambridge, we find Colonel Reed
having the subject of flags under consideration. To the reply to a
letter written by him at that time, we may possibly trace the origin of
the use of a modification of the British ensign, a drawing of which is
given under Queen Anne's proclamation before quoted, as the flag of the
United Colonies. And we shall give good reasons to conclude that this
modification consisted in applying to its red field a sufficient number
of white stripes, to divide the whole into thirteen stripes, alternate
red and white, as above shown; and we will show the propriety of this
by establishing the fact that a _stripe_ was the badge of rank in
the ununiformed army that assembled about Boston in defence of liberty.
Colonel Joseph Reed, Secretary to the Committee of Conference from
Congress, and Military Secretary of General Washington, the Committee
being then in session, wrote, October 20, 1776: "Please fix upon some
particular color for a flag and a signal by which our vessels may know
one another.[48] What do you think of a flag with a white ground, a tree
in the middle, the motto, 'Appeal to Heaven?' This is the flag of our
floating batteries." To which Colonels Glover and Moylan replied,
October 21, 1775: "That as Broughton and Selman, who sailed that
morning, had none but their old colors, they had appointed the signal
by which they could be known by their friends to be 'the ensign up to
the maintopping lift."[49]
[48] From this, we may justly conclude that the Committee of
Conference, composed of Dr. Franklin, Mr. Lynch, and Mr.
Harrison, had the subject of the flag under consideration,
and that the flag prepared under their supervision was the
one displayed as the flag of the United Colonies, on the day
the army organized by them, General Washington, &c., went
into being.
[49] Siege of Boston, p. 261.
This ensign, which is called their "old colors," must have been the
ensign spoken of and described in Queen Anne's proclamation. (See Fig.
7, Plate I.) Since we have seen _one_ ensign prescribed 1707, for the
merchant ships and vessels of Great Britain, and the dominions
thereunto belonging, and that no change was made until 1801. This
being the case, the ensign of the colonial cruisers, inasmuch as they
were armed merchant vessels, must have been the British ensign
displayed at the maintopping lift. There were several reasons for
this; the most forcible of which were, that it being usual to have no
special place for the display of the national ensign at sea, but the
custom being to exhibit it in such part of the vessel from which it
could be most conveniently observed by the strange sail (on which
occasion only it was worn at sea), to adopt a particular place for its
display would be to give it a new character; one peculiarly happy for
the then state of affairs, as it would betray the _English_ transports
to the colonial cruisers, and would not betray the _Colonial_ cruisers
to the British ships of war, as "the maintopping lift" must have been
such a position as would not attract the attention of those not in the
secret. This reply of the gentlemen charged with the continental or
colonial cruisers, would readily have suggested a modification of the
British ensign for the ensign of the United Colonies of North America;
for the transition, in the adoption of a flag, from a particular place
for the display of a particular flag, to some modification of the same
flag, was both natural and easy; especially, as a slight modification
of this flag would enable them to indicate the number of colonies,
while the emblem of union would happily indicate the union of those
colonies, and at the same time would have justified them in saying, in
their address of December 6, 1775, "Allegiance to our king. Our words
have ever avowed it, our conduct has ever been in keeping with it," as
having acknowledged their dependence on the mother country, even in
the flag with which they were to struggle against her.
Before we proceed to consider the origin of the stripes, we shall give
an account of the same flag as displayed on the fleet fitted out at
Philadelphia about this time, so as to fix, beyond a doubt, this emblem
of _union_. As a preliminary, we will give a short extract of the
sailing orders given to Benedict Arnold's fleet,[50] when he set out on
his expedition to Canada. They may be found at length in Major Meigs's
journal of that expedition.
[50] Mass. Historical Collections, 2d series, vol. ii. p.
228.
"1st Signal." "For speaking with the whole fleet, _ensign_ at
maintopmast head."
"2d Signal." "For chasing a sail, ensign at foretopmast head."
"6th Signal." "For boarding any vessel, Jack at maintopmast head, and
the whole fleet to draw up in a line as near as possible."
The Jack, or Union, or Union Jack, as it was and is called, was and is,
to this day, in the navy of Great Britain, the flag of the admiral of
the fleet; and was probably, as such, worn by the vessel of the
commander-in-chief of this expedition, and its use probably suggested
the adoption of a standard for the commander-in-chief of the first
American fleet, Flag No. 7, in our table. The date of sailing of the
above fleet was Sept. 19, 1775, before the letter of Colonels Glover
and Moylan, speaking of the "old colors," was written (the date of the
latter was Oct. 21, 1775), and the use of the terms jack and ensign
strengthens the conclusion that the term "old colors" meant British
colors, for we shall find, in the orders of the first American fleet,
that the ensign and jack are called the striped ensign and Jack.
In this connection, we give a few extracts from the sailing orders of
the first American fleet, "given the several captains in the fleet, at
sailing from the Capes of Delaware, Feb. 17, 1776."[51]
[51] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iv. p. 1179.
"Sir: You are hereby ordered to keep company with me, if possible, and
truly observe the signals given by the ship I am in."
"In case you are in any very great danger of being taken, you are to
destroy these orders and your signals."