[Footnote 88: This is what Dr. Ramsay, in his account quoted above, on

pages 85 and 86, erroneously states was a proposed conference as to

terms of capitulation.]

[Footnote 89: _Note._--Mr. Hildreth says that "Wyoming did not number

three thousand inhabitants." (History of the United States, Vol. III.,

Chap. xxxviii., p. 262.) The number of the slain could not have been

greater than those mentioned above by Dr. Ramsay (p. 86), who states

that, instead of those in the garrison being "indiscriminately

butchered," they were allowed to cross the Susquehanna and make their

way through the woods to neighbouring settlements.]

[Footnote 90: Colonel Stone states that the Provincials "intended to

make a quick movement, and take the enemy by surprise;" but their

purpose was discovered by an Indian scout. He then gives the following

account of the battle and of the "massacre" which followed:

"The Provincials pushed rapidly forward; but the British and Indians

were prepared to receive them, 'their line being formed a small distance

in front of their camp, in a plain thinly covered with pine, shrub, oaks

and undergrowth, and extending from the river to a marsh at the foot of

the mountain' (Marshall). 'On coming in view of the enemy, the

Americans, who had previously marched in a single column, instantly

deployed into a line of equal extent, and attacked from right to left at

the same time' (Col. Z. Butler's letter). 'The right of the Americans

was commanded by Colonel Zebulon Butler, opposed to Colonel John Butler,

commanding the enemy's left. Colonel Dennison commanded the left of the

Americans, and was opposed by the Indians forming the enemy's right'

(Chapman). The battle commenced at about forty rods distance, without

much execution at the onset, as the brushwood interposed obstacles to

the sight. The militia stood the fire well for a short time, and as they

pressed forward there was some giving way on the enemy's right.

Unluckily, just at this moment the appalling war-whoop of the Indians

rang in the rear of the Americans' left; the Indian leader, having

conducted a large party of his warriors through the marsh, succeeded in

turning Dennison's flank. A heavy and destructive fire was

simultaneously poured into the American ranks; and amidst the confusion,

Colonel Dennison directed his men to 'fall back,' to avoid being

surrounded, and to gain time to bring his men into order again. This

direction was mistaken for an order to 'retreat,' whereupon the whole

line broke, and every effort of their officers to restore order was

unavailing. At this stage of the battle, and while thus engaged, the

American officers mostly fell. The flight was general. The Indians,

throwing away their rifles, rushed forward with their tomahawks, making

dreadful havoc; answering the cries for mercy with the hatchet, and

adding to the universal consternation those terrific yells which invest

savage warfare with tenfold horror. So alert was the foe in his bloody

pursuit, that less than sixty of the Americans escaped either the rifle

or the tomahawk. Of the militia officers, there fell one

lieutenant-colonel, one major, ten captains, six lieutenants, and two

ensigns. Colonel Durkee and Captains Hewett and Ransom were likewise

killed. Some of the fugitives escaped by swimming the river, and others

by flying to the mountains. As the news of the defeat spread down the

valley, the greater part of the women and children, and those who had

remained to protect them, likewise ran to the woods and mountains, while

those who could not escape thus sought refuge in Fort Wyoming. The

Indians, apparently wearied with pursuit and slaughter, desisted and

betook themselves to secure the spoils of the vanquished.

"On the morning of the 4th, the day after the battle, Colonel John

Butler, with the combined British and Indian forces, appeared before

Fort Wyoming and demanded its surrender. 'The inhabitants, both within

and without the fort, did not on that emergency sustain a character for

courage becoming men of spirit in adversity. They were so intimidated as

to give up without fighting; great numbers ran off; and those who

remained all but betrayed Colonel Zebulon Butler, their commander' (Col.

Z. Butler's letter). 'The British Colonel Butler sent several flags,

requiring an unconditional surrender of his opposing namesake and the

few continental troops yet remaining, but offering to spare the

inhabitants their property and effects. But with the American colonel

the victor would not treat on any terms; and the people thereupon

compelled Colonel Dennison to comply with conditions which his commander

had refused.' The consequence was that Colonel Zebulon Butler contrived

to escape from the fort with the remains of Captain Hewett's company of

regulars (_Idem._), and Colonel Dennison entered into articles of

capitulation. 'By these it was stipulated that the settlers should be

disarmed, and their garrison demolished; that all prisoners and public

stores should be given up; that the property of the people called Tories

should be made good, and they be permitted to remain peaceably upon

their farms. In behalf of the settlers it was stipulated that their

lives and property should be preserved, and that they should be left in

the unmolested occupancy of their farms' (Chapman's History).

"Unhappily, however, the British commander either could not or would not

enforce the terms of capitulation (see page 91, where Mr. Hildreth says

that 'Colonel Butler, desirous to fulfil these terms of capitulation,

presently marched away with his Tories, but he could not induce the

Indians to follow. They remained behind, burned the houses, ravaged the

fields, killed such as resisted, and drove the miserable women and

children through the woods and mountains to seek refuge where they

might.'), which were to a great extent disregarded as well by the Tories

as the Indians. Instead of finding protection, the valley was again laid

waste, the houses and improvements were destroyed by fire, and the

country plundered. Families were broken up and dispersed, men and their

wives separated, mothers torn from their children and some of them

carried into captivity, while far the greater number fled to the

mountains, and wandered through the wilderness to the older settlements.

Some died of their wounds, others from want and fatigue, while others

were still lost in the wilderness or were heard of no more. Several

perished in a great swamp in the neighbourhood, which, from the

circumstance, acquired the name of 'the Shades of Death,' and retains it

to this day. These were painful scenes. But it does not appear that

anything like a massacre followed the capitulation." (Life of Joseph

Brant, and Border Wars of the American Revolution, Vol. I., Chap. xv.,

pp. 334-336.)]

CHAPTER XXXV.

AMERICAN RETALIATION FOR THE ALLEGED "MASSACRE OF WYOMING," AS NARRATED

BY AMERICAN HISTORIANS.

We will now state from the same historical authorities the _revenge_

which the continentals took for the "Massacre of Wyoming."

Dr. Ramsay says: "Soon after the destruction of the Wyoming settlement,

an expedition was carried on against the Indians by Colonel Zebulon

Butler, of the Pennsylvania troops. He and his party having gained the

head of the Delaware, October 1st, marched down the river two days, and

then struck across the country to the Susquehanna. They burnt or

destroyed the Indian villages both in that quarter and the other

settlements; but the inhabitants escaped. The destruction was extended

for several miles on both sides of the Susquehanna. They completed the

expedition in sixteen days."[91]

This destruction of "Indian villages" and "other settlements" to the

extent of "several miles on both sides of the Susquehanna" was more than

an equivalent revenge for the destruction of Wyoming. But it was only

the beginning of vengeance and destruction, not only against the

immediate offenders in the case of Wyoming, but the pretext for a

resolution and order of Congress itself for the entire destruction of

the Six Indian Nations, though their chiefs had held no council and

given no order as to the attack upon the settlement of Wyoming, and had

nothing to do with it, except that one of their tribes, with possibly a

few stragglers from some of the other tribes. With this exception, as is

shown by the narratives above quoted, the Six Nations had no connection

with the destruction of Wyoming; were living quietly and industriously

on their well-cultivated farms, though friendly to the royal cause. Yet

Congress, by an order which, we believe, has no parallel in the annals

of any civilized nation, commands the complete destruction of those

people as a nation. It is cruel, indeed, and revolting to humanity, to

kill and scalp ever so small a number of individuals, including women

and children; but is it less cruel and revolting to render them

houseless by thousands, to destroy the fruits of their labours, to exile

them from their homes (after having destroyed them), and leave them to

nakedness and starvation? Yet such was the case in the execution of the

order of Congress for the extermination of the Six Nations.

"The determination," says Dr. Andrews, "was now taken by Congress to

destroy this Indian nation. * * The intelligence of the preparations

that were making against them was received by the Indians with great

courage and firmness. * * They took a strong position in the most woody

and mountainous part of the country, which they fortified with great

judgment. * * General Sullivan attacked them in this encampment on the

29th of August. They stood a hot cannonade for more than two hours; but

the breastwork of logs being almost destroyed, and the Americans having

reached the top of the hill on their left, they were apprehensive of

being surrounded, and retreated immediately with the utmost speed. * *

The behaviour of the Indians on this day was very courageous; they

returned the fire of the Americans with great spirit and regularity; and

would, it was thought, have maintained their ground had not the

Americans been provided with a train of artillery, to which the defeat

of the Indians was principally owing. * * This engagement proved

decisive. After their trenches were forced, they fled without making any

further endeavour to rally. They were pursued two or three miles; but

their flight was so swift that they could not be overtaken. Their loss

in slain and wounded was very considerable, though few prisoners were

made.

"The consternation occasioned among the Indians by this defeat was such,

that they lost all hope of retrieving their fortunes, and dropped all

idea of further resistance. As the Americans advanced, they retreated

before them with the utmost precipitation, and suffered them to proceed,

without any obstruction, in the destructive operations they were

commissioned to perform.

"In pursuance of the orders he had received, General Sullivan penetrated

into the heart of the country inhabited by the Five Nations, spreading

everywhere the most extensive desolation. His letter to the Congress,

giving an account of the progress and proceedings of the army under his

command, was as complete a journal of destruction as ever was penned. No

less than forty towns and settlements were destroyed, besides detached

habitations. All their fields of corn and all their orchards and

plantations; whatever, in short, was in a state of cultivation,

underwent the same fate. The devastation was such, that on the American

army's leaving that country not a house was left standing to their

knowledge, nor an Indian to be seen.

"Such was the issue of this celebrated expedition, undertaken by way of

retaliation for the outrages which the Indians (Senecas) had committed

on the frontiers, and particularly in destroying the unfortunate

settlement of Wyoming during the preceding summer.

"What rendered this total ruin of the country possessed by the Five

Nations the more remarkable was the degree of knowledge and expertness

in agriculture and in various domestic arts to which it was now for the

first time discovered that the Indians had attained. It appeared by

General Sullivan's account that the lands about the towns were

excellently cultivated, and their houses large and elegantly

constructed. The extent of their industry may be conjectured by his

asserting that the quantity of corn destroyed could not, by a moderate

computation, amount to less than 160,000 bushels; that their orchards

were so well stocked that no less than 1,500 trees were cut down in one

orchard only, numbers of which had evidently been planted many years;

and that their garden grounds contained immense quantities of vegetables

of every kind."[92]

Mr. Bancroft represents what he in one place terms "the great

expedition" as a mere raid for the chastisement of the Seneca Indians.

He says: "Moved by the massacres of Wyoming and Cherry Valley, Congress,

on the 25th of February, had directed Washington to protect the inland

frontiers and chastise the Seneca Indians. * * The best part of the

season was gone when Sullivan, on the last of July, moved from Wyoming.

His arrival at Tioga sent terror to the Indians. * * Several of the

chiefs said to Colonel Bolton, in council, 'Why does not the great king,

our father, assist us? Our villages will be cut off, and we can no

longer fight his battles.'

"On the 22nd of August, the day after he was joined by New York troops

under General James Clinton, Sullivan began his march up the Tioga into

the heart of the Indian country. On the same day, Little David, a Mohawk

chief, delivered a message from himself and the Six Nations to General

Haldimand, then Governor of Canada: 'Brother! for these three years past

the Six Nations have been running a race against fresh enemies, and are

almost out of breath. Now we shall see whether you are our loving strong

brother, or whether you deceive us. Brother! we are still strong for the

King of England, if you will show us that he is a man of his word, and

that he will not abandon his brothers the Six Nations.' * * The march

into the country of the Senecas, on the left, extended to Genesee; on

the right, detachments reached Cayuga lake. After destroying eighteen

villages and their fields of corn, Sullivan, whose army had suffered for

want of supplies, returned to New Jersey."[93]

Mr. Hildreth's account of this expedition, though brief, is more

comprehensive and satisfactory than that of Mr. Bancroft. Mr. Hildreth

says:

"The command of the enterprise against the Indians, declined by Gates,

was given to Sullivan. Three brigades from the main army, under Poor,

Hand, and Maxwell--New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey

troops--were assembled at Wyoming. A New York brigade ('upwards of 1,000

men,' says Dr. Ramsay), under General James Clinton, hitherto employed

in guarding the frontier of that State, crossed from the Mohawk to Lake

Otsego (one of the sources of the Susquehanna), dammed the lake, and so

raised its level, and then by breaking away the dam produced an

artificial flood, by the aid of which the boats were rapidly carried

down the north-east branch of the Susquehanna, to form a junction with

Sullivan. * *

"Sullivan's army, amounting to 5,000 men, passed up the Chemung branch

of the Susquehanna. At Newton, now Elmira, they encountered a strong

body of the enemy,[94] partly Indians and partly Tories, under Brant,

the Butlers and Johnson, entrenched on a rising ground and disposed in

ambuscade. Sullivan detached Poor to gain the rear, while he attacked

them in front with artillery. Having put them to rout, he crossed to

the hitherto unexplored valley of the Genesee. That want of food might

compel the Indians and their Tory allies to emigrate, everything was

ravaged. The ancient Indian orchards were cut down; many bushels of corn

were destroyed, and eighteen villages, composed largely of frame houses,

were burned. Provisions failed. Such at least was the reason that

Sullivan gave, and the attack upon Niagara, the great object of the

enterprise, was abandoned.

"A simultaneous expedition from Pittsburg ascended the Alleghany, and

visited with similar devastation all the villages along the river.

Pending these operations, and to prevent any aid from Canada, divers

artifices were employed by Washington to create the belief of an

intended invasion of that province."[95]

The account of this expedition given by Dr. Ramsay corresponds, with

some additional particulars, with that given by Dr. Andrews, as above

quoted, and almost in the same words. He says:

"The Indians who form the confederacy of the Six Nations, commonly

called Mohawks, were the objects of this expedition. They inhabit that

immense and fertile tract of country which lies between New England, the

Middle States, and the Province of Canada. * * The Indians, on hearing

of the expedition projected against them, acted with firmness. They

collected their strength, took possession of proper ground, and

fortified it with judgment. General Sullivan, on the 29th of August,

attacked them in their works. They stood a cannonade for more than two

hours, but then gave way. This engagement proved decisive. After the

trenches were forced, the Indians fled without making any attempt to

rally. The consternation occasioned among them by this defeat was so

great, that they gave up all ideas of further resistance. As the

Americans advanced into their settlements, the Indians retreated before

them, without throwing any obstruction in their way. General Sullivan

penetrated into the heart of the country inhabited by the Mohawks, and

spread desolation everywhere. Many settlements in the form of towns were

destroyed. All their fields of corn, and whatever was in a state of

cultivation, underwent the same fate. Scarcely anything in the form of

a house was left standing, nor was an Indian to be seen.

"To the surprise of the Americans, they found the lands about the Indian

towns well cultivated, and their houses both large and commodious. The

quantity of corn destroyed was immense. Orchards, in which were several

hundred fruit trees, were cut down; and of them many appeared to have

been planted for a long series of years. Their gardens, replenished with

a variety of useful vegetables, were laid waste."[96]

From this review of the invasions and contests between the Americans and

Indians, it is clear that the Indians were the greater sufferers in life

and property. The mutual hatreds of former years, when the colonies were

warring with the French (instead of being, as now, in alliance with

them), and the Indians were in the interest and service of the French,

seems to have been perpetuated on both sides, and to have become more

intense on the part of the Americans after the failure of their efforts

to secure the Indians to their side. The old contests between the

Southern colonists and the Indians were renewed and repeated with

intense bitterness; and in the Northern colonies the policy of Congress

and its agents was to crush and exterminate the Indians altogether. In

acts of individual cruelty, their historical and characteristic mode of

war, the Indians exceeded the Americans; but in acts of wholesale

destruction of life and property, the Americans far outdid the Indians,

adopting the Indian instead of a civilized mode of warfare, and

including in their sweep of destruction women and children as well as

men.

The employment of Indians at all on the part of Great Britain against

the colonists, is, in our opinion, the blackest crime recorded in the

annals of the British Government, prompted apparently by the cowardly

and execrable General Gage, but condemned by Generals Carleton and

Burgoyne, as well as by General Howe. The use, however, which the

Americans sought to make of the Indians, and their cruel and

exterminating mode of warfare against them, leave them no ground of

boasting on the score of humanity against either the British Government

or the Indians.

To this may be added the unfortunate condition and treatment of the

Loyalists or "Tories" among the Indians. For adhering, or suspected of

adhering to the faith of their fathers, and even of the present

persecution down to within less than six years, they were, however

peaceably they might be living, driven from their homes and their

property seized and alienated, and they left no place for the soles of

their feet except among the Indians, and then termed monsters and

treated as traitors, for joining their protectors in the defence of

their places of refuge, and, as far as possible, for the recovery of

their homes. What else, as men, as human beings, could they do? They

were denied and banished from the homes which they had, unless they

would reverse their political faith and oath of allegiance, and forswear

allegiance, to enrol themselves in arms against the country of their

forefathers and of their affection. They could not but be chafed with

the loss of their freedom of speech and of conviction of their

citizenship and their property, and of being driven into exile; and they

must have been more or less than men had they not acted loyally and to

the best of their ability with their protectors, however abhorrent to

their views and feelings were many acts of the Indians--acts imitated

and even excelled, in so many respects, by the Americans themselves, in

their depredations into the Indian territories.

COLONEL STONE'S ACCOUNT, IN DETAIL, OF GENERAL SULLIVAN'S EXPEDITION OF

EXTERMINATION OF THE SIX NATIONS OF INDIANS.

In his _Life of Brant, including the Border Wars of the American

Revolution_, Colonel Stone gives a much more elaborate account of this

expedition of destruction against the Six Nations, or rather the Five

Nations, for the Oneidas and some of the Tuscaroras joined the

Americans. Colonel Stone narrates the progress and work of General

Sullivan from place to place. We will add a few extracts from his

narrative, after some preliminary explanations.

Colonel Stone corrects a very common error, which views the whole race

of North American Indians as essentially alike--"all as the same roving,

restless, houseless race of hunters and fishermen, without a local

habitation and with scarce a name." He gives examples of the varieties

of Indian character, not less marked than between the English and the

French--some following the buffalo in his migrations, others finding a

precarious subsistence in the forest chase, others again fishing and

trapping; tribes who pass most of their time in canoes, while others,

woodland tribes, cultivate the soil, and gradually become organized, and

acquire a higher state of civilization, and present a marked difference

of character and taste from the hunter and fishermen tribes. "This

higher state of social organization among the Six Nations," says Colonel

Stone "greatly increased the difference. They had many towns and

villages giving evidence of perseverance. They were organized into

communities whose social and political institutions, simple as they

were, were still as distinct and well-defined as those of the American

Confederacy. They had now acquired some arts, and were enjoying many of

the comforts of civilized life. Not content with small patches of

cleared lands for the raising of a few vegetables, they possessed

cultivated fields and orchards of great productiveness at the West.

Especially was this the fact with regard to the Cayugas and Senecas. The

Mohawks having been driven from their own rich lands (in the valley of

the Mohawk and Susquehanna rivers), the extensive domains of the

westernmost tribes of the confederacy (in the Genesee country) formed

the granary of the whole. And in consequence of the superior social and

political organization just referred to, and the Spartan-like character

incident to the forest life, the Six Nations, though not the most

numerous, were beyond doubt the most formidable of the tribes then in

alliance with the Crown. It was justly considered, therefore, that the

only way _to strike them effectively would be to destroy their homes_

and the growing produce of their farms, and thus, _by cutting off their

means of supply, drive them from their own country deeper into the

interior, and perhaps throw them altogether upon their British allies

for subsistence_."

These facts will go far to account for the desire of the Mohawks to

recover the homes from which they had been driven, and for the relations

between the Six Nations to the Crown of Great Britain and the revolting

portion of the colonists.

It has been intimated that the Oneida Indians and part of the Onondagos

adhered to the revolting colonists. Colonel Stone observes: "It was the

intention of General Sullivan that General Clinton should employ in his

division as large a number of the Oneida warriors as could be induced to

engage in the service. The latter officer was opposed to this

arrangement; but through the importunities of Sullivan, the Rev. Mr.

Kirkland, their missionary, who was now a chaplain in the army, had been

summoned to Albany for consultation. From thence Mr. Kirkland was

despatched to Pennsylvania, directly to join Sullivan's division; while

to Mr. Deane, the interpreter connected with the Indian Commissioner at

Fort Schuyler (formerly Fort Stanwix), was confided the charge of

negotiating with the Oneida chiefs on the subject. The Oneidas

volunteered for the expedition almost to a man; while those of the

Onondagos who adhered to the cause of the Americans were equally

desirous of proving their fidelity by their deeds. Under these

circumstances, Clinton wrote to Sullivan on the 26th, that on the

following Saturday Mr. Deane, with the Indian warriors, would join him

at the head of the lake. A sudden revolution, however, was wrought in

their determination by an address to the Oneidas from General Haldimand

(Governor of Canada), received at Fort Schuyler the 22nd. This document

was transmitted to them in their own language; and its tenor was so

alarming as to induce them suddenly to change their purpose, judging

very correctly, from the threats of Haldimand, that their presence was

necessary at home for the defence of their own castles. Still Mr. Deane

wrote that an arrangement was on foot by which he hoped to obtain the

co-operation of a considerable number of the Oneida warriors."

"General Haldimand's address was written in the Iroquois (Mohawk)

language, of which a translation was made by Mr. Deane and enclosed to

General Clinton."

In this address General Haldimand charged the Oneida Indians with having

"taken a different course from the rest of the Five Nations, your

confederates, and have likewise deserted the King's cause through the

deceitful machinations and snares of the rebels, who intimidated you

with their numerous armies, by which means you became bewildered and

forgot all your engagements with and former care and favour from the

Great King of England, your Father. You also soon forgot the frequent

bad usage and continual encroachments of the Americans upon the Indian

lands throughout the continent. I say, therefore, that at the breaking

out of these troubles, you firmly declared to _observe a strict

neutrality in the dispute_, and made your declaration known to Sir Guy

Carleton, my predecessor, _who much approved of it, provided you were in

earnest_.[97] I have hitherto strictly observed and examined your

conduct, and find that you did not adhere to your assertion, although I

could trace no reason, on the side of Government as well as the Indians,

why you should act so treacherous and double a part; by which means we,

not mistrusting your fidelity, have had many losses among the King's

subjects, and the Five Nations, your friends and connections."

After further reproaches, admonitions, and threatenings, General

Haldimand concluded in the following severe words: "These are facts,

Brothers, that, unless you are lost to every sense of feeling, cannot

but recall in you even a most hearty repentance and deep remorse for

your past vile actions."

The effect of General Haldimand's address was to cause a conference--Mr.

Deane, at the head of thirty-five Oneida warriors--with General Clinton,

to apologize for the absence of their brethren from the expedition, and

to make those explanations in regard to their own situation already

communicated by Mr. Deane by letter, together with the address of

General Haldimand. In his reply, General Clinton, among other things,

said: "It is not my desire that the whole of your warriors should leave

their castles. I have given a general invitation to our brethren the

Oneidas, the Tuscaroras, and such of the Onondagos as have entered into

friendship with us. In order to give all our Indian friends an equal

chance of evidencing their spirit and determination to partake of our

fortune, I am entirely satisfied that such only should join me as think

proper."

Colonel Stone, after stating that on the 22nd of August General Clinton

arrived at Tioga, and formed a junction with General Sullivan, says:

"The entire command amounted to 5,000, consisting of the brigades of

Generals Clinton, Hand, Maxwell, and Poor, together with Proctor's

artillery and a corps of riflemen." Then, after relating the battle of

Newton (the present site of Elmira), as described in extracts from the

historians in previous pages, Colonel Stone narrates the progress and

work of the invading army of extermination and destruction. We give the

following extracts from his narrative:

"It is apprehended that but few of the present generation are thoroughly

aware of the advances which the Indians, in the wide and beautiful

country of the Cayugas and Senecas, had made in the march of

civilization. They had several towns and many large villages laid out

with a considerable degree of regularity. They had framed houses, some

of them well furnished, having chimneys, and painted. They had broad and

productive fields; and in addition to an abundance of apples, were in

the enjoyment of the pear, and the still more delicious peach. But after

the battle of Newton, the Indians everywhere fled at Sullivan's

advance, and the whole country was swept as with a besom of destruction.

On the 4th (September), as the army advanced, they destroyed a small

settlement of eight houses, and two days afterwards reached the more

considerable town of Kendaia, containing about twenty houses, neatly

built and well finished. These were reduced to ashes, and the army spent

nearly a day in destroying the fields of corn and the fruit trees. Of

these there were great abundance, and many of them appeared to be

ancient."

"On the 7th, Sullivan crossed the outlet of Seneca Lake, and moved in

three divisions upon the town of Kanadaseagea, the Seneca capital,

containing about sixty houses, with gardens and numerous orchards of

apple and peach trees. It was Sullivan's object to surround the town and

take it by surprise. But although Butler had endeavoured to induce the

Indians to make a stand at the place, his importunities were of no

avail. They said it was no use to contend with such an army; and their

capital was consequently abandoned as the other towns had been before

the Americans could reach it. A detachment of 400 men was sent down on

the west side of the lake to destroy Gotheseunquean, and the plantations

in the neighbourhood; while at the same time a number of volunteers,

under Colonel Harper, made a forced march in the direction of Cayuga

Lake, and destroyed Schoyere. Meantime the residue of the army was

employed, on the 8th, in the destruction of the town, together with the

fruit trees and fields of corn and beans. Here, as elsewhere, _the work

of destruction was thorough and complete_."

"The main army then moved forward upon Kanandaigua, at which place it

arrived in two days. Here they 'found twenty-three very elegant houses,

mostly framed, and in general large, together with very extensive fields

of corn--all of which were destroyed. From Kanandaigua they proceeded to

the small town of Honeoye, consisting of ten houses, which were

immediately burnt to the ground. A post was established by General

Sullivan at Honeoye, to maintain which a strong garrison was left, with

heavy stores and one field-piece. With this precautionary measure the

army prepared to advance upon the yet more considerable town of

Genesee--the great capital of the western tribes of the

confederacy--containing their stores and their broadest cultivated

fields."

"The valley of the Genesee, for its beauty and fertility, was beheld by

the army of Sullivan with astonishment and delight. Though an Indian

country, and peopled only by wild men of the woods, its rich intervales

presented the appearance of long cultivation, and were then smiling with

the harvests of ripening corn. Indeed, the Indians themselves professed

not to know when or by whom the lands upon that stream were first

brought into cultivation. Instead of a howling wilderness, Sullivan and

his troops found the Genesee flats, and many other districts of the

country, resembling much more the orchards and farms and gardens of

civilized life. But all was now doomed to speedy devastation. The

Genesee Castle was destroyed. The troops scoured the whole region round

about, and burnt and destroyed everything that came in their way. The

town of Genesee contained 128 houses, mostly large and very elegant. It

was beautifully situated, almost encircled with a clear flat, extending

a number of miles, over which extensive fields of corn were waving,

together with every kind of vegetable that could be conceived. But the

entire army was immediately engaged in destroying it, and the axe and

the torch soon transformed the whole of that beautiful region from the

character of a garden to a scene of sickening desolation. Forty Indian

towns, the largest containing 128 houses, were destroyed. Corn, gathered

and ungathered, to the amount of 160,000 bushels, shared the same fate;

the fruit trees were cut down; and the Indians were hunted like wild

beasts, till neither house, nor fruit tree, nor field of corn, nor

inhabitant remained in the whole country. The gardens were enriched with

great quantities of useful vegetables of different kinds. The size of

the corn-fields, as well as the high degree of cultivation, excited

wonder, and the ears of corn were so remarkably large that many of them

measured twenty-two inches in length. So numerous were the fruit trees,

that in one orchard they cut down 1,500."

"Having completed the objects contemplated by the expedition to the

point at which he had arrived, General Sullivan recrossed the Genesee

with his army the 16th of September, and set out on his return. Why he

did not follow up his success, and strike the enemy's citadel at

Niagara, which at that time was in no situation for formidable

resistance, is a question difficult of solution. Unquestionably, in the

organization of the expedition, the conquest of Niagara, the

headquarters of the foe of all descriptions, and the seat of British

influence and power among the Indians, was one of the principal objects

in view. Certain it is, that the most important feature of the

enterprise was not undertaken; and it will be seen in the sequel that

but small ultimate advantage resulted from the campaign. Stimulated by a

keener thirst for revenge, clouds of savages were again and again seen

to sweep through the valley of the Mohawk with the scalping knife and

the torch."

"The return of the army was along the same tract by which it had

advanced. On the 20th, having recrossed the outlet of Seneca Lake,

Colonel Zebulon Butler was detached with the rifle corps of 500 men to

pass round the foot of Cayuga Lake, and lay waste the Indian towns on

its eastern shore; while Lieutenant-Colonel Dearborn, with 200 men, was

detached to perform the same service on the south-western shore. The

main army pursued the most direct route to the Chemung and Tioga. On the

26th Colonel Dearborn's detachment returned, and on the 28th they were

rejoined by Colonel Zebulon Butler, who had burnt three towns of the

Cayugas, including their capital. Dearborn had burnt six towns in his

route, destroying at the same time large quantities of corn. On the same

day, Colonels Van Courtlandt and Dayton were detached upon a similar

service--for the destruction of large fields of corn growing upon the

banks of the Tioga and its tributaries."

"The army then resumed its march, and passing through Wyoming, arrived

at Easton on the 15th of October. The distance thence to Genesee Castle

was 280 miles. With the exception of the action at Newton, the

achievements of the army in battle were not great. But it had scoured a

broad extent of country, and had laid more towns in ashes than had ever

been destroyed on the continent before. The red men were driven from

their beautiful country, their habitations left in ruins, their fields

laid waste, their orchards uprooted, and their altars and the tombs of

their fathers overthrown."[98]

All the devastations of settlements, burnings and slaughter committed by

the "Tories and Indians" during the whole war shrink into insignificance

in regard to extent of territory, the number of inhabitants and towns,

the extent of cultivated farms and gardens, when compared with General

Sullivan's one vast sweep of ruin and misery, in the course of which, as

the historian says, "_the Indians were hunted like wild beasts, till

neither house nor fruit tree, nor field of corn nor inhabitant, remained

in the whole country_."

All this was done by an express order of Congress to the

Commander-in-Chief; and for doing this General Sullivan and his army

received the cordial approbation and thanks of the Congress.

It was very natural that the survivors of the Six Nations and the

"Tories," who took refuge and resided among them, should seek revenge on

every possible occasion, in months following, in the regions of their

own sufferings, especially upon those individuals and communities who

they knew had prompted and aided the executioners of Congress. There

were partizan leaders, with adventurous followers, on both sides, in the

Southern as well as in the Northern States, who inflicted many acts of

barbarity and desolation; but these retaliatory cruelties and raids of

destruction acquired a greater intensity of bitterness and cruelty after

the terrible ravages and cruelties perpetrated by General Sullivan and

his army.

Besides, the history of the Indians, as well as of the "Tories,"

throughout the whole war, was written by their adversaries, and it was

considered a master-stroke of policy to exaggerate the alleged misdeeds

and paint the character of both the Indians and Tories in the blackest

colours. The story of the "Massacre of Wyoming" is a sample of the

manner in which the American writers of the day made history against the

Indians and the "Tories." When facts could not be sufficiently seasoned

to stimulate recruits for the army and appropriations from the people

for its support, fiction pure and simple was resorted to; and Dr.

Franklin himself did not think it unworthy of his antecedents, age and

position to employ this method to bring disrepute upon the "Tories," the

Indians, and the British Government itself, and to excite the hatred of

his countrymen against them. The accomplished author of the _Life of

Brant and the Border Wars of the American Revolution_ forcibly observes:

"The Indians of the Six Nations, in common with their chief, were loaded

with execrations for atrocities of which all were alike innocent,

because the deeds recorded were never committed, it having been the

policy of the public writers and those in authority, not only to magnify

actual occurrences, but sometimes, when those were wanting, to draw upon

their imaginations for such deeds of ferocity and bloodshed as might

best serve to keep alive the strongest feelings of indignation against

the parent country, and likewise induce the people to take the field in

revenge, if not driven thither by the nobler impulse of patriotism."[99]

Such deliberate fictions, for political purposes, as that by Dr.

Franklin, just referred to, were probably rare; but the investigations

into which the author has been, in the preparation of the present work,

have satisfied him that, from other causes, much exaggeration and

falsehood has obtained a permanent footing in American history. Most

historians of that period, English and American, wrote too near the time

when the events they were describing occurred, for a dispassionate

investigation of the truth; and other writers who have succeeded, have

too often been content to follow the beaten track, without incurring the

labour of diligent and calm inquiry. Reference has been made above to

Wyoming, concerning which, to this day, the world has been abused with

monstrous fictions, with tales of horror never enacted. Nor were the

exaggerations in regard to the invasion of Wyoming greater than were

those connected with the irruption into and destruction of Cherry

Valley, as the reader will discover in the course of the ensuing pages.

Indeed, the writer, in preparation of materials for this work, has

encountered so much that is false recorded in history as sober verity,

that he has at times been disposed almost to universal scepticism in

regard to uninspired narration.

The "deliberate fictions, for political purposes, by Dr. Franklin," as

the biographer of Brant expresses it, "were written as facts;" or, as

the author quoted expresses it, "the well-known scalp story of Dr.

Franklin was long believed, and recently revived and included in several

books of authentic history." The details of Dr. Franklin's publication

were so minute and varied as to create a belief that they were perfectly

true. "It was long supposed to be authentic," as the author quoted says

in introducing the document, in Appendix No. 1 to Volume I., "but has

since been ascertained to be a publication from the pen of Dr. Franklin,

for political purposes."

The names introduced are of course fictitious, as well as the

statements, but introduced with such an air of plausibility as to

preclude the suspicion that they were fictitious. The publication will

be a curiosity to most of the readers of these pages, as it has been to

the writer. It is as follows:

_Extract of a letter from Captain Gerrish, of the New England Militia,

dated Albany, March 7th_, 1782:

"The peltry taken in the expedition will, as you see, amount to a good

deal of money. The possession of this booty at first gave us pleasure;

but we were struck with horror to find among the packages eight large

ones, containing scalps of our unhappy folks taken in the last three

years by the Seneca Indians, from the inhabitants of the frontiers of

New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, and sent by them as a

present to Colonel Haldimand, Governor of Canada, in order to be

transmitted by him to England. They were accompanied by the following

curious letter to that gentleman:

"TIOGA, January 3rd, 1782.

"May it please Your Excellency,

"At the request of the Seneca chiefs, I send herewith to your

Excellency, under the care of James Boyd, eight packs of scalps, cured,

dried, hooped, and painted with all the Indian triumphal marks, of which

the following is invoice and explanation:

"No. 1, containing forty-three scalps of Congress soldiers killed in

different skirmishes; these are stretched on black hoops, four inch

diameter; the inside of the skin painted red, with a small black spot to

note their being killed with bullets. Also sixty-two farmers, killed in

their houses, the hoops red; the skin painted brown, and marked with a

hoe; a black circle all round, to denote their being surprised in the

night; and a black hatchet in the middle, signifying their being killed

with that weapon.

"No. 2, containing ninety-eight farmers killed in their houses; hoops

red; figure of a hoe, to mark their profession; great white circle and

sun, to show they were surprised in the daytime; a _little red foot_,

to show they stood upon their defence, and died fighting for their lives

and families.

"No. 3, containing ninety-seven farmers; hoops green, to show they were

killed in the fields; a large white circle, with a little round mark on

it for the sun, to show that it was in the daytime; black bullet mark on

some, hatchet on others.

"No. 4, containing 102 farmers, mixed of the several marks above; only

eighteen marked with a little yellow flame, to denote their being

prisoners burnt alive, after being scalped, their nails pulled out by

the roots, and other torments; one of these latter supposed to be of a

rebel clergyman; his band being fixed to the hoop of his scalp. Most of

the farmers appear by the hair to be young or middle-aged men; there

being but sixty-seven grey heads among them all, which makes the service

more essential.

"No. 5, containing eighty-eight scalps of women; hair long, braided in

the Indian fashion, to show they were mothers; hoops blue; skin yellow

ground, with red tadpoles, to represent, by way of triumph, the tears of

grief occasioned to their relations; a black scalping-knife or hatchet

at the bottom, to mark their being killed with these instruments;

seventeen others, hair very grey; black hoops; plain brown colour, no

mark but the short club or cassetete, to show that they were knocked

down dead, or had their brains beat out.

"No. 6, containing 193 boys' scalps, of various ages; small green hoops;

whitish ground on the skin, with red tears in the middle, and black

bullet marks, knife, hatchet, or club, as their death happened.

"No. 7, 211 girls' scalps, big and little; small yellow hoops; white

ground; tears, hatchet, club, scalping knife, etc.

"No. 8. This package is a mixture of all the varieties above mentioned,

to the number of 122; with a box of birch bark, containing twenty-nine

little infants' scalps of various sizes; small white hoops, white

ground.

"With these packs, the chiefs send to your Excellency the following

speech delivered by Coneiogatchie in council, interpreted by the elder

Moore, the trader, and taken down by me in waiting:

"'_Father!_--We send you herewith many scalps, that you may see that we

are not idle friends.--A blue belt.

"'_Father!_--We wish you to send these scalps over the water to the

Great King, that he may regard them and be refreshed; and that he may

see our faithfulness in destroying his enemies, and be convinced that

his presents have not been made to ungrateful people.--A blue and white

belt with red tassels.

"'_Father!_--Attend to what I am going to say; it is a matter of much

weight. The Great King's enemies are many, and they grow fast in number.

They were formerly like young panthers; they could neither bite nor

scratch; we could play with them safely; we feared nothing they could do

to us. But now their bodies are become big as the elk and strong as the

buffalo; they have also got great and sharp claws. They have driven us

out of our country by taking part in your quarrel. We expect the Great

King will give us another country, that our children may live after us,

and be his friends and children as we are. Say this for us to the Great

King. To enforce it we give this belt.--A great white belt with blue

tassels.

"'_Father!_--We have only to say further, that your traders exact more

than ever for their goods; and our hunting is lessened by the war, so

that we have fewer skins to give for them. This ruins us. Think of some

remedy. We are poor, and you have plenty of everything. We know you will

send us powder and guns, and knives and hatchets; but we also want

shirts and blankets.--A little white belt.'

"I do not doubt but that your Excellency will think it proper to give

some further encouragement to those honest people. The high prices they

complain of are the necessary effect of the war. Whatever presents may

be sent for them through my hands shall be distributed with prudence and

fidelity. I have the honour of being

"Your Excellency's most obedient and most humble servant,

"JAMES CRAUFURD."

This chapter of Congress vengeance to exterminate the Six Nations of

Indians, and of its writers to picture them as human monsters, cannot be

better concluded than in the words of the historian of Brant,[100] and

of the Border Wars of the American Revolution:

"No Indian pen traces the history of their tribes and nations, or

records the deeds of their warriors and chiefs, their prowess and their

wrongs. Their spoilers have been their historians; and although a

reluctant assent has been awarded to some of the nobler traits of their

nature, yet, without yielding a due allowance for the peculiarities of

their situation, the Indian character has been presented with singular

uniformity as being cold, cruel, morose, and revengeful; unrelieved by

any of those varying traits and characteristics, those lights and

shadows which are admitted in respect to other people no less wild and

uncivilized than they.

"Without pausing to reflect that, even when most cruel, they have been

practising the trade of war--always dreadful--as much in conformity to

their own usages and laws as have their more civilized antagonists, the

white historian has drawn them with the characteristics of demons.

Forgetting that the second of Hebrew monarchs did not scruple to saw his

prisoners with saws, and harrow them with harrows of iron; forgetful

likewise of the scenes of Smithfield, under the direction of our own

British ancestors; the historians of the poor untutored Indians, almost

with one accord, have denounced them as monsters _sui generis_, of

unparalleled and unapproachable barbarity; as though the summary

tomahawk were worse than the iron tortures of the harrow, and the torch

of the Mohawk hotter than the faggots of Queen Mary.

"Nor does it seem to have occurred to the 'pale-faced' writers that the

identical cruelties, the records and descriptions of which enter so

largely into the composition of the earlier volumes of American history,

were not barbarities in the estimation of those who practised them. _The

scalp lock was an emblem of chivalry._ Every warrior shaving his head

for battle was careful to leave _the lock of defiance upon his crown_,

as for the bravado, 'Take it if you can.' The stake and the torture

were identified with their rude notions of the power of endurance. They

were inflicted upon captives of their own race, as well as upon whites;

and with their own braves these trials were courted, to enable the

sufferer to exhibit the courage and fortitude with which they could be

borne--the proud scorn with which all the pain that a foe might inflict

could be endured.

"But (it is said) they fell upon slumbering hamlets in the night and

massacred defenceless women and children. This, again, was their own

mode of warfare, as honourable in their estimation as the more courteous

methods of committing wholesale murder laid down in the books.

"But of one enormity they were ever innocent. Whatever degree of

personal hardship and suffering their female captives were compelled to

endure, their persons were never dishonoured by violence; a fact which

can be predicated, we apprehend, of no other victorious soldiery that

ever lived.

"In regard, moreover, to the countless acts of cruelty alleged to have

been perpetrated by the savages, it must still be borne in mind that the

Indians have had no writer to relate their own side of the story. The

annals of man, probably, do not attest a more kindly reception of

intruding foreigners than was given to the Pilgrims landing at Plymouth

by the faithful Massassoit, and the tribes under his jurisdiction. Nor

did the forest kings take up arms until they but too clearly saw that

either their visitors or themselves must be driven from the soil which

was their own--the fee of which was derived from the Great Spirit. And

the nation is yet to be discovered that will not fight for their homes,

the graves of their fathers, and their family altars. Cruel they were in

the prosecution of their contests; but it would require the aggregate of

a large number of predatory incursions and isolated burnings to balance

the awful scene of conflagration and blood which at once extinguished

the power of Sassacus, and the brave and indomitable Narragansets over

whom he reigned. No! until it is forgotten that by some Christians in

infant Massachusetts it was held to be right to kill Indians, as the

agents and familiars of Azazel; until the early records of even tolerant

Connecticut, which disclose the fact that the Indians were seized by the

Puritans, transported to the British West Indies, and sold as slaves,

are lost; until the Amazon and La Plata shall have washed away the

bloody history of the Spanish American conquest; and until the fact that

Cortez stretched the unhappy Guatimozin naked upon a bed of burning

coals (or General Sullivan's devastation of the Six Indian Nations) is

proved to be a fiction, let not the American Indians be pronounced the

most cruel of men."[101]

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 91: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.

xix., p. 325.

"About four weeks after Colonel Zebulon Butler's return, some hundreds

of Indians, a large body of Tories, and about fifty regulars, entered

Cherry Valley, within the State of New York. They made an unsuccessful

attempt on Fort Alden; but they killed and scalped thirty-two of the

inhabitants, mostly women and children; and also Colonel Alden and ten

soldiers."--_Ib._, p. 325. Then, on the side of the continentals,

"Colonel G. Van Shaick, with fifty-five men, marched from Fort Schuyler

to the Onondago settlements, and on the 19th of April, 1779, burnt the

whole, consisting of about fifty houses, together with a large quantity

of provisions. Horses and stock of every kind were killed. The arms and

ammunition of the Indians were either destroyed or brought off, and

their settlements were laid waste. Twelve Indians were killed and

thirty-four made prisoners. This expedition was performed in less than

six days, and without the loss of a man."--_Ib._, pp. 326, 327.]

[Footnote 92: Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol. III., Chap.

xli., pp. 436-439.]

[Footnote 93: Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap.

x., pp. 230, 231, 232.

Mr. Bancroft's tame account of "the great expedition" against the Five

Nations, limiting it to a chastisement of the Senecas, can only be

accounted for from his contempt of General Sullivan, his desire to pass

over as slightly as possible an expedition of destruction so

disproportionate to the alleged cause of it, and against a whole rural

and agricultural people for the alleged depredations of some of them.

There were, as might be expected, marauding parties along the borders on

the part of both the Indians and Americans, but the former always seem

to have suffered more, and the latter to have excelled the former in

their own traditionary mode of savage warfare.

"Other expeditions," says Mr. Holmes, "besides this decisive one were

conducted against the Indians in course of the year. In April, Colonel

Van Shaick, with fifty-five men, marched from Fort Schuyler, and burnt

the whole Onondago settlements, consisting of about fifty houses, with a

large quantity of provisions, killed twelve Indians and made thirty-four

prisoners, without the loss of a single man. In the month of August,

Colonel Broadhead made a successful expedition against the Mingo,

Munsey, and Seneca Indians." (American Annals, Vol. II., p. 302.)]

[Footnote 94: Mr. Bancroft says that "the British Rangers and men of the

Six Nations (who constructed the defensive breastwork at Newton) _were

in all about_ 800." (History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap. x, p.

232.)

It was certainly no great feat of military courage and skill for 5,000

men, with the aid of artillery, to defeat and disperse 800 Indians and

Tories, without artillery, and then ravage and devastate an undefended

country.]

[Footnote 95: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap.

xxxix., pp. 287-289.]

[Footnote 96: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.

xix., pp. 327-329.

We will select from the same historian, though the same facts may be

found in other histories of the time, a few examples in addition to

those already given of the terrible retribution which the Americans

inflicted upon the Indians in retaliation for any incursions which they

may have made into the white settlements.

"The Cherokee Indians made an incursion into Ninety-Six district, in

South Carolina, massacred some families and burned several houses.

General Pickens, in 1781, collected a party of the militia, and

penetrated into their country. This he accomplished in fourteen days, at

the head of 394 horsemen. In that short space he burned thirteen towns

and villages, killed upwards of forty Indians, and took a number of

prisoners. Not one of his party was killed, and only two were wounded.

The Americans did not expend over two pounds of ammunition, and yet only

three Indians escaped after having been once seen. * *

"Towards the end of the war, in 1782, there was a barbarous and

unprovoked massacre of some civilized Indians who had settled near the

Muskingum. These, under the influence of some pious missionaries of the

Moravian persuasion, had been formed into some degree of religious

order. They abhorred war, and would take no part therein, giving for a

reason that 'the Great Spirit did not make men to destroy men, but to

love and assist each other.' From love of peace they advised those of

their own colour, who were bent on war, to desist from it. They were

also led from humanity to inform the white people of their danger, when

they knew their settlements were about to be invaded. This provoked the

hostile (American) Indians to such a degree, that they carried these

quite away from Muskingum to a bank of the Sandusky Creek. They, finding

corn dear and scarce in their new habitations, obtained liberty to come

back in the fall of the same year to Muskingum, that they might collect

the crops they had planted before their removal.

"While the white (American) people at and near the Monongahela heard

that a number of Indians were at the Moravian towns on the Muskingum,

they gave out that their intentions were hostile. Without any further

enquiry, 160 of them crossed the Ohio, and put to death these harmless,

inoffensive people, though they made no resistance. In conformity to

their religious principles, these Moravians submitted to their hard

fate, without attempting to destroy their murderers. Upwards of ninety

of this pacific race were killed by men who, while they called

themselves Christians, were more deserving of the name of savages than

those whom they inhumanly murdered." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United

States, Vol. II., Chap. xix., pp. 330-332.)

Mr. Hildreth gives the following account of the proceedings of the

eighty or ninety men who murdered the peaceful Indians: "Arrived at the

middle Moravian village, they found a party of Christian Indians

gathering corn. The Indians at another neighbouring village were sent

for, and the whole were placed together in two houses. A council was

then held to decide upon their fate. Williamson, their Commander,

heretofore accused of too great lenity to the Indians, referred the

matter to his men. Only sixteen voted for mercy; all the rest,

professing a faith common on the frontier, that 'an Indian has no more

soul than a buffalo,' were for murder. They rushed on their prey,

scalping-knife in hand, and upwards of ninety Indians, men, women, and

children, soon lay bleeding and gasping." (History of the United States,

Vol. III., Chap. lxv., p. 423.)

"Soon after this unprovoked massacre, a party of Americans set out for

Sandusky, to destroy the Indian towns in that part; but the Delawares,

Wyandots, and other Indians opposed them. An engagement ensued, in which

some of the white people were killed, and several were taken prisoners.

Among the latter were Colonel Crawford and his son-in-law. The colonel

was sacrificed to the manes of those Indians who were massacred in the

Moravian towns. The other prisoners were put to death with the tomahawk.

"Throughout the American war, the desolation brought by the Indians on

the frontier settlements of the United States, and on the Indians by the

Americans, was sufficient to excite compassion in the most obdurate

heart.

"Not only men and warriors, but women and children indiscriminately

murdered, while whole settlements were involved in promiscuous

desolation. Each was made a scourge to the other; and the unavoidable

calamities of war were rendered doubly distressing by the dispersion of

families, the breaking up of settlements, and an addition of savage

cruelties, to the most extensive devastation of those things which

conduce to the comfort of human life."]

[Footnote 97: The biographer of Brant and historian of the Border Wars

of the American Revolution thinks that Sir Guy Carleton was not opposed

to the employment of the Indians in the war with the Congress (Vol. I.,

pp. 89, 90), and quotes Brant as his authority; but General Haldimand

(who himself favoured the employment of the Indians in the war) appears

to be the safest interpreter of the views of Sir Guy Carleton, who

intended, by the friendly alliance of the Indians with the King, that

they should be neutral.]

[Footnote 98: Stone's Life of Joseph Brant, including the Border Wars of

the American Revolution, Vol. II., Chap. i.]

[Footnote 99: Life of Brant, including the Border Wars of the American

Revolution.]

[Footnote 100: Brant himself was educated at Philadelphia, married and

lived quietly on his land in the Mohawk Valley, entertained the

missionaries, and assisted in translating portions of the New Testament;

but when the revolution commenced he was not allowed to live in peace

unless he joined the revolutionary party. He determined to maintain, as

he said, the covenant faith of his forefathers to the King of England,

and entered upon the "warpath," in which he became so distinguished a

hero; in the course of which he perpetrated many deeds of cruelty, but

also, as his biographer records, performed many acts of humanity,

kindness, and generosity.]

[Footnote 101: Stone's Brant and the Border Wars of the American

Revolution, Vol. I., Introduction, pp. 13, 14, 15.]

CHAPTER XXXVI.

SITUATION AND TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS DURING THE WAR.

The condition of the United Empire Loyalists for several months before,

as well as after, the Declaration of Independence, was humiliating to

freemen and perilous in the extreme; and that condition became still

more pitiable after the alliance of the revolutionists with the

French--the hereditary enemies of both England and the colonies. From

the beginning the Loyalists were deprived of the freedom of the press,

freedom of assemblage, and under an espionage universal, sleepless,

malignant--subjecting the Loyalists to every species of insult, to

arrest and imprisonment at any moment, and to the seizure and

confiscation of their property.

Before the Declaration of Independence, both parties were confessedly

British subjects, professing allegiance to the same sovereign and

constitution of government, both professing and avowing their adherence

to the rights of British subjects; but differing from each other as to

the extent of those rights in contradistinction to the constitutional

rights of the Crown and those of the people--as in the case of party

discussions of all constitutional questions, whether in the colonies or

mother country for centuries past. Both parties had their advocates in

the British Parliament; and while the prerogative advocates supported

the corrupt Ministry of the day--or the King's party, as it was

called--the Opposition in Parliament supported the petitions and

remonstrances of those colonists who claimed a more popular colonial

government; but all the advocates of the constitutional rights of the

colonists, in both Houses of Parliament, disclaimed, on the part of

those whom they represented, the least idea of independence or

separation from England. The Declaration of Independence essentially

changed the relations of parties, both in Great Britain and America. The

party of independence--getting, after months of manipulation by its

leaders, first a majority of one in the Congress, and afterwards

increasing that majority by various means--repudiated their former

professed principles of connection with England; broke faith with the

great men and parties in England, both in and out of Parliament, who had

vindicated their rights and professions for more than ten years; broke

faith also with their numerous fellow-subjects in America who adhered to

the old faith, to the old flag, and connection with England, and who

were declared by resolutions of Conventions, from Congress, provinces,

counties, to townships and towns, enemies of their country, rebels and

traitors, and treated as such.[102] Even before the Declaration of

Independence, some of these popular meetings, called Conventions,

assumed the highest functions of legislation and government, and dealt

at pleasure with the rights, liberties, property, and even lives of

their Tory fellow citizens. There had been violent words, terms of

mutual reproach, as in all cases of hot political contests; but it was

for the advocates of independent liberty to deny to the adherents of the

old faith all liberty of speech or of opinion, except under penalties of

imprisonment or banishment, with confiscation of property. For a large

portion of the community[103] to be thus stript of their civil rights by

resolutions of a Convention, and reduced to the position of proscribed

aliens or slaves, must have been galling to Loyalists beyond

expression, and well calculated to prompt them to outbreaks of passion,

and retaliations of resentment and revenge, each such act followed by a

corresponding act from the opposite party.[104]

It might be supposed that forbearance and respect would have been shown

to those who remained "steadfast and immovable" in the traditional faith

of British monarchy and British connection, notwithstanding a corrupt

and arbitrary party was in power for the time being; but the very

reverse of this was the case on the part of those who professed, as one

cardinal article of their political creed, that "all men are born free

and equal," and therefore that every man had an equal right to his

opinions, and an equal right to the expression of them; but all this was

reversed in the treatment of the Loyalists. Mr. Hildreth well describes

the position and treatment of the Loyalists, both before and after the

Declaration of Independence, in the following words:

"In the position of that considerable class of persons who had remained

in doubt, the Declaration of Independence and the assumption of State

government made a decided change. It was now necessary to choose one

side or the other.

"Very serious, too, was the change in the legal position of the class

known as Tories, in many of the States a large minority, and in all

respectable for wealth and social position. Of those thus stigmatized,

some were inclined to favour the utmost claims of the mother country;

_but the greater part, though determined to adhere to the British

connection, yet deprecated the policy which had brought on so fatal a

quarrel_. This loyal minority, especially its more conspicuous members,

as the warmth of political feeling increased, had been exposed to the

violence of mobs, and to all sorts of personal indignities, in which

private malice or a wanton and insolent spirit of mischief had been too

often gratified under the disguise of patriotism. The barbarous and

disgraceful practice of tarring and feathering and carting Tories,

placing them in a cart and carrying them about as a sort of spectacle,

had become in some places a favourite amusement. To restrain these

outrages, Congress had specially committed the oversight of Tories and

suspected persons to the regularly appointed Committees of Inspection

and Observation for the several counties and districts. But even these

Committees were not always very judicious or discriminating in the

exercise of despotic powers implied in that delicate trust.

"By the recent political changes, Tories and suspected persons became

exposed to dangers from the law as well as from mobs. Having boldly

seized the reins of government, the new State authorities claimed the

allegiance of all residents within their limits, and under the lead and

recommendation of Congress, those who refused to acknowledge their

authority, or who adhered to their enemies, were exposed to severe

penalties, confiscation of property, imprisonment, banishment, and

finally death."[105]

It does not appear that these lawless outrages upon "Tories" were ever

checked or discountenanced, or their authors ever even reproved by the

so-called authorities, but were actively or tacitly encouraged; so that

before and during the very first months of Independence, the Loyalists

were subject to the penalties of the mobs on one side and to the more

cruel penalties of new-made law by a newly self-created authority on the

other side. Perhaps no one did as much to promote this cruel policy

against the Loyalists as Mr. John Adams, who was the ruling spirit in

all the proceedings of Boston for years, the advocate of the Declaration

of Independence, and the chief member of the Secret Committee of

Congress for years, and was at length appointed Ambassador from the

American Congress to Holland, whence he wrote a letter to Thomas

Cushing, then Lieutenant-Governor of Massachusetts, but which was

intercepted on board of the prize brigantine _Cabot_, and carried to St.

Christopher's, in the West Indies. This letter was published in the

Annual Register for 1781, pp. 259-261. It is dated "Amsterdam, December

15th, 1780," more than four years after the Declaration of Independence,

and fully indicates the source of all those cruel acts against the

Loyalists at the commencement and during the early years of the American

civil war. Mr. Adams says:

"It is true, I believe, what you suggest, that Lord North showed a

disposition to give up the contest, but was diverted from it not

unlikely by the representation of the Americans in London, who, in

connection with their coadjutors in America, have been thorns to us

indeed on both sides of the water; but I think their career might have

been stopt on your side if the executive officers had not been too timid

in a point which I so strenuously recommended at the first--namely, to

fine, imprison, and hang all inimical to the cause, without favour or

affection. I foresaw the evil that would arise from that quarter, and

wished to have timely stopt it. I would have hanged my own brother had

he taken a part with our enemy in the contest."

Such was the "strenuously recommended" wholesale hanging policy of Mr.

John Adams for the extermination of the "Tories"--a curious illustration

of his professed doctrine, that "all men are born free and equal," and

which largely accounts for the treatment of Loyalists during the war,

and for the exasperated feelings which existed between them and their

persecutors and oppressors of the Independence party. One of the first

manifestations of this relentless feeling against the Loyalists occurred

in Mr. Adams' native city of Boston, on its evacuation by General Howe,

who, as Lord Mahon says, "had taken with him, at their own urgent

request, above a thousand of the inhabitants of Boston, who had espoused

the cause of the parent State, and who dreaded on that account the

vengeance of their countrymen. Before they had embarked, they had, as

Washington informs his brother, publicly declared that 'if they thought

the most abject submission would procure them peace, they never would

have stirred.'"[106] (Letter to John Augustine Washington, March 13th,

1776, as printed in the American Archives.)

"Indeed, throughout this contest, and amidst all those qualities

displayed by the Americans, many of those qualities being entitled to

high respect and commendation, there was none certainly less amiable

than their merciless rancour against those among them who adhered to the

royal side. In reference to those, a ferocious saying came to be current

in America, that though we are commanded to forgive our enemies, we are

nowhere commanded to forgive our friends. In reference to them, true

Jetburgh justice was more than once administered--first the punishment,

then the accusation, and last of all the evidence."[107]

The Convention of the State of New York (1776) resolved that "any person

being an adherent to the King of Great Britain should be guilty of

treason and suffer death."[108]

The Loyalists experienced similar treatment in other provinces.

"Previous to their evacuation of Philadelphia, the Congress had ordered

some of the principal Quakers and other gentlemen of the first

consideration in that place, above twenty in number, to be taken into

custody, as strongly attached to the royal cause, and known enemies to

the ruling powers. These gentlemen had repeatedly refused to give any

written or verbal acknowledgment of allegiance or submission to the

American Government, or promise of holding no correspondence with its

enemies. Notwithstanding the evident danger their persons were in, they

had even the resolution to refuse confining themselves to their

respective dwellings. The spirit of these gentlemen was unconquerable to

the last, as they still persisted, in defiance of threats, and in spite

of all solicitations and entreaty, immovable in their principles and in

their determination to reject the test that was proposed to them. They

were sent prisoners to Stanton, in Virginia, as soon as it was

apprehended that the British troops would take possession of

Philadelphia."[109]

After the surrender of Lord Cornwallis, at Yorktown, the defenceless

Loyalists were the objects of vengeance as they went further north. The

army of Lord Cornwallis received civil treatment from Washington's

army,[110] and great kindness from the French officers and soldiers.

Lord Mahon observes:

"The followers of the English army, left defenceless at Yorktown, were

exposed to much ill-treatment on the part of the native soldiers,

thirsting, it was said, for vengeance. Abbé Robin[111] saw an English

lady, a colonel's wife, come in tears to implore for herself and for her

children the protection of French generosity against American outrage.

On the other hand, we find the English officers and soldiers, the actual

prisoners of war, bear willing testimony to the kindness they received.

Thus speaks Lord Cornwallis in his letter to Sir Henry Clinton: 'The

treatment in general that we have received from the enemy since our

surrender has been perfectly good and proper. But the kindness and

attention that has been shown us by the French officers in particular,

their delicate sensibility of our situation, their generous and pressing

offer of money, both public and private, to any amount, has really gone

beyond what I can possibly describe, and will, I hope, make an

impression on the breast of every English officer, whenever the fortune

of war should put any of them into our power.'" (Lord Mahon's History of

England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxiv., pp. 181, 182.)

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER XXXVI.

THE ACTS OF LEGISLATIVE BODIES FOR THE PUNISHMENT OF THE ADHERENTS TO

THE CROWN WERE NUMEROUS.

"In _Rhode Island_, death and _confiscation_ of estate were the

penalties by law for any person who communicated with _the Ministry_ or

their agents, _or_ who afforded supplies to the forces, _or_ piloted the

armed ships of the King. Besides these general statutes, several Acts

were passed in that State to confiscate and sequester the property of

certain persons who were designated by name.

"In _Connecticut_, the offences of supplying the royal army or navy, of

giving them information, of enlisting or procuring others to enlist in

them, and of piloting or assisting naval vessels, were punished more

mildly, and involved only the loss of estate and personal liberty for a

term not exceeding three years. To _speak_ or _write_ or act against the

doings of Congress or of the Assembly of Connecticut, was punishable by

_disqualification for office, imprisonment_, and the disarming of the

offender. Here, too, was a law for seizing and confiscating the estates

of those who sought royal protection, and absented themselves from their

homes or the country.

"In _Massachusetts_, a person _suspected_ of enmity to the Whig cause

could be _arrested_ under a magistrate's warrant and banished, unless he

would swear fealty to the friends of liberty; and the select men of

towns could prefer charges of political treachery in town meetings, and

the individual accused, if convicted by a jury, could be sent into the

enemy's jurisdiction (banished). Massachusetts also designated by name,

and generally by occupation and residence, 380 of her people, of whom

seventeen had been inhabitants of Maine, who had fled from their homes,

and denounced against any one of them who should return, apprehension,

imprisonment, and transportation to a place possessed by the British;

and for a second voluntary return, without leave, _death_ without the

benefit of clergy. By another law, the property of twenty-nine persons

who were denominated 'notorious conspirators,' was confiscated--two had

been governors, one lieutenant-governor, one treasurer, one

attorney-general, one chief justice, and four commissioners of customs.

"_New Hampshire_ passed Acts similar to these, under which seventy-six

of her former citizens were prohibited from coming within her borders,

and the estates of twenty-eight were declared to be forfeited.

"_Virginia_ passed a resolution to the effect that persons of a given

description should be deemed and treated as aliens, and that their

property should be sold, and the proceeds go into the public treasury

for future disposal; and also a law prohibiting the migration of certain

persons to that commonwealth, and providing penalties for the violation

of its provisions.

"In _New York_, the County Committees were authorized to apprehend and

decide upon the guilt of such inhabitants as were _supposed_ to hold

correspondence with the enemy, or had committed some other specified

act; and they might punish those whom they adjudged to be guilty with

imprisonment for three months, or banishment. There, too, persons

opposed to liberty and independence were prohibited from practising law

in the Courts; and the effects of fifty-nine persons, of whom three were

women, and their rights of remainder and reversion, were to pass by

confiscation from them to the people. So, also, a parent whose sons went

off and adhered to the enemy was subjected to a tax of ninepence on the

pound of the parents' estate for each and every such son; and until a

revision of the law, Whigs were as liable to this tax as others.

"In _New Jersey_, one Act was passed to punish traitors and disaffected

persons; another, for taking charge of and leasing the real estates, and

for forfeiting the personal estates of certain fugitives and offenders;

and a third for forfeiting to, and vesting in the State, the real

property of the persons designated in the second statute; and a fourth,

supplemental to the Act first mentioned.

"In _Pennsylvania_, sixty-two persons, who were designated by name, were

required by the Executive Council to surrender themselves to some Judge

of a Court, or Justice of the Peace, within a specified time, and abide

trial for _treason_, or in default of appearance to stand attainted; and

by an Act of a subsequent time, the estates of thirty-six other persons,

who were also designated by name, and who had been previously attainted

of treason, were declared to be confiscated.

"The Act of _Delaware_ provided that the property, both real and

personal, of certain persons who were named, and who were forty-six in

number, should be forfeited to the State, 'subject, nevertheless, to the

payment of the said offenders' just debts,' unless, as in Pennsylvania,

they gave themselves up to trial for _the crime of treason in adhering

to the royal cause_.

"_Maryland_ seized, confiscated, and appropriated all property of

persons in allegiance to the British Crown, and appointed Commissioners

to carry out the terms of three statutes which were passed to effect

these purposes.

"In _North Carolina_, the Confiscation Act embraced sixty-five specified

individuals, and four mercantile firms, and by its terms not only

included the 'lands' of these persons and commercial houses, but their

'negroes and other personal property.'

"The law of _Georgia_, which was enacted very near the close of the

struggle, declared certain persons to have been guilty of treason

against that State, and their estates to be forfeited for their

offences."[112]

"_South Carolina_ surpassed all the other members of the confederacy,

Massachusetts excepted. The Loyalists of the State, whose rights,

persons, and property were affected by legislation, were divided into

four classes. The persons who had offended the least, who were

forty-five in number, were allowed to retain their estates, but were

amerced twelve per cent. of their value. Soon after the fall of

Charleston, and when disaffection to the Whig cause was so general, 210

persons, who styled themselves to be 'principal inhabitants' of the

city, signed an address to Sir Henry Clinton, in which they state that

they have every inducement to return to their allegiance, and ardently

hope to be re-admitted to the character and condition of British

subjects. These 'addressers' formed another class. Of these 210,

sixty-three were banished and lost their property by forfeiture, either

for this offence or the graver one of affixing their names to a petition

to the royal general, to be armed on the royal side. Another class,

composed of the still larger number of eighty persons, were _also

banished and divested of their estates_, for the crime of holding civil

or military commissions under the Crown, after the conquest of South

Carolina. And the same penalties were inflicted upon thirteen others,

who, on the success of Lord Cornwallis at Camden, presented his lordship

with congratulations. Still fourteen others were _banished and deprived

of their estates_ because they were _obnoxious_. Thus, then, the

'addressers,' 'petitioners,' 'congratulators,' and 'obnoxious

Loyalists,' who were proscribed, and who suffered the loss of their

property (in South Carolina), were 170 in number; and if to these we add

the forty-five who were fined twelve pounds in the hundred of the value

of their estates, the aggregate will be 215.

"Much of the legislation of the several States appears to have

proceeded from the recommendations made from time to time _by Congress_,

and that body passed several acts and resolutions of its own. Thus they

subjected to _martial law_ and to _death_ all who should furnish

provisions and certain other articles to the King's troops in New

Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware; and they resolved that all Loyalists

taken in arms should be sent to the States to which they belonged, there

to be _dealt with as traitors_" (not as prisoners of war, as were

Americans taken in arms against the British).[113]

REMARKS ON THE CONFISCATION ACTS ABOVE CITED.

The Draconian Code or the Spanish Inquisition can hardly be said to

exceed in severity and intolerance, the acts of the several State

Legislatures and Committees above quoted, in which mere opinions are

declared to be treason, as also the refusal to renounce a solemn oath of

allegiance. The very place of residence, the non-presenting one's self

to be tried as a traitor, the mere _suspicion_ of holding Loyalist

opinions, involved the loss of liberty and property. Scores of persons

were made criminals, not after trial by a verdict of a regularly

empanelled jury, but by name, in acts or resolutions of Legislatures,

and sometimes of Committees. No modern civilized country has presented

such a spectacle of the wholesale disposal, by name, of the rights,

liberties and properties, and even lives of citizens, by inquisition and

various bodies, as was here presented against the Loyalists, guilty of

no crime against their neighbours except holding to the opinions of

their forefathers, and the former opinions of their present persecutors,

who had usurped the power to rob, banish, and destroy them--who embodied

in themselves, at one and the same time, the functions of law makers,

law judges, and law executioners, and the receivers and disposers, or,

as was the case, the possessors of the property which they confiscated

against the Loyalists.

Is it surprising, then, that under such a system of oppression and

robbery, Loyalists should be prompted to deeds of heroism, and sometimes

of desperation and cruelty, to avenge themselves for the wrongs

inflicted upon them, and to recover the liberties and properties of

which they had thus been deprived, rendering themselves and their

families homeless, and reducing them to poverty and distress? No one can

justify many deeds of the Loyalists; but who could be surprised had they

been more desperate than they were? And this the more so as they were,

probably, superior in wealth and nearly equal in numbers to their

oppressors, who had suddenly seized upon all military sources of power,

disarmed the Loyalists, and erected tribunals for their ruin.[114]

American writers often speak of the havoc committed by the "Tories," but

the acts of Legislatures and Committees above quoted furnish ample

causes and provocation for retaliation, and the most desperate

enterprises and efforts to recover lawful rights and hard-earned

property. Where these Confiscating Acts had been most sweeping and

severe, as in the case of South Carolina, and the two parties nearly

equal, this internecine war against life and property was the most

relentless.[115]

It is as easy as it is unfair for American writers to narrate and

magnify the murderous acts of the "Tories," and omit those perpetrated

by the "Whigs," as well as the cruel laws against the liberties,

property, and lives of the "Tories," which gave rise to these barbarous

acts.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 102: "Committees exercised legislative, executive, and

judicial powers. It is not to be doubted that, in many instances, these

were improperly used, and that private resentments were often covered

under the specious veil of patriotism. The sufferers, in passing over to

the Royalists, carried with them a keen remembrance of the vengeance of

Committees, and when opportunity presented were tempted to retaliate."

(Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xxvi., pp.

467, 468.)]

[Footnote 103: "Until the Declaration of Independence they were by far

the largest party, who not only expected but prayed for a

reconciliation. England was their home, and by that affectionate name

was always spoken of; all the wrongs which were heaped upon the children

could not make them forget their home, or entirely alienate them from

their parent. The ligaments that connect nations are never less

powerful, though less tender, than those which unite individuals,

families, and clans. Consanguinity, affinity, alliance, operate alike on

each." (Allen's History of the American War.)

"The disaffected, or rather the Loyalists, were a formidable party in

the Middle States. They might be forgiven--many of them acted from

principle, from a conscientious regard to their duty, from affection to

their 'Sovereign,' and however mistaken they may have been, they deserve

no censure. It is the infirmity of men's nature to err, and the majority

cannot complain if the minority insist on the same privilege for which

the predominant party are contending--the liberty of judging for

themselves."--_Ib._, Vol. I., p. 483.]

[Footnote 104: Even in South Carolina. Mr. Hildreth remarks:

"Not, however, by armies alone were hostilities carried on. All the

scattered settlements bristled in hostile array. Whigs and Tories

pursued each other with little less than savage fury. Small parties,

everywhere under arms, some on one side, some on the other, with very

little reference to greater operations, were desperately bent on plunder

and blood." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap.

xli., p. 329.)]

[Footnote 105: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap,

xxxiii., pp. 137, 138.]

[Footnote 106: Having thus recovered their capital (Boston), one of the

first acts of government exercised by the Provincial Assembly was to

order the effects and the estates of those who fled with the British

troops to Halifax to be publicly disposed of, and their produce applied

to the use of the State. Such adherents to Britain as had risked to

remain behind, were treated with great severity. They were prosecuted as

enemies and betrayers of their country, and their estates were

confiscated accordingly. (Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol.

II., Chap. xix., p. 159.)]

[Footnote 107: Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. liii., pp.

127, 128.

"The American Loyalists, in arms on the side of England, had grievous

cause throughout the war to complain of the merciless treatment of such

among them as fell into their countrymen's hands."--_Ib._, Vol. VII.,

Chap. lxvi., p. 250.

"The Legislature of North Carolina passed a law (1780) to put a stop to

the robbery of poor people under the pretence that they were Tories--a

practice carried on even to the plundering of their clothes and

household furniture." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol.

III., Chap. xli., p. 329.)

"In New York, in 1776, a rage for plundering, under pretence of taking

Tory property, infected many of the common soldiery, and even some of

the officers." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,

Chap. xi., p. 154.)]

[Footnote 108: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,

Chap. xi.]

[Footnote 109: Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol. II., Chap.

xxvi., pp. 370, 371.]

[Footnote 110: In connection with these transactions, we have an

illustration of the uniform and generous treatment of Loyalists by

General Washington, although he once gave expression to ill-feeling

towards them at Boston in the spring of 1775; for says Lord Mahon:

"Cornwallis, on his part, was honourably anxious to protect from harm

the native Loyalists within his lines; and he proposed, as the tenth

Article, that no such men were to be punished on account of having

joined the British army. Washington wrote in reply: 'This cannot be

assented to, being altogether of civil resort.' Means were found,

however, with Washington's connivance, to obtain the same object in

another form. It was stipulated that, immediately after the

capitulation, the _Bonetta_ sloop-of-war was to sail for New York,

unsearched, with despatches from Lord Cornwallis to Sir Henry Clinton,

and with as many soldiers on board as he should think fit to send;

provided only that the vessel was returned, and that the soldiers were

accounted for as prisoners in a future exchange. By this expedient was

the British chief enabled to secure a safe conduct for his American

adherents." (Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxiv., p.

179.)]

[Footnote 111: "The abbé was struck at seeing, from several indications,

how much keener was at that time the animosity between the English and

Americans than between the English and French. Thus the English

officers, when they laid down their arms and were passing along the

enemy's lines, courteously saluted every French officer, even of the

'lowest rank,' a compliment which they withheld from every American man

of the highest." (Voyage en Amerique, par l'Abbé Robin, p. 141, ed.

1782; quoted in Lord Mahon's History, Vol. VI., Chap. lxiv., p. 181.)]

[Footnote 112: _Note_ by the Author.--The above statement of the

confiscating law of Georgia gives a very inadequate idea of that law.

Savannah was taken, and General Lincoln and his army were driven out of

Georgia by Lieutenant-Colonel Campbell, in 1778, who treated all classes

with such kindness and generosity that the Legislature and Government,

as previously existed, was restored and remained until 1782, when

Savannah was evacuated by the British. Just at the juncture of Colonel

Campbell's conquest of Georgia, the Legislature of that State was

passing a Confiscation Act against "Tories" and preparing to carry it

into effect. During the latter part of the nearly four years of British

occupation, the Congress party elected a Governor and organized their

Legislature, meeting at Augusta. Two months before the evacuation of

Savannah by the British, the Legislature of the Congress party passed

the Confiscation Act referred to in the text. We find a copy of this act

in a pamphlet published in London in 1783, entitled _The Particular Case

of the Georgia Loyalists_. This Act may serve as a specimen of

Confiscation Acts passed in other States. We give it entire, remarking

that it curiously assumes in the preamble that there had been no break

in the Government of the State from 1778 to 1782, though the English had

ruled the State during the whole of that period. The Act is as follows:

"Whereas on the 1st day of March, which was in the year of our Lord

1778, an Act was passed for attainting certain persons therein mentioned

of treason, and confiscating their estates for the use and benefit of

this State, which said Act has not yet been carried into full execution:

And whereas it is necessary that the names of the said persons so

attainted by the same law should be inserted in a law, with the names of

various other persons who have since the aforesaid time been guilty of

treason against this State, and the authority of the same, by

traitorously adhering to the King of Great Britain, and by aiding,

assisting, abetting, and comforting the generals and other officers,

civil and military, of the said King, to enforce his authority in and

over this State, and the good people of the same: And whereas the

_aforesaid treason_, and other atrocious crimes, justly merit forfeiture

of protection and property:

"Be it enacted, by the representatives and freemen of the State of

Georgia in General Assembly met, and by the authority of the same, that

all and each of the following persons, viz. (here follow the names of

286 persons, late inhabitants of Georgia), be and they are hereby

declared to be banished from this State for ever; and if any of the

aforesaid shall remain in this State sixty days after the passing of

this Act, or shall return to this State, the Governor or

Commander-in-Chief for the time being is hereby authorised and required

to cause such persons so remaining in or _returning_ to this State to be

apprehended and committed to jail, there to remain without bail or

mainprize, until a convenient opportunity shall offer for transporting

the said persons beyond the seas to some part of the British King's

dominions, which the Governor or Commander-in-Chief for the time being

is hereby required to do; and if any of the said persons shall return to

this State after such transportation, then and in such case he or they

shall be adjudged and hereby declared to _be guilty of felony_, and

shall, on conviction of their having so returned as aforesaid, _suffer

death_ without the benefit of clergy.

"And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that all and

singular the estates, real and personal, of each and every one of the

aforesaid persons, which they held, possessed or were entitled to, in

law or equity, on the 19th of April, 1775, or which they have held

since, or do hold in possession, or others hold in trust for them, or to

which they are or may be entitled in law or equity, or which they may

have, hold, or be possessed of, in right of others, together with all

debts, dues, and demands that are or may be owing to the aforesaid

persons, or either of them, _be confiscated to and for the use and

benefit of this State_; and the monies arising from the sales which take

place by virtue of and in pursuance of this Act, to be applied to such

uses and purposes as the Legislature shall hereafter direct.

"And whereas divers others persons, citizens of this State, and owing

allegiance thereto (whose names are not herein recited), did, in

violation of said allegiance, traitorously assist, abet, and participate

in the aforesaid treasonable practices: Be it therefore enacted, by the

authority of the aforesaid, that all and every of the person or persons

under this description shall, on full proof and conviction of the same

in a court of law, be liable and subjected to all the like pains,

penalties, and forfeitures inflicted by this Act on those offenders

whose names are particularly mentioned therein.

"And be it further enacted, that all debts, dues, or demands due or

owing to merchants and others residing in Great Britain, be and they are

hereby sequestered, and the Commissioners appointed by this Act, or a

majority of them, are hereby empowered to recover, receive, and deposit

the same in the Treasury of this State, in the same manner and under the

same regulations as debts confiscated, there to remain for the use of

this State until otherwise appropriated by this or any other House of

Assembly.

"And whereas there are various persons, subjects of the King of Great

Britain, possessed of or entitled to estates, real and personal, which

justice and sound policy require should be applied to the benefit of

this State: Be it therefore enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that

all and singular the estates, real and personal, belonging to persons

being British subjects, of whatever kind or nature, of which they may be

possessed, or others in trust for them, or to which they are or may be

entitled in law or equity, and also all debts, dues, or demands owing or

accruing to them, be confiscated to and for the use and benefit of this

State; and the monies arising from the sale which shall take place by

virtue of and in pursuance of this Act, to be applied to such uses and

purposes as the Legislature shall hereafter direct.

"And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that the State

will and do guarantee and defend the Commissioners appointed by this

Act, or a majority of them, in all their proceedings for carrying the

powers and authorities given them by the same into full effect; and will

also warrant and for ever defend all and every sale or sales which the

said Commissioners, or a majority of them, shall make to any purchaser

or purchasers of any part or parts of the real and personal estates

confiscated by this Act.

"Augusta, State of Georgia, 4th May, 1782."]

[Footnote 113: Historical Introduction to Col. Sabine's Biographical

Sketches of the American Loyalists, pp. 77-81.]

[Footnote 114: In the historical essay above quoted, the author says:

"The examination now completed of the political condition of the

colonies, of the state of parties, and of the divisions in particular

classes in society, and avocations in life, leads to the conclusion that

the number of our countrymen who wished to continue their connection

with the mother country was very large. In nearly every Loyalist letter

or other paper which I have examined, and in which the subject is

mentioned, it is either assumed or stated in terms that the LOYAL were

_the majority_; and this opinion, I am satisfied, was very generally

entertained by those who professed to have a knowledge of public

sentiment. That the adherents of the Crown were mistaken, is certain.

But yet in the Carolinas, and Georgia, and possibly in Pennsylvania the

two parties differed but little in point of strength, while in New York

the Whigs were far weaker than their opponents." (Historical

Introduction to Col. Sabine's Biographical Sketches of the American

Loyalists, p. 65.)]

[Footnote 115: In the historical essay above quoted we have the

following words:

"What was the nature of the conflict between the two parties in South

Carolina? Did the Whigs and their opponents meet in open and fair fight,

and give and take the courtesies and observe the rules of civilized

warfare? Alas, no! They murdered one another. I wish it were possible to

use a milder word; but murder is the only one that can be employed to

express the truth. Of this, however, the reader shall judge. I shall

refrain from a statement of my own, and rely on the testimony of others.

"Gen. Greene thus spoke of the hand-to-hand strifes, which I stigmatize

as murderous. 'The animosity,' said he, 'between the Whigs and Tories

renders their situation truly deplorable. The Whigs seem determined to

extirpate the Tories, and the Tories the Whigs. Some thousands have

fallen in this way in this quarter, and the evil rages with more

violence than ever. If a stop cannot be soon put to these massacres, the

country will be depopulated in a few months more, as neither 'Whig' nor

'Tory' can live." (Historical Introduction to Colonel Sabine's

Biographical Sketches of the American Loyalists, p. 33.)]

CHAPTER XXXVII.

TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS BY THE AMERICANS, AT AND AFTER THE AMERICAN

REVOLUTION.

It remains now to ascertain the reception with which the applications of

Loyalists were met in the several State Legislatures. During the last

three years of the war, the principal operations of the British army

were directed to the Southern States; and there the exasperations of

party feeling may be supposed to have been the strongest.[116]

No where had arbitrary authority been exercised more unmercifully

towards the revolutionists than by Earl Cornwallis and Lord Rawdon in

South and North Carolina. Dr. Ramsay says: "The troops under the command

of Cornwallis had spread waste and ruin over the face of all the

country, for 400 miles on the sea coast, and for 200 miles westward.

Their marches from Charleston to Camden, from Camden to the River Dan,

from the Dan through North Carolina to Wilmington, from Wilmington to

Petersburg, and from Petersburg through many parts of Virginia, till

they finally settled in Yorktown, made a route of more than 1,100 miles.

Every place through which they passed in these various marches

experienced the effects of their rapacity. Their numbers enabled them to

go where they pleased; their rage for plunder disposed them to take

whatever they had the means of removing; and their animosity to the

Americans led them often to the wanton destruction of what they could

neither use nor carry off. By their means, thousands had been involved

in distress."[117]

It was therefore in South Carolina, more than any other State, that

animosity might be expected to be intense and prolonged against the

Loyalists; but among these men of the South, with their love of freedom,

and dash and energy in war, there was a potent element of chivalry and

British generosity which favourably contrasts with the Massachusetts

school of persecuting bigotry and of hatred, from generation to

generation, to England and English institutions. Accordingly we learn

from Moultrie's Memoirs, Vol. II., p. 326, that "after the peace, a

Joint Committee from the Senate and House of Representatives in South

Carolina, chosen to hear the petitions of Loyalists who had incurred the

penalties of the confiscation, banishment, and amercement laws, made a

report to the separate Houses in favour of the great majority of the

petitioners; and a great part of those names which were upon the

confiscation, banishment and amercement lists were struck off."

"The petitions of others were afterwards presented from year to year,

and ultimately almost the whole of them had their estates restored to

them, and they were received as citizens."[118]

As to the proceedings of the other States, after the close of the war,

in regard to the United Empire Loyalists, the following summary, from

the _Historical Introduction_ to Colonel Sabine's _Biography of the

American Loyalists_, will be sufficient:

"At the peace, justice and good policy both required a general amnesty,

and the revocation of the acts of disability and banishment, so that

only those who had been guilty of flagrant crimes should be excluded

from becoming citizens. Instead of this, however, the State Legislatures

generally continued in a course of hostile action, and treated the

conscientious and pure, and the unprincipled and corrupt, with the same

indiscrimination as they had done during the struggle. In some parts of

the country there really appears to have been a determination to place

these misguided but then humbled men beyond the pale of human sympathy.

In one legislative body, a petition from the banished, praying to be

allowed to return to their homes, was rejected without a division; and a

law was passed which denied to such as had remained within the State,

and to all others who had opposed the revolution, the privilege of

voting at the elections or of holding office. In another State, all who

had sought royal protection were declared to be aliens, and to be

incapable of claiming and holding property within it, and their return

was forbidden. Other Legislatures refused to repeal such of their laws

as conflicted with the conditions of the treaty of peace, and carried

out the doctrines of the States alluded to above without material

modification. But the temper of South Carolina was far more moderate.

Acting on the wise principle that 'when the offenders are numerous, it

is sometimes prudent to overlook their crimes,' she listened to the

supplications made to her by the fallen, and restored to their civil and

political rights a large portion of those who had suffered under her

banishment and confiscation laws. The course pursued by New York,

Massachusetts, and Virginia was different. These States were neither

merciful nor just; and it is even true that Whigs, whose gallantry in

the field, whose prudence in the Cabinet, and whose exertions in

diplomatic stations abroad, had contributed essentially to the success

of the conflict, were regarded with enmity on account of their attempts

to produce a better state of feeling and more humane legislation. Had

these States adopted a different line of conduct, their good example

would not have been lost, probably, upon others, smaller and of less

influence; and had Virginia especially been honest enough to have

permitted the payment of debts which her people owed to British subjects

before the war, the first years of our freedom would not have been

stained with a breach of our public faith, and the long and angry

controversy with Great Britain, which well-nigh involved us in a second

war with her, might not have occurred.

"Eventually, popular indignation diminished; the statute book was

divested of its most objectionable enactments, and numbers were

permitted to occupy their old homes, and to recover the whole or part of

their property; but by far the greater part of the Loyalists who quitted

the country at the commencement of, or during the war, never returned;

and of the many thousands who abandoned the United States after the

peace, and while these enactments were in force, few, comparatively, had

the desire or even the means to revisit the land from which they were

expelled. Such persons and their descendants form a very considerable

proportion of the population of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Upper

Canada.

"It is equally to be regretted on grounds of policy that the

_majorities_[119] in the State Legislatures did not remember, with Mr.

Jefferson, that separation from England 'was contemplated with

affliction by all,' and that, like Mr. Adams, many sound Whigs 'would

have given everything they possessed for a restoration to the state of

things before the contest began, provided they could have had sufficient

security for its continuance.' Then they might have done at an early

moment after the cessation of hostilities, what they actually did do in

a few years afterwards--namely, have allowed the banished Loyalists to

return from exile, and, excluding those against whom enormities could

have been proved, have conferred upon them, and upon those who had

remained to be driven away at the peace, the rights of citizens. Most of

them would have easily fallen into respect for the new state of things,

old friendships and intimacies would have been revived, and long before

this time all would have mingled in one mass. * *

"As a matter of _expediency_, how unwise was it to perpetuate the

feelings of the opponents of the revolution, and to keep them a distinct

class for a time, and for harm yet unknown! How ill-judged the measures

that caused them to settle the hitherto neglected possessions of the

British Crown! Nova Scotia had been won and lost, and lost and won, in

the struggle between France and England, and the blood of New England

had been poured out upon its soil like water. But when the Loyalists

sought refuge there, what was it? Before the war, the fisheries of its

coast, for the prosecution of which Halifax itself was founded,

comprised, in public estimation, its chief value; and though Great

Britain had quietly possessed it for about seventy years, the emigration

to it of the adherents of the Crown from the United States, in a single

year, more than doubled its population. Until hostile events brought

Halifax into notice, no civilized people were poorer than the

inhabitants of that colony; since, in 1775, the Assembly estimated that

£1,200 currency--a sum less than $5,000--was the whole amount of money

which they possessed. By causing the expatriation, then, of many

thousands of our countrymen, among whom were the well-educated, the

ambitious, and the well-versed in politics, we became the founders of

two agricultural and commercial colonies; for it is to be remembered

that New Brunswick formed a part of Nova Scotia until 1784, and that the

necessity of the division then made was of our own creation. In like

manner we became the founders of Upper Canada. The Loyalists were the

first settlers of the territory thus denominated by Act of 1791; and the

principal object of the line of division of Canada, as established by

Mr. Pitt's Act, was to place them, as a body, by themselves, and to

allow them to be governed by laws more congenial than those which were

deemed requisite for the government of the French on the St. Lawrence.

Our expatriated countrymen were generally poor, and some of them were

actually without the means of providing for their common wants from day

to day. The Government for which they had become exiles was as liberal

as they could have asked. It gave them lands, tools, materials for

building, and the means of subsistence for two years; and to each of

their children, as they became of age, two hundred acres of land. And

besides this, of the offices created by the organization of a new

Colonial Government, they were the chief recipients. The ties of kindred

and suffering in a common cause created a strong bond of sympathy

between them, and for years they bore the appellation of 'United Empire

Loyalists.'"[120]

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 116: Writing under date of January, 1782, Mr. Hildreth says:

"The surrender of Cornwallis was soon felt in the Southern department.

Wilmington was evacuated, thus dashing all the hopes of the North

Carolina Tories. Greene approached Charleston, and distributed his

troops so as to confine the enemy to the neck and adjacent islands.

"In re-establishing the State Government of _South Carolina, none were

allowed to vote who had taken British protection_. John Matthews was

elected Governor. Among the earliest proceedings of the Assembly was the

passage of a law _banishing the most active British partisans and

confiscating their property_. The services of Greene were also

gratefully remembered in a vote of 10,000 guineas, or $50,000, to

purchase him an estate.

"The Georgia Assembly, in meeting at Augusta, chose John Martin as

Governor, _and passed a law of confiscation and banishment very similar

to that of South Carolina_. Greene presently received from this

Province, also, the present of a confiscated plantation. _North

Carolina_ acknowledged his services by a grant of wild lands." (History

of the United States, Vol. III., Chap. xliii., p. 373.)]

[Footnote 117: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,

Chap, xxv., p. 456.

"Under the immediate eye of Cornwallis," says Mr. Bancroft, "the

prisoners who had capitulated in Charleston were the subjects of

perpetual persecution, unless they would exchange their paroles for

oaths of allegiance. Mechanics and shopkeepers could not collect their

dues except after promises of loyalty.

"Lord Rawdon, who had the very important command on the Santee, raged

equally against deserters from his Irish regiment and against the

inhabitants. The chain of forts for holding South Carolina consisted of

Georgetown, Charleston, Beaufort, and Savannah on the sea; Augusta,

Ninety-Six, and Camden in the interior. Of these, Camden was the most

important, for it was the key between the north and south. On the rumour

of an advancing American army, Rawdon called on all the inhabitants

round Camden to join in arms. One hundred and sixty who refused he shut

up during the heat of midsummer in one prison, and loaded more than

twenty of them with chains, some of whom were protected by the

capitulation of Charleston." (Bancroft's History of the United States,

Vol. X., Chap. xv., pp. 311, 312, 313.)

"Peace was restored to Georgia (July, 1782), after having been four

years in possession of the British. That State is supposed to have lost

1,000 of its citizens and 4,000 slaves." (Moultrie's Memoirs, Vol. II.,

p. 340; quoted in Holmes' American Annals, Vol. II., p. 340.)]

[Footnote 118: Quoted in Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., p. 351.]

[Footnote 119: "I say _majorities_, because I am satisfied that in

almost every State there were minorities, more or less numerous, who

desired the adoption of a more moderate course. In New York it is

certain that the first political parties, after the peace, were formed

in consequence of divisions which existed among the Whigs as to the

lenity or severity which should be extended to their vanquished

opponents."]

[Footnote 120: Historical Essay, introductory to Colonel Sabine's

Sketches of the American Loyalists, pp. 86-90.]

APPENDIX A. TO CHAPTER XXXVII.

REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, AND

REMARKS ON THE FEELINGS WHICH SHOULD NOW BE CULTIVATED BY BOTH OF THE

FORMER CONTENDING PARTIES.

The entire failure of the Americans to conquer Canada in the war of

1812-1815 is an illustration of the folly of coercing the allegiance of

a people against their will. Upper Canada at that time consisted of less

than 100,000 inhabitants; yet, with the extra aid of only a few hundred

English soldiers, she repelled for three years the forces of the United

States--more than ten times their number, and separated only by a river.

Mr. J.M. Ludlow, in his brief but comprehensive "History of the War of

American Independence, 1775-1783," Chapter vii., well states _the folly

of England in endeavouring to conquer by arms the opinions_ of three

millions of people, and the impossibility of the American colonists

achieving their independence without the aid of men and money, and ships

from France, to which, in connection with Spain and Holland, the

Americans are actually indebted for their independence, and not merely

to their own sole strength and prowess, as American writers so

universally boast. Mr. Ludlow observes:

"At a time when steam had not yet baffled the winds, to dream of

conquering by force of arms, on the other side of the Atlantic, a people

of the English race, numbering between 3,000,000 and 4,000,000, with

something like 1,200 miles of seaboard, was surely an act of enormous

folly. We have seen in our own days the difficulties experienced by the

far more powerful and populous Northern States in quelling the secession

of the Southern, when between the two there was no other frontier than

at most a river, very often a mere ideal line, and when armies could be

raised by 100,000 men at a time. England attempted a far more difficult

task, with forces which, till 1781, never exceeded 35,000 men, and never

afterwards exceeded 42,075, including 'Provincials,' _i.e._, American

Loyalists." (But England, repeatedly on the verge of success, failed

from the incapacity and inactivity of the English generals.)

"Yet it is impossible to doubt that not once only, but repeatedly during

the course of the struggle, England was on the verge of triumph. The

American armies were perpetually melting away before the

enemy--directly, through the practice of short enlistments; indirectly,

through desertions. These desertions, if they might be often palliated

by the straits to which the men were reduced through arrears of pay and

want of supplies, arose in other cases, as after the retreat from New

York, from sheer loss of heart in the cause. The main army, under

Washington, was seldom even equal in numbers to that opposed to him. In

the winter of 1776-77, when his troops were only 4,000 strong, it is

difficult to understand how it was that Sir William Howe, with more

than double the number, should have failed to annihilate the American

army."

"WEAKNESS OF THE AMERICAN ARMY.