INTRODUCTION.

For some years I had been engaged in collecting material for a life of my

great grandfather, the Rev. William Smith, D. D., Provost of the University

of Pennsylvania, and in doing so, I read all the Bibliographical and

Historical works which I thought could in any way make mention of him. In

no case did I find anything said against his character as a man, until I

read Wm. B. Reed's Life of his grandfather, Gen. Joseph Reed. His remarks

were uncalled for and _ungentlemanly_; what they were, _amount to nothing_,

as they were _untrue_; and therefore not worth repeating. My first idea was

to speak of Gen. Joseph Reed in the same manner, though with more truth;

but finding the truth had been suppressed, and that to publish all I could

wish in regard to Reed, would take up too much room in my work, and be

departing from my original design, I therefore, concluded to publish all

the historical facts in regard to Reed in a small volume by itself, and to

publish such an edition, that it could not be bought up and destroyed.

I have taken the liberty of using the following extracts from an article

published in the Fireside Visitor--by J. M. Church. Whom it was written by

I do not know, but the writer evidently understood his subject.

* * * * *

"When it was announced that Mr. Irving was about to present to the public a

life of Washington, we hailed the information with feelings of delight, not

unmingled with gratitude, that the illustrious author of 'Columbus,' the

Sketch Book, and Knickerbocker should make the crowning work of his life

and literary labors, the history of the greatest and purest of patriots, so

dear to the hearts of all his countrymen, and one who, the more time and

investigation develop and explain his motives and actions, the greater and

nobler he appears. Our expectations were great when we contemplated the

vast field that time had laid open to the historian; and though Marshall

and Sparks had left but little to do, we felt there was still enough to

make Mr. Irving's the greatest history of that greatest of men.

On the appearances of the first volume, a number of errors were noticed by

the press, which were subsequently corrected. The most important one, that

in relation to Major Stobo, we are glad to see fully explained and

corrected in a note at the end of the second volume. In the early part of

the second volume, however, a far graver error occurs, we mean Mr. Irving's

estimate of the conduct and character of Gen. Reed, and is it mainly the

object of this communication to set that matter in its true light.

Who can read without emotion of the trials and difficulties that beset

Washington throughout the whole of his career? A Congress so corrupt, that

Livingston writes, 'I am so discouraged by our public mismanagement, and

the additional load of business thrown upon me by the villainy of those who

pursue nothing but accumulating fortunes, to the ruin of their country,

that I almost sink under it.' False friends and traitors intrigue against

him--even Gen. Reed, the very man Mr. Irving so delighted to honor, and an

inmate of his household, writes a letter to Gen. Lee, the aspiring rival of

Washington, reflecting, with harsh severity, on the conduct and character

of his commander and benefactor. Lee's answer fell into the hands of

Washington, and was read by him during the absence of Reed, who made no

attempt at an explanation until Lee was taken prisoner. He then endeavored

to explain the delay, by saying that he had been in the meantime

endeavoring to get possession of his letter, in order that he might show to

Washington that it contained nothing to call forth the violent answer of

Gen. Lee, and, 'In the meantime,' writes Reed, 'I most solemnly assure you,

that you would see in it nothing inconsistent with that respect and

affection which I have, and ever shall bear to your person and character.'

Who can read this without being shocked at the falsehood of the man!

It was, indeed, fortunate for Reed, that Washington never saw that letter.

But how could Mr. Irving quote a portion of so important a document, while

he suppressed the material part? Indeed, we are tempted to believe that

some other hand had supervised those pages, before they were presented to

the public.

We conceive it to be the duty of an impartial historian to collect facts,

and present them to his readers, and he is guilty of falsifying history who

suppresses them. His readers have the same right to _all_ the evidence that

bears upon important occurrence that he has, and though the author may give

his views and conclusions, the reader is not of necessity compelled to

agree with him. We for one, must beg leave to differ from Mr. Irving in his

estimate of Reed's character, and we doubt not that every one reading his

letter will sustain us in our opinion, that his conduct was false and

treacherous in the extreme.

In order properly to appreciate the baseness of Reed's conduct, it is

necessary to consider the circumstances under which it occurred. It was

immediately after Washington had experienced the most trying reverses. Fort

Washington had just been captured; over two thousand men had been taken

prisoners, and his own eyes had beheld his men, partners of his toil,

bayoneted and cut down while they begged for quarter. The Jerseys were

overrun, and Philadelphia threatened by the enemy. Add to this, the

accounts he received from Congress of the state of affairs at home, and it

wanted but the discovery of such treachery to crush a spirit less mighty

than his.

It appears strange that Mr. Irving should form such an undue estimate of

Reed's character, nor can we believe him to be ignorant of what was his

real position and standing among his brother officers. As early as 1776,

when Reed contemplated resigning his commission as Adjutant General, the

announcement was hailed with pleasure, for Reed had few friends. Col.

Trumbull, writing to a member of Congress on the subject, says, "I heard

Jos. Reed had sent his resignation some time ago; in the name of common

sense, why is it not accepted? That man's want of abilities in his office

had introduced the greatest disorders and want of discipline into the army;

it ought to originate from that office. Then he had done more to raise and

keep up a jealousy between the New England and other troops, than all the

men in the army besides. Indeed, his _stinking pride_, as General George

Clinton expresses it, has gone so far, that I expect every day to hear he

is called to account by some officer or other; indeed, he is universally

hated and despised, and it is high time he was displaced." If Mr. Irving

has not seen that letter, we refer him to the New York Gazette, of December

the 9th, 1776, or to Mr. Peter Force's American Archives, if that work be

more accessible to him.

We have still another complaint of omission to make against Mr. Irving, and

we think it too important a point in the history of Gen. Reed to be

overlooked.

A few days previous to the battle of Trenton, when affairs were most

gloomy, and not a single star appeared to give the faintest glimmer of

hope, Reed appeared despondent: "He felt the game was up, and there was no

use of following the wretched remains of a broken army; he had a family,

and it was but right that he should look after their interests; besides,

the time had nearly expired during which they could avail themselves of the

pardon offered by Gen. Howe to all those who should go over to the enemy."

Such were the lamentations of Gen. Reed, until, in the agony of his fears,

he communicated them to Gen. Cadwalader. The feelings of that high-minded,

chivalrous soldier can hardly be imagined--his first impulse was to order

Reed under the arrest, but was deterred for fear of the effect the example

might have on the men. He, however remonstrated with him, and his arguments

appeared for the time to restore his composure. During the night previous

to the battle of Trenton, Reed lay concealed in Burlington, in anxious

expectation of the result of Washington's great master-stroke.

He had opposed the enterprise in his communications with Washington, by the

most discouraging representations, and now anxiously awaited the result.

His fears were worked up to the highest pitch; and the burthen of his

conversation was, how he should protect himself. He had with him a

companion in his weakness, and the determination they both came to was, to

go over to the enemy early in the morning. Before, however, they could

execute their intentions, the news arived[TN] of the victory of the

Americans, the turning point in our country's fortunes, which gave hope to

the people and courage to Gen. Reed.

A few years after these transactions, Reed was accused in the public

newspapers of having meditated a desertion to the enemy. He replied in a

pamphlet, in which he attempted to defend himself, and addressed it to Gen.

Cadwalader, whom he conceived to be the author of the charges and between

whom and himself there was some unfriendly feelings, arising out of

pecuniary transactions between them. Cadwalader came out with a crushing[A]

"Reply," in which though he denied having published the statements in the

newspapers, he yet affirmed the truth of them, and brought such

overwhelming _proofs_ to sustain his charges, that the public lost all

confidence in Reed, and failed to re-elect him to the office he had just

held. It is not within the limits of an article like this to go through

Gen. Cadwalader's pamphlet, suffice it to say, he was supported by

Alexander Hamilton, Dickinson, Doct. Rush, Bradford, and numerous others.

Among other things, it was proved that previous to the battle of Trenton,

Reed had sent to Count Dunop, who commanded at Bordentown, to ask if he

could have a _protection_ for himself and _a friend_. The messenger

narrowly escaped being hanged, through the intercession of a friend of

Count Dunop. This is corroborated by an extract from the Diary of "Mrs.

Margaret Morris."

Extract from a Journal kept by Margaret Morris, for the amusement and

information of her sister Mitcah Martha Moore. Her residence at the time,

was on the "bank" at Burlington, N. J., at the corner of Ellis Street.

* * * * *

"January 4th, 1777, we were told by a woman who lodged in the same room

where General Reed and Colonel C---- took shelter, when the battle of

Trenton dispersed the Americans, that they (Reed and C----) had laid awake

all night consulting together about the best means of securing themselves,

and that they came to the determination of setting off next day as soon as

it was light to the British Camp, and joining them with all the men under

their command. But when the morning came an express arrived with an account

that the Americans had gained a great victory. The English made to flee

before the ragged American Regiments. This report put the rebel General and

Colonel in high spirits, and they concluded to remain firm to the cause of

America. They paid me a visit, and though in my heart I despised

them--treated them civilly, and was on the point of telling them their

conversation the preceding night had been conveyed to me on the wings of

the wind, but on second thought gave it up--though perhaps the time may

come when they may hear more about it."

There is still another page in the life of Gen. Reed that remains to be

told, and that is the attempt alleged to have been made by Mrs. Ferguson to

bribe him. All are familiar with his intensely patriotic reply, refusing

_ten thousand pounds_, and the best office in the colonies, in his

Majesty's gift. To be sure, Gov. Johnstone,[B] in a speech before

Parliament, most emphatically denied having employed[C] Mrs. Ferguson to

offer to Gen. Reed any bribe whatever, while at the same time he admits

that _other_ means besides persuasion were used. Does he allude to the pair

of elegant pistols that Reed accepted after the attempt to bribe him, and

with which he was charged in the public papers? But Mr. Irving has not yet

approached this delicate subject, and to his able hands we leave it, fully

conscious he will give it the attention so important a circumstance

requires.

Should he fail, however, to do justice to Gen. Reed in this matter, he will

pardon us if we again take the liberty of addressing him on the subject.

We have been careful in our strictures upon the character and conduct of

Gen. Reed to assert nothing that unquestionable evidence does not sustain;

and if by our remarks we have lowered him from the undeserved eminence to

which the injudicious zeal of interested parties has so industriously

labored to elevate him, this result must rather be attributed to the

weakness of the support, and the frailty of the statue, than to the vigor

of the blows we have bestowed upon it.

The most we have done has been to remove the deceptive varnish, and the

idol has fallen to pieces.

Nuts for Future Historians to Crack · 第 7 / 53 题