married. Soon the tumult and agitation of the secession movement,
followed by the call for volunteers, stirred his patriotic spirit and
martial ardor. He offered his services to President Lincoln, who
commissioned him as brigadier general, assigned to General Banks’ corps
in the army of West Virginia.
The veteran was quickly in the field of operations, soon at the head of
a division. It was while in this command he encountered the renowned
Stonewall Jackson, inflicting on this hitherto invincible confederate
general a defeat which sent him “whirling up the valley.” The tidings of
this remarkable victory caused great rejoicing throughout the North and
gained great applause and commendations for General Shields. The army of
Virginia up to this time had suffered a succession of disasters. The
government was in a dilemma.
The command of the Army of the Potomac was at this juncture offered to
General Shields. I make this statement on the authority of General
Shields himself. Following his victory at Winchester, he said, a member
of the cabinet arrived in his camp and on the part of the President
proposed to him the command of the Army of the Potomac. The reasons
suggested for this tender appeared to be, as I recall them, the
necessity for a change of leaders owing to previous ill success;
Shields’ established capacity for high command, as shown by his career
in Mexico, his recent campaign and the enthusiasm and confidence his
appointment would arouse in the ranks of the army, but the controlling
motive appeared to be a political consideration—that Shields, because of
his foreign birth, could not in the event of his success become a
political factor or rival in the field of national politics—that is to
say, in no event would it be possible to make of Shields a candidate for
the presidency.
* * * * *
The suggestion appears to have been given to Shields in this same
interview that the President was then contemplating and preparing to
issue the emancipation proclamation. This latter determined Shields’
decision. He rejected the proposal made to him. This, in substance, is
my recollection of the statement made by the general during one of his
visits to Chicago late in the 70’s. Others besides the writer heard
General Shields make this statement at the time.
The President sent Shields’ name to the Senate for confirmation as major
general, and as the appointment was not ratified by that body Shields
resigned and withdrew from the army. Likely this may have been partly in
protest against the threatened emancipation policy. At all events,
Shields returned to California. From there he shortly afterward removed
to Missouri, settling on a farm near Carrollton in that state and
devoting himself to the labors and duties of farm life. In 1877 he was
elected member of the general assembly of Missouri, and the same year
appointed adjutant general of the state militia. The death of Senator
Bogg the next year caused a vacancy in the representation of Missouri in
the United States Senate, and General Shields was appointed, thus giving
him the distinction of having served in the United States Senate from
three different states.
The term was short, and with its termination may be said ended General
Shields’ public service as a legislator and statesman. He nevertheless
continued an interesting figure before the public, appearing on many
occasions in different cities as a lecturer and for addresses on various
subjects of general interest. It was while engaged in a lecturing tour
that the end came. He died suddenly while visiting a convent in Ottumwa,
Iowa, June 1, 1879.
* * * * *
Few men in public life have filled so many and so various offices and
employments. He had been school teacher, lawyer, legislator, jurist,
state auditor, land commissioner, general in the Mexican and Civil wars,
United States senator, adjutant general, farmer and lecturer. He might
have been governor of Oregon, commander of the papal army and of the
army of the Potomac (possibly), and he could have led the Fenians in
their foolish raid on Canada had not his good common sense rejected the
offer and condemned the project.
General Shields was warm and earnest in his Irish sympathies, and he
showed this on many public occasions. It is to his honor that he lived
and died a poor man. He never profited or sought to profit by the
multiplied opportunities for personal gain which must have been open to
him during his public career. In his old age, after all his notable
services, he was receiving a pension of only $34 per month, and when he
died all that he left his family was the farm, the swords voted to him
by Illinois and South Carolina—and an untarnished name.
Illinois has since honored the memory of her one-time senator and
general by causing his statue to be placed in the National Capitol. This
was due largely to the active efforts and enthusiasm of a well-known
Chicago attorney, William H. Condon, since dead, who also published the
life of General James Shields.
THE FRENCH-IRISH BRIGADES IN THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.
The signal and important services of the French-Irish regiments in the
American revolutionary war have scarcely ever found adequate recognition
and acknowledgement at the hands of historical writers. Indeed, the same
may be said of the great part France had in that war.
Of course, every school boy has read of the exploits of the youthful and
enthusiastic Lafayette, and knows that Rochambeau with his army and De
Grasse with his fleet were conspicuous in bringing about the surrender
of Cornwallis and his forces at Yorktown. Only by the powerful
co-operation of the French army and navy at the siege was the crowning
victory of the war achieved, and that victory forced from the English
king and his ministers the recognition of American independence. All
this is well known, but the magnitude of the French aid all through the
war is less familiar to the general reader.
[Illustration:
HON. HENRY GROVES CONNOR,
of Raleigh, N. C.
An Eminent Jurist and Learned Historian.
Member of the Society.
]
The army and navy registers in the French archives show that sixty-three
ships of war, mounting 3,668 guns, manned by 32,600 officers and seamen,
were employed in the naval operations on the American seaboard, and
upward of 12,000 land forces. The financial cost to France of the fleets
and armies and the loans and gifts in money to the colonies have been
computed by a competent authority at $50,000,000.
My present design in this sketch is to emphasize the part the Irish
brigades in the French army had in the American war. I do not need to
recall to mind the historic renown of the Irish Brigade.
Almost every battlefield in Europe during the seventeenth century was
flamed by their valor and crimsoned with their blood. In France, in
Italy, in Spain and in the Low Countries these exiled soldiers fought
with such furious impetuosity that even the bitterest enemies of their
race were forced to pay them the reluctant tribute of their admiration.
King George II. is said to have exclaimed after witnessing the bravery
of the Irish brigade at the battle of Dettingen: “Cursed be the laws
that deprive me of such subjects.”
When the colonies had declared their independence of Great Britain and
the aid of France was eagerly invoked the Irish troops in the French
army pressed their request on the war office in Paris that they should
be sent to America to fight the British, who were, they declared, their
hereditary enemies. A copy of the French original of this document may
be seen in the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. In 1779 several Irish
regiments were embarked in the French fleets for service against the
English forces in the West Indies and on the American coast. Included in
this contingent were the regiments of Dillon, Walsh, Berwick and Fermoy.
These regiments being so designated in compliment to the colonel in
command as the “Colonel Proprietaire.” In the fleet of the Count
d’Estaing there was carried a considerable land force—mostly of the
Irish brigade. Count Dillon was second in command to the admiral and at
the siege of Savannah, then held by the British, he led his own regiment
in the attack on the defenses.
* * * * *
There was, also, on the land side, an American co-operating force
commanded by General Lincoln. The assault ended disastrously for both
the French and Americans with severe loss in killed and wounded. Upward
of 1,200 of the assaulting columns fell in the space of fifty minutes;
of these 821 were of the French forces and the rest of the American. The
utmost bravery was shown, both in the attack and in the defense, but the
storming column, led by Count d’Estaing and Dillon, could not withstand
the terrific fire of the batteries and were forced to abandon the
assault.
D’Estaing was wounded and carried off the field. The gallant Pole, Count
Pulaski, who served with the American forces, was killed. He was in
command of a small force of regular cavalry of lancers. Among the list
of the killed and wounded of the French attacking column I find the
names of Brow, major in Dillon’s regiment; Moran and O’Neill, captains;
Tauffe, lieutenant, and many other familiar Irish names; officers and
subofficers of the brigade. The names of the rank and file are not
given, but it is not difficult to surmise what must have been the
gallantry of the assault when we see the heavy list of the killed and
wounded.
* * * * *
The particulars of the memorable attack on Savannah are given with great
fullness in a publication issued many years ago by the Georgia
Historical Society, compiled from original sources. The gallantry of
Sergeant Jasper, an Irishman, at the siege and his heroic death on the
battlements while attempting to raise thereon the flag of his regiment,
has immortalized his name and his bravery. A statue of Jasper in one of
the public squares of Savannah fittingly commemorates the deed and
memory of the gallant patriot.
Following the abandonment of the siege the French fleet withdrew and
undertook the reduction of several of the English possessions in the
West Indies. It is not my purpose to follow the subsequent career and
fortunes of the fleet and forces under d’Estaing except to remark that
the diversion made by these attacks on the islands under the British
flag were naturally important aids to the cause of the colonies, since
the English forces employed in their defense would otherwise have been
in service, doubtless, in the attempt to subdue the colonies.
* * * * *
I am tempted to relate another incident in Count Dillon’s career of
glory in the expeditions that followed the failure at Savannah. He had
part in the attempts made by the French fleet and forces on several of
the English possessions, notably in the attack made on the Island of St.
Eustache.
The frigates being unable to approach sufficiently near to the
fortifications to land aid, Dillon, with only 377 men, landed and in
person led the assault. The Irish were at the head of the column, and
such was the impetuosity of the attacking force that 840 regular troops
of the English army laid down their arms and were made prisoners of war
by less than half their number! Later on the Dillon regiment was
employed in the siege of the important fortress and Island of St.
Christopher, and the place was finally carried, Count Dillon remaining
in command of the island as governor.
After the treaty of peace with France and the colonies, the island,
under the terms of the treaty, was yielded back to Great Britain.
Shortly afterward Dillon paid a visit to London in the train of the
French embassy.
He was presented at the court and, having paid his respects to the king,
George III., the lord chancellor, Loughborough, who was in attendance,
crossed over to Dillon and said to him, after some preliminary
compliments: “I must thank you for the equity and fairness of your
decisions given whilst you were acting as governor of the island. My
court has had occasion to pass on some of the cases you decided and we
found no occasion to dissent from your judgments.”
* * * * *
Sad to say, this gallant soldier met his death on the scaffold, at the
hands of the ruffians who were in the ascendance during the French
revolution, as did so many thousands of the noblest and best of French
men and women.
At the last moment, as he stood at the foot of the fatal guillotine, a
lady who preceded him and who, like Dillon, was to meet her doom by the
order of the same furies, turned to the count, saying: “Would you not
oblige me by going first?”
“Certainly, madam,” was the answer of the chivalric Irishman, and
ascending before the lady, in a moment the horrible instrument had ended
the career of the heroic Count Arthur Dillon.
A namesake, Colonel Theobald Dillon, who had been with Rochambeau at
Yorktown, was another of the victims of the French Revolution, under
circumstances even more revolting. But I must stay my pen on this
subject.
* * * * *
The erection of the monument or statue of Lafayette in Paris a few years
back, as a token and testimony of America’s gratitude to France, has
since then been supplemented by the installation of a fine statue of
Rochambeau in Washington—a like tribute to the value and importance of
the aid given by France in the critical period of the Revolutionary War.
The inauguration of the Rochambeau statue, which is one of the finest
and most impressive in the nation’s capital, was made the occasion of
ceremonies and exercises of the highest dignity and importance. Of
course, these were reported with great fullness at the time, and I have
no need to dwell on the details now.
The government, by the action of Congress, has since published a large
volume in which is given, I may say, not only a full narrative of all
the proceedings in connection with the statue, but also a comprehensive
story of French aid and services in the war for colonial independence.
The volume includes the “roster” of the French naval and military
forces. The Irish regiments to which I have referred, of course, are
given due notice, like the others; that is to say, the name of the
regiment, together with the list of the chief officers, etc. Count
Dillon’s regiment was present at the surrender of Cornwallis and the
British army at Yorktown. The count himself was not there, being
occupied at his post as governor of the island already referred to. His
cousin, Colonel Theobald Dillon, was there, and many other French-Irish
officers of the brigade.
* * * * *
It will be of interest to many to learn that efforts have been made to
obtain from the French war office a full list of the officers and
soldiers of the Irish brigades who served in the war of the American
revolution. I am happy to state that a volume will soon be issued by the
French government containing these names. The search for the necessary
data was instituted at the request of M. Jusserand, the learned and
accomplished French ambassador at Washington.
I trust I am not betraying a secret in stating that the initiative in
the task of Irish historic interest has been due to Archbishop Ireland,
who was himself a conspicuous figure in the ceremonies attending the
celebration for Lafayette in Paris, and in the Rochambeau exercises at
Washington and New York.
BISHOP BERKELEY AND HIS PLANS FOR A GREAT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY.
The records of Yale College bear testimony to the beneficence and
liberality of an Irish bishop who, early in the eighteenth century, gave
proof of his zeal for learning by bestowing on that institution, then
lately founded—its charter is dated 1701—the dwelling house and farm in
Rhode Island which he had purchased and occupied during his strange
visit and sojourn in America.
The bishop likewise gave to the college on his departure the best and
largest collection of books—nearly one thousand volumes—that had ever up
to that time been brought over. The catalogue, or list of these works,
is preserved in the Yale College library. Harvard is likewise indebted
to the same benefactor for a collection of textbooks.
* * * * *
Bishop George Berkeley was a remarkable character in his day. An account
of his career cannot but possess a certain interest for the general
reader. He was the friend and associate of many of the literary
celebrities of the time, Dean Swift, Addison and Steele, who esteemed
his friendship and appreciated his amiable character and qualities.
Berkeley was born in the County Kilkenny, Ireland, the same year that
James II. succeeded to the British crown. His early education was
acquired in the same school in Kilkenny which Dean Swift had attended,
and his subsequent studies were pursued at Trinity College, Dublin. It
was said of him while at college that he was regarded by some of his
fellow students as the greatest dunce in the institution, while others
thought him a prodigy of learning and goodness, but all agreed that he
was full of simplicity and enthusiasm—indeed, these latter
characteristics remained with him through life. The results of his
application to study is shown by his college record. He was elected
“scholar” in 1702, a B. A. in 1704, and obtained his master’s degree in
1707, and the same year was admitted to a fellowship. The drift of his
mind and of his studies was shown in the formation of a college society
“to promote investigations in the new philosophy of Boyle, Newton and
Locke,” a subject upon which he wrote many papers.
* * * * *
Before leaving college to enter on his career in London, Berkeley had
already acquired some reputation as a writer on philosophical subjects.
It was Dean Swift who introduced his fellow countryman to the circles of
influence in the British capital. In the “Journal to Stella,” the dean
jots down under date of April 12, 1713: “I went to court today on
purpose to present Mr. Berkeley, one of our fellows of Trinity College.
This Mr. Berkeley is a very ingenious man and great philosopher, and I
have mentioned him to all the ministers, and have given them some of his
writings, and I will favor him as much as I can. This, I think, I am
bound to—in honor and conscience to use all my little credit toward
helping forward men of worth in the world.”
* * * * *
Swift introduced Berkeley to the Earl of Peterborough, then one of the
most extraordinary characters in Europe. He had amazed the country a few
years before by his wonderful achievements in Spain, during the war of
the succession. Soldier, scholar and diplomatist, this singular man was
eccentric in all his movements and actions—indeed, his career and
character is still a favorite study and an enigma for the historian and
biographer. The introduction obtained for Berkeley, the post of the
chaplain and secretary to Peterborough, who had been appointed
ambassador to the King of Sicily. It was little use the eccentric earl
had for a chaplain, since he was himself a well-known skeptic and
freethinker!
The post to which he had been appointed gave Berkeley the opportunity of
making acquaintance with the continent—he had taken “orders” before
Trinity College—and he now saw France and Italy for the first time. His
letters describing his experience and observations in these countries
are exceedingly interesting, but my limits will not admit of quotations.
The death of Queen Anne during his sojourn abroad and the accession of
George I. caused a change in his prospects and position. Peterborough
was recalled by the new administration, and consequently Berkeley
returned to England in August, 1714.
* * * * *
The change of administration in England blighted for a time Berkeley’s
prospects of preferment. His friend, Dean Swift, was no longer in the
ascendant, and his late patron, the Earl of Peterborough, had been
deprived of place and influence. He was, nevertheless, a welcome guest
and visitor in literary circles and in general society. He possessed a
charm of address and manners that won friends to him on all sides. He
shortly had the opportunity again to revisit the continent—this time as
companion and tutor to the son of Sir George Ashe. While in Paris he had
an interview and carried on a discussion with the celebrated Malebranche
on points of philosophy and metaphysics which, it is said, became so
animated and exciting that the Frenchman brought on himself a violent
disorder which prostrated him and resulted in his death within a few
days.
After an absence this time of five years Berkeley returned to England in
1720. He found the country in turmoil over the collapse of the South Sea
bubble. The speculative mania which had spread widely in England led as
usual to an era of extravagance and corruption. The disorders of society
consequent on these conditions was general. Berkeley gave vent to his
feelings on the situation by an essay that attracted wide attention, in
which he sought to point out a remedy for the prevailing evils.
* * * * *
His suggestions may be briefly quoted as bearing equally on certain
conditions not altogether unfamiliar to us in the United States. He
argued that the persons who compose society must become individually
industrious, frugal, public-spirited and religious. Sumptuary laws, he
thought, might do something toward mitigating existing distress, and
public amusements might be regulated, and masquerades prohibited. The
drama, too, should be reformed. But the prime necessity was that
sensuality must give way to religious love and reverence. “Let us be
industrious, frugal and religious, if we are to be saved at all,” was
his counsel.
In 1721 he returned to Ireland, from which he had been so long absent.
He had retained all along his post in Trinity College, and was now
shortly installed as chaplain to the Duke of Trafton, the viceroy.
There occurred in 1723 a curious and romantic incident in which Swift
was concerned, or rather “Vanessa”—one of the two unhappy women whose
passion for and devotion to the cynical dean have become familiar to all
readers. Vanessa, like Stella, the other victim of unrequited affection,
followed the dean to Dublin, and there learned of Swift’s connection
with Stella—to whom he had been secretly married. Heart-crushed by the
revelation, she revoked a will she had made in favor of the man she
loved, and substituted Berkeley as the beneficiary and legatee. This is
all the more curious and unaccountable as Vanessa (Esther Vanhumrigh)
seems to have met Berkeley but once, and that only by chance. At all
events he was the gainer by some 4,000 pounds.
* * * * *
Fortune had begun to favor him. He was appointed dean of Derry
(Londonderry), an important ecclesiastical dignity in the Irish church,
said to be worth £1,100 a year. While in possession of this lucrative
position the project of the great university in the new world seems to
have taken root in his mind, and quickly became a passionate enthusiasm.
This is the project which links Berkeley’s name with America—indeed it
was to recall his romantic initiative and devotion to this early scheme
for higher education that I venture on this sketch.
Swift says the design had been long in Berkeley’s mind. His generous aim
involved the surrender of his opulent position as dean, and the
employment of his means, including the Vanessa legacy, in promoting this
project, on which he had evidently set his heart, and it also
necessitated other sacrifices as we shall see. Of course, it was not
possible for him unaided to carry out or even to begin his undertaking.
He relied on obtaining aid from sympathizers, and an indispensable
charter from the king, George I.
* * * * *
It is a curious fact that he was indebted to a Catholic—the Abbe
Gualteri, whom he had met in Italy—for the opportunity of making his
application to the king under favorable conditions. The abbe was a
distinguished Venetian scientist, who had the ear of court circles, and
he interested himself warmly in Berkeley’s behalf, with the result that
a charter was granted in June, 1725, for a college in the Island of
Bermuda, and constituting “Dr. Berkeley, Dean of Londonderry, principal
of said college.”
Berkeley’s enthusiasm and persuasive eloquence enlisted promise of
support in other powerful quarters. The prime minister, Sir Robert
Walpole, promised a grant of £20,000; the private subscriptions seem to
have aggregated about £5,000.