RICHARD DERBY AND HIS SON JOHN
(1774-1792)
The first armed resistance to British troops in the American colonies
was made at Salem and led by Captain Richard Derby of the third
generation of the most notable seafaring family in this country’s
annals. Born in 1712, he lived through the Revolution, and his career
as a shipmaster, merchant and patriot covered the greater part of
the American maritime history of the eighteenth century. Until 1757,
when he retired from active service on the sea, his small vessels
of from fifty to one hundred tons burden were carrying fish, lumber
and provisions to the West Indies and fetching home sugar, molasses,
cotton, rum and claret, or bringing rice and naval stores from
Carolina. With the returns from these voyages, assorted cargoes were
laden for voyages to Spain and Madeira and the proceeds remitted in
bills on London, or in wine, salt, fruit, oil, lead and handkerchiefs
to America.
Captain Richard Derby’s vessels ran the gauntlet of the privateers
during the French War from 1756 to 1763, and their owner’s letters
to his London agents describe them as mounting from eight to twelve
cannon, mostly six-pounders, “with four cannon below decks for
close quarters.” Accustomed to fighting his way where he could not
go peaceably, Richard Derby and the men of his stamp whose lives
and fortunes were staked on the high seas, felt the fires of their
resentment against England wax hotter and hotter as her shipping laws
smote their interests with increasing oppression.
In fact, the spirit of independence and protest against interference
by the mother country had begun to stir in the seaport towns a full
century before the outbreak of armed revolution. It is recorded in
Salem annals that “when it was reported to the Lords of Plantations
that the Salem and Boston merchants’ vessels arrived daily from Spain,
France, Holland, and the Canaries (in 1763) which brought wines,
linens, silks and fruits, and these were exchanged with the other
colonies for produce which was carried to the aforesaid kingdoms
without coming to England, complaint was made to the Magistrates that
these were singular proceedings. Their reply was ‘that they were His
Majesty’s Vice-Admirals in those seas and _they would do that which
seemed good to them_.’”
The spirit of those “Vice Admirals” who proposed to do what seemed good
to them continued to flourish and grow bolder in its defiance of unjust
laws, and the port of Salem was primed and ready for open rebellion
long before that fateful April day at Lexington and Concord. In 1771,
four years before the beginning of the Revolution, the Salem _Gazette_
published on the first anniversary of the “Boston Massacre,” the
following terrific proclamation framed in a border of black in token of
mourning:
“As a Solemn and Perpetual Memorial:
“Of the Tyranny of the British Administration of Government in the
years 1768, 1769, and 1770;
“Of the fatal and destructive Consequences of Quartering Armies, in
Time of Peace, in populous cities;
“Of the ridiculous Policy and infamous Absurdity of supporting _Civil
Government by a Military Force_.
“Of the Great Duty and Necessity of firmly opposing Despotism at its
first Approaches;
“Of the detestable Principles and arbitrary Conduct of those
_Ministers_ in Britain who advised, and of their _Tools_ in America
who desired the Introduction of a Standing Army in this Province in
the year 1768;
“Of the irrefragible Proof which those ministers themselves thereby
produced, that the Civil Government, as by them Administered, was
weak, wicked, and tyrannical;
“Of the vile Ingratitude and abominable Wickedness of every American
who abetted and encouraged, either in Thought, Word or Deed, the
establishment of a Standing Army among his Countrymen;
“Of the unaccountable Conduct of those _Civil Governors_, the
immediate Representatives of His Majesty, who, while the _Military_
was triumphantly insulting the whole LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY OF THE
STATE, and while the blood of the Massacred Inhabitants was flowing
in the Streets, persisted in repeatedly disclaiming all authority of
relieving the People, by any the least removal of the Troops:
“And of the Savage cruelty of the IMMEDIATE PERPETRATORS:
“_Be it forever Remembered_
“That this day, THE FIFTH OF MARCH, is the Anniversary of
BOSTON MASSACRE IN KING ST. BOSTON,
NEW ENGLAND, 1770.
“In which Five of his Majesty’s Subjects were slain and six wounded,
By the Discharge of a number of Muskets from a Part of Soldiers under
the Command of Capt. Thomas Preston,
“GOD Save the People!
“Salem, March 5, 1771.”
The fuse was laid to the powder by the arrival of Lieutenant General
Thomas Gage as the first military governor of Massachusetts in May,
1774. He at once moved the seat of government from Boston to Salem
which was the second town in importance of the colony, and Salem
began to exhibit symptoms of active hostility. Gage’s change of
administrative headquarters was accompanied by two companies of the
Sixty-fourth Regiment of the line, Colonel Alexander Leslie, which were
encamped beyond the outskirts of the town. The presence of these troops
was a red rag to the people of Salem, and furthermore, Gage outraged
public opinion by proposing to choose his own councillors, which
appointments had been previously conceded to the Provincial Assembly.
A new Act of Parliament, devised to suit the occasion, eliminated the
councillors who had been named by the Assembly or General Court, and
Gage adjourned this body, then in session in Boston, and ordered it to
reconvene in Salem on June 7th.
When the Assembly met in Salem it passed a resolution protesting
against its removal from Boston, and acted upon no other political
measures for ten days when the House adopted a resolution appointing
as delegates to the Congress at Philadelphia, James Bowdoin, Thomas
Cushing, Samuel Adams, John Adams, and Robert Treat Paine “to consult
upon measures for the restoration of harmony between Great Britain
and the Colonies.” This action angered General Gage, and he at once
prepared a proclamation dissolving the General Court. His secretary
posted off to the Salem “town house” to deliver said proclamation,
but he was refused admittance, word being brought out to him that the
“orders were to keep the door fast.” Therefore the defeated secretary
read the document to the curious crowd outside and afterwards in
the empty council chamber. So ended the last Provincial Assembly of
Massachusetts under a British Governor.
[Illustration: Richard Derby]
Having moved his headquarters to Salem, General Gage let it be known
that he regarded the odious Boston Port Bill as a measure which
must be maintained by military law and an army of twenty thousand
men if needs be. He also suppressed the town meetings, appointed new
councillors, and heaped up other grievances with such wholesale energy
that Salem flew up in arms and defied him. A town meeting had been
called for August 24th to choose delegates to a county convention, and
the people of the town refused to harken unto the order prohibiting
their most jealously guarded institution of local government, the town
meeting. Gage hurried back from Boston, took command of his troops,
and ordered the Fifty-ninth Regiment of foot to make ready for active
service. It is recorded that he showed “Indecent passion, denounced
the meeting as treasonable and spoke with much vehemence of voice and
gesture, threatened the committee of the town whom he met at the house
of Colonel Brown, and ordered up his troops.”
The citizens thereupon held a meeting in the open air, chose their
delegates to the county convention, and dispersed. Timothy Pickering,
afterwards Washington’s Secretary of War, and other members of the
Committee were placed under arrest for their part in this town meeting.
Before nightfall of the same day three thousand men of Salem and nearby
towns had armed themselves with muskets and were ready to march to the
rescue if their town meeting should be further molested, or British
troops employed to enforce any further punishments.
General Gage had declared with an oath that he would transport every
man of the Committee, and the “embattled farmers” and sailors feared
lest these fellow townsmen of theirs might be carried on board the
frigate _Scarboro_ which was making ready to sail for England. An
express rider was sent out from Boston at midnight to carry the warning
of the proposed sailing of this man-of-war, and with the threat of
transportation bracing their resolution, the men of Salem replied that
“they were ready to receive any attacks they might be exposed to for
acting in pursuance to the laws and interests of their country, as
becomes men and Christians.”
The issue was not forced by General Gage and having made a failure of
the campaign and a blunder of the transfer of the seat of government
he returned to Boston with his troops in September. In February of the
following year, 1775, he was informed that the Provincial Congress had
stored a large amount of munitions and a number of cannon in Salem, and
he ordered Colonel Leslie to embark in a transport with a battalion
of infantry, disembark at Marblehead, march across to Salem and seize
this material of war. These troops, two hundred and fifty strong,
sailed from Boston at night and landed on the Marblehead beach Sunday
afternoon. Major Pedrick, a patriot of the town, at once mounted a
horse and galloped to Salem, two miles away, to carry warning of this
invasion. The British infantry marched along the turnpike until they
came to the North River, a small, navigable stream making up from Salem
Harbor. This was spanned by a drawbridge, and Colonel Leslie was much
disturbed to find the drawbridge raised and a formidable assemblage of
Salem citizens buzzing angrily at the farther side of the stream. The
British officer had no orders to force the passage, and the situation
was both delicate and awkward in the extreme. Timothy Pickering had
been chosen colonel of the First Regiment of militia and forty of his
armed men were mustered, drawn up ready to fire at the order. Colonel
Leslie threatened to let loose a volley of musketry to clear the road,
and was told by Captain John Felt of Salem:
“You had better not fire, for there is a multitude, every man of whom
is ready to die in this strife.”
Some of the more adventurous patriots climbed to the top of the raised
drawbridge and hurled insulting taunts at the British infantry, yelling
“Fire and be damned to you.” Rev. Thomas Barnard of the North Church
tried to make peace and addressed Colonel Leslie: “You cannot commit
this violation against innocent people, here on this holy day, without
sinning against God and humanity. Let me entreat you to return.”
At the head of the crowd of armed men of Salem stood Captain Richard
Derby. He owned eight of the nineteen cannon which had been collected
for the use of the Provincial Congress and he had not the slightest
notion of surrendering them. There was a parley while Colonel Leslie
argued that he was in lawful use of the King’s highway. The Salem
rejoinder was to the effect that the road and the bridge were private
property to be taken from them only by force and under martial law. At
this juncture, when bloody collision seemed imminent, Captain Richard
Derby took command of the situation, and roared across the stream, as
if he were on his own quarterdeck:
“Find the cannon if you can. Take them if you can. They will never be
surrendered.”
A fine portrait of this admirable old gentleman has been preserved,
and in a well-powdered wig, with a spyglass in his hand, he looks
every inch the man who hurled this defiance at Great Britain and dared
a battalion of His Majesty’s foot to knock the chip off his stalwart
shoulder. Colonel Leslie made a half-hearted attempt to set his men
across the river in boats, and it was at this time that the only
casualty occurred, a Salem man, Joseph Whicher, receiving a bayonet
thrust. Meanwhile the Marblehead regiment of patriot militia had been
mustered under arms, and the Minute Men of Danvers were actually on the
march toward the North River bridge. Perceiving that to force a passage
meant to set the whole colony in a blaze, and unwilling to shoulder
so tremendous a responsibility without orders from General Gage, the
British colonel delayed for further discussion. At length Captain Derby
and his friends proposed that in order to satisfy Colonel Leslie’s
ideas of duty and honor, he should be permitted to cross the bridge
and immediately thereafter return whence he came. This odd compromise
was accepted, and after marching to the farther side of the river the
troops faced about and footed back to their transport at Marblehead,
without finding the cannon they had come out to take. It was a victory
for Captain Richard Derby and his townsmen and well worth a conspicuous
place in the history of the beginnings of the American Revolution.
Another prominent figure in this tremendously dramatic situation was
Colonel David Mason, a veteran soldier who had commanded a battery in
the French War in 1756-7, and a scientist of considerable distinction
who had made discoveries in electricity of such importance that
he was requested to journey to Philadelphia to discuss them with
Doctor Franklin. Colonel Mason was a man of great public spirit and
patriotism, and in November, 1774, he had received an appointment as
Engineer from the “Massachusetts Committee of Safety,” which was the
first military appointment of the Revolutionary War. He was from this
time actively engaged in collecting military stores for the use of his
country and making secret preparation for the approaching contest with
England. He had obtained from Captain Derby the cannon which Colonel
Leslie wished to confiscate and had given them to a Salem blacksmith to
have the iron work for the carriages made and fitted.
Colonel Mason resided near the North Bridge and Doctor Barnard’s
church. When he heard the British troops were drawing near he ran into
the North Church and disrupted the afternoon service by shouting at the
top of his voice: “The regulars are coming and are now near Malloon’s
Mills.” He and others in authority among their fellow-townsmen tried
to control the hotheads and avert hostilities. But the task was made
difficult by defiant patriots who bellowed across the drawbridge:
“Soldiers, red jackets, lobster coats, cowards, damn your government.”
A high-spirited dame, Sarah Tarrant by name, poked her head out of a
window of her cottage overlooking the scene and shrilly addressed the
British colonel:
“Go home and tell your master he has sent you on a fool’s errand, and
broken the peace of our Sabbath. What? Do you think we were born in the
woods to be frightened by owls? Fire at me if you have the courage, but
I doubt it.”
John Howard of Marblehead, who was one of the militia men under
arms, stated in his recollections of the affair at the North Bridge
that there were eight military companies in Marblehead at that time,
comprising nearly the whole male population between sixteen and sixty
years of age. They were all promptly assembled under Colonel Orne, to
the number of a thousand men. Their orders were “to station themselves
behind the houses and fences along the road prepared to fall upon
the British on their return from Salem, if it should be found that
hostile measures had been used by them; but if it should appear that no
concerted act of violence upon the persons or property of the people
had been committed, they were charged not to show themselves, but to
allow the British detachment to return unmolested to their transport.”
The episode was taken seriously in England as shown by an item in the
_Gentleman’s Magazine_ of London of April 17, 1775, which reported: “By
a ship just arrived at Bristol from America, it is reported that the
Americans have hoisted the standard of liberty at Salem.”
William Gavett of Salem wrote an account of the affair of which he was
an eye-witness and described certain lively incidents as follows:
“One David Boyce, a Quaker, had gone out with his team to assist in
carrying the guns out of reach of the troops, and they were conveyed
to the neighborhood of what was then called Buffum’s hill, to the
northwest of the road leading to Danvers and near the present estate
of Gen. Devereux. My father looked in between the platoons, as I heard
him tell my mother, to see if he could recognize any of the soldiers
who had been stationed at Fort William on the Neck, many of whom
were known to him, but he could discover no familiar faces and was
blackguarded by the soldiers for his inquisitiveness, who asked him,
with oaths, what he was looking after. The northern leaf of the draw
was hoisted when the troops approached the bridge, which prevented them
from going any further. Their commander (Col. Leslie) then went upon
West’s, now Brown’s, wharf, and Capt. John Felt followed him. He then
remarked to Capt. Felt, or in his hearing, that he should be obliged to
fire upon the people on the northern side of the bridge if they did not
lower the leaf. Capt. Felt told him if the troops did fire they would
be all dead men, or words to that effect. It was understood afterwards
that if the troops fired upon the people, Capt. Felt intended to
grapple with Col. Leslie and jump into the river, for said he, ‘I would
willingly be drowned myself to be the death of one Englishman.’ Mr. Wm.
Northey, observing the menacing attitude assumed by Capt. Felt, now
remarked to him, ‘don’t you know the danger you are in opposing armed
troops, and an officer with a drawn sword in his hand?’ The people
soon commenced scuttling two gondolas which lay on the western side
of the bridge and the troops also got into them to prevent it. One
Joseph Whicher, the foreman in Col. Sprague’s distillery, was at work
scuttling the Colonel’s gondola, and the soldiers ordered him to desist
and threatened to stab him with their bayonets if he did not—whereupon
he opened his breast and dared them to strike. They pricked his breast
so as to draw blood. He was very proud of this wound in after life and
was fond of exhibiting it.”
[Illustration:
From a painting by Lewis J. Bridgman
“Leslie’s Retreat,” North Bridge, Salem, Mass., February 26, 1775]
It was a son of this Captain Richard Derby who carried to England the
first news of the Battle of Lexington in the swift schooner _Quero_,
as the agent of the Provincial Congress. No American’s arrival in
London ever produced so great a sensation as did that of this Salem
sailor, Captain John Derby, in May, 1775. He reached England in advance
of the king’s messenger dispatched by General Gage, and startled the
British nation with the tidings of the clash of arms which meant the
loss of an American empire.
Three days after the fight at Lexington, the Provincial Congress met at
Concord, and appointed a committee “to take depositions _in perpetuam_,
from which a full account of the transactions of the troops under
General Gage in the route to and from Concord on Wednesday last may be
collected to be sent to England by the first ship from Salem.”
Captain Richard Derby was a member of this Congress, and he offered
his fast schooner _Quero_ of sixty-two tons for this purpose, his son
Richard, Jr., to fit her out, and his son John to command her for this
dramatic voyage. Old Captain Richard, hero of the North River bridge
affair, was a sturdy patriot and a smart seaman. He knew his schooner
and he knew his son John, and the news would get to England as fast as
sail could speed it.
General Gage had sent his official messages containing the news of the
Lexington fight by the “Royal Express-packet” _Sukey_, which sailed on
April 24th. Captain John Derby in the _Quero_ did not get his sailing
orders from the Provincial Congress until three days later, on April
27th. These orders read as follows:
“_Resolved_: that Captain Derby be directed and he hereby is directed
to make for Dublin, or any other good port in Ireland, and from thence
to cross to Scotland or England, and hasten to London. This direction
is given so that he may escape all enemies that may be in the chops of
the Channel to stop the communication of the Provincial Intelligence
to the agent. He will forthwith deliver his papers to the agent on
reaching London.
“J. WARREN, Chairman.
“P. S.—You are to keep this order a profound secret from every person
on earth.”
The letter which Captain John Derby carried with his dispatches read as
follows:
“IN PROVINCIAL CONGRESS, WATERTOWN,
“APRIL 26, 1775.
“TO THE HON. BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, ESQ., LONDON:
“SIR: From the entire confidence we repose in your faithfulness and
abilities, we consider it for the happiness of this Colony that the
important trust of agency for it, on this day of unequalled distress,
is devolved on your hands; and we doubt not your attachment to the
cause of the liberties of mankind will make every possible exertion in
our behalf a pleasure to you, although our circumstances will compel
us often to interrupt your repose by matters that will surely give
you pain. A single instance hereof is the occasion of the present
letter; the contents of this packet will be our apology for troubling
you with it. From these you will see how and by whom we are at last
plunged into the horrours of a most unnatural war. Our enemies, we
are told, have despatched to Great Britain a fallacious account of
the tragedy they have begun; to prevent the operation of which to
the publick injury, we have engaged the vessel that conveys this to
you as a packet in the service of this Colony, and we request your
assistance in supplying Captain Derby, who commands her, with such
necessaries as he shall want, on the credit of your constituents in
Massachusetts Bay. But we most ardently wish that the several papers
herewith enclosed may be immediately printed and dispersed through
every Town in England, and especially communicated to the Lord Mayor,
Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of London, that they may take
such order thereon as they may think proper, and we are confident
your fidelity will make such improvement of them as shall convince
all who are not determined to be in everlasting blindness, that it
is the united efforts of both Englands that must save either. But
whatever price our brethren in one may be pleased to put on their
constitutional liberties, we are authorized to assure you that the
inhabitants of the other, with the greatest unanimity, are inflexibly
resolved to sell theirs only at the price of their lives.
“Signed by order of the Provincial Congress,
“JOS. WARREN, President _pro tem_.”
John Derby cracked on sail like a true son of his father, and made a
passage across the Atlantic of twenty-nine days, handsomely beating
the lubberly “Royal-Express packet” _Sukey_, which had sailed from
Boston four days ahead of him. It is supposed that he made a landing
at the Isle of Wight, went ashore alone, and hurried to London as fast
as he could. The tidings he bore were too alarming and incredible to
be accepted by the statesmen and people of Great Britain. Nothing had
been heard from General Gage and here was an audacious Yankee skipper,
dropped in from Heaven knew where, spreading it broadcast that the
American colonists were in full revolt after driving a force of British
regulars in disastrous rout. From the office of the Secretary of State,
Lord Dartmouth issued this skeptical statement, May 30th:
“A report having been spread and an account having been printed and
published, of a skirmish between some people of the Province of
Massachusetts Bay, and a detachment of His Majesty’s troops, it is
proper to inform the publick that no advices have as yet been received
in the American Department of any such event. There are reasons to
believe that there are dispatches from General Gage on Board the
_Sukey_, Captain Brown, which though she sailed four days before the
vessel that brought the printed accounts, is not arrived.”
On the following day, Hutchinson, who had preceded Gage as Governor of
Massachusetts, wrote from London to his son in Boston:
“Captain Darby, in ballast arrived at Southampton from Marblehead the
27, and came to London the next evening. I am greatly distressed for
you. Darby’s own accounts confirm many parts of the narrative from the
Congress, and they that know him say he deserves credit and that he has
a good character; but I think those people would not have been at the
expense of a vessel from Marblehead or Salem to England for the sake of
telling the truth.”
On June 1st, Lord Dartmouth wrote General Gage as follows:
“WHITEHALL, 1st June, 1775.
“SIR: Since my letter to you of 27th ult. an account has been printed
here, accompanied with depositions to verify it, of skirmishes between
a detachment of the troops under your command and different bodies of
the Provincial Militia.
“It appears upon the fullest inquiry that this account, which is
chiefly taken from a Salem newspaper, has been published by a Capt.
Darby, who arrived on Friday or Saturday at Southampton in a small
vessel in ballast, directly from Salem, and from every circumstance,
relating to this person and the vessel, it is evident he was employed
by the Provincial Congress to bring this account, which is plainly
made up for the purpose of conveying every possible prejudice and
misrepresentation of the truth.
“From the answers he has given to such questions as has been asked,
there is the greatest probability that the whole amounts to no more
than that a Detachment, sent by you to destroy Cannon and Stores
collected at Concord for the purpose of aiding Rebellion, were fired
upon, at different times, by people of the Country in small bodies
from behind trees and houses, but that the party effected the service
they went upon, and returned to Boston, and I have the satisfaction
to tell you that, the affair being considered in that light by all
discerning men, it has had no other effect here than to raise that
just indignation which every honest man must feel at the rebellious
conduct of the New England Colonies. At the same time it is very
much to be lamented that we have not some account from you of the
transaction, which I do not mention from any supposition that you did
not send the earliest intelligence of it, for we know from Darby that
a vessel with dispatches sailed four days before him. We expect the
arrival of that vessel with great impatience, but ’till she arrives I
can form no decisive judgment of what has happened, and therefore can
have nothing more to add but that I am, &c., DARTMOUTH.”
Alas for British hopes and fears, the eagerly awaited arrival of the
_Sukey_ confirmed the disastrous news revealed by Captain John Derby,
as may be learned from the following article in _The London Press_:
“TO THE PUBLICK.
“LONDON, June 12, 1775.
“When the news of a massacre first arrived, the pensioned writer
of the _Gazette_ entreated the publick ‘to suspend their judgment,
as Government had received no tidings of the matter.’ It was added
that there was every reason to expect the despatches from General
Gage, by a vessel called the _Sukey_. The publick have suspended
their judgment; they have waited the arrival of the _Sukey_; and the
humane part of mankind have wished that the fatal tale related by
Captain Derby might prove altogether fictitious. To the great grief of
every thinking man, this is not the case. We are now in possession
of both the accounts. The Americans have given their narrative of
the massacre; the favorite servants have given a Scotch account of
the skirmish. In what one material fact do the two relations, when
contrasted with each other, disagree? The Americans said ‘that a
detachment of the King’s Troops advanced toward Concord; that they
attempted to secure two bridges on different roads beyond Concord;
that when they reached Lexington they found a body of Provincials
exercising on a green; that on discovering the Provincial militia
thus employed, the King’s Troops called out to them to disperse,
damned them for a parcel of rebels, and killed one or two, as the most
effectual method intimidating the rest.’ This the writer of the Scotch
account in the _Gazette_ styles, ‘marching up to the rebels to inquire
the reason of being so assembled.’ Both relations, however, agree in
this, that a question was asked; the pensioned varnisher only saying
that it was asked in a civil way, attended with the loss of blood.
“Thus far, then, the facts, in every material circumstance, precisely
agree; and as yet, we have every reason to believe that the _Salem
Gazette_ is to the full as authentick as our Government paper, which,
as a literary composition, is a disgrace to the Kingdom.
“The _Salem Gazette_ assured us that the King’s Troops were compelled
to return from Concord; that a handful of militia put them to rout,
and killed and wounded several as they fled. Is this contradicted
in the _English Gazette_? Quite the contrary; it is confirmed. The
Scotch account of the skirmish acknowledges that ‘on the hasty
return of the troops from Concord, they were very much annoyed, and
several of them were killed and wounded.’ The Scotch account also
adds ‘that the Provincials kept up a scattering fire during the whole
of the march of the King’s Troops of fifteen miles, by which means
several of them were killed and wounded.’ If the American Militia
‘kept up a scattering fire on the King’s Troops, of fifteen miles,’
the Provincials must have pursued, and the regulars must have fled,
which confirms the account given in the _Salem Gazette_, wherein
it is asserted that the Regulars ‘were forced to retreat.’ Whether
they marched like mutes at a funeral, or whether they fled like
the relations and friends of the present ministry who were amongst
the rebel army at the battle of Cullodon, is left entirely to the
conjecture of the reader; though it should seem that a scattering
fire, poured in upon a retreating enemy for fifteen miles together,
would naturally, like goads applied to the sides of oxen, make them
march off as fast as they could.”
The newspaper account which Captain Derby carried to London was printed
in _The Essex Gazette_ of the issue of “from Tuesday, April 18, to
Tuesday, April 25.” _The Salem Gazette_ had suspended publication the
day before the great events of Concord and Lexington, and therefore
it was _The Essex Gazette_ of Salem which was taken to England, the
slight error in the name of the journal being immaterial. This edition
of the little four-paged weekly newspaper which shook the British
Empire to its foundations, was not made up after the pattern of modern
“scarehead” journals. The story of Concord and Lexington was tucked
away on an inside page with no headline, title or caption whatever, and
was no more than a column long. It may be called the first American war
correspondence and no “dispatches from the front” in all history have
equaled this article in _The Essex Gazette_ as a stupendous “beat” or
“scoop,” measured by the news it bore and the events it foreshadowed.
The _Gazette_ carried on its title page the legends, “Containing the
freshest advices, both foreign and domestic”; “Printed by Samuel and
Ebenezer Hall at their Printing-Office near the Town House.”
The article in question read, for the most part, as follows:
“SALEM, April 25.
“Last Wednesday, the 19th of April, the troops of his _Britannick_
Majesty Commenced Hostilities upon the People of this Province,
attended with circumstances of cruelty not less brutal than what
our venerable Ancestors received from the vilest savages of the
Wilderness. The Particulars relative to this interesting Event, by
which we are involved in all the Horrors of a Civil War, we have
endeavoured to collect as well as the present confused state of
affairs will admit.
“On Tuesday Evening a Detachment from the Army, consisting, it is
said, of 8 or 900 men, commanded by Lieut. Col. Smith, embarked at
the Bottom of the Common in Boston, on board a Number of Boats, and
landed at Phip’s farm, a little way up Charles River, from whence
they proceeded with Silence and Expedition, on their way to Concord,
about 18 miles from Boston. The People were soon alarmed, and began
to assemble, in several towns, before Daylight, in order to watch the
Motion of the Troops. At Lexington, 6 miles below Concord, a Company
of Militia, of about 100 Men, mustered near the Meeting House; the
Troops came in Sight of them just before Sun-rise, and running within
a few rods of them, the Commanding Officer accosted the Militia in
words to this Effect:
“‘_Disperse, you Rebels—Damn you, throw down your Arms and disperse._’
“Upon which the Troops huzza’d, and immediately one or two Officers
discharged their Pistols, which were instantaneously followed by
the Firing of 4 or 5 of the Soldiers, and then there seemed to be a
general discharge from the whole Body; Eight of our Men were killed,
and nine wounded. In a few minutes after this action the Enemy renewed
their March for Concord; at which Place they destroyed several
Carriages, Carriage Wheels, and about 20 barrels of Flour; all
belonging to the Province. Here about 150 Men going toward a Bridge,
of which the Enemy were in Possession, the latter fired and killed
2 of our Men, who then returned the Fire, and obliged the Enemy to
retreat back to Lexington, where they met Lord Percy, with a large
Reinforcement, with two Pieces of Cannon. The Enemy now having a Body
of about 1800 Men, made a Halt, picked up many of their Dead, and took
care of their Wounded. At Menotomy, a few of our Men attacked a Party
of twelve of the Enemy (carrying stores and Provisions to the Troops),
killed one of them, wounded several, made the Rest Prisoners, and
took Possession of all their arms, Stores, Provisions, &c., without
any loss on our side. The Enemy having halted one or two Hours at
Lexington found it necessary to make a second Retreat, carrying with
them many of their Dead and Wounded, who they put into Chaises and
on Horses that they found standing in the Road. They continued their
Retreat from Lexington to Charlestown with great Precipitation; and
notwithstanding their Field Pieces, our People continued the Pursuit,
firing at them till they got to Charlestown Neck (which they reached a
little after Sunset), over which the Enemy passed, proceeded up Bunker
Hill, and soon afterward went into the Town, under the protection of
the _Somerset_ Man of War of 64 guns.”
There follows a list of the names of the Provincial Casualities,
numbering 38 killed and 19 wounded, with accusations of savage and
barbarous behavior on the part of the British troops. The writer then
goes on to say:
“I have seen an account of the Loss of the Enemy, said to have come
from an officer of one of the Men of War; by which it appears that 63
of the Regulars, and 49 Marines were killed, and 103 of both wounded;
in all 215. Lieut. Gould of the 4th Regiment, who is wounded,
and Lieut. Potter of the Marines, and about twelve soldiers, are
Prisoners....
“The Public most sincerely sympathize with the Friends and Relations
of our deceased Brethren, who gloriously sacrificed their Lives in
fighting for the Liberties of their Country. By their noble, intrepid
Conduct, in helping to defeat the Forces of an ungrateful Tyrant,
they have endeared their Memories to the present generation who will
Transmit their Names to Posterity with the highest Honour.”
The opposite page of _The Gazette_ contained an editorial, or
communication, signed “Johannes in Ermo,” which Captain John Derby
must have enjoyed spreading broadcast in London. It was a battle-hymn
in prose, the voice of a free people in arms, indomitable defiance at
white-heat. This was the message it flung to the mother country over
seas:
“Great Britain, adieu! no longer shall we honour you as our mother;
you are become cruel; you have not so much bowels as the sea monsters
toward their young ones; we have cried to you for justice, but behold
violence and bloodshed! your sword is drawn _offensively_, and the
sword of New England _defensively_; by this stroke you have broken us
off from you, and effectually alienated us from you. O, Britain, see
you to your own house!
“King George the third, adieu! no more shall we cry to you for
protection, no more shall we bleed in defense of your person. Your
breach of covenant; your violation of faith; your turning a deaf ear to
our cries for justice, for covenanted protection and salvation from the
oppressive, tyrannical, and bloody measures of the British Parliament,
and putting a sanction upon all their measures to enslave and butcher
us, have _Dissolved our Allegiance_ to your Crown and Government! your
sword that ought in _justice to protect_ us, is now drawn _with a
witness_ to destroy us! Oh, George, see thou to thine house!
“General Gage, pluck up stakes and be gone; you have drawn the sword,
you have slain in cool blood a number of _innocent_ New England men—you
have made the assault—and be it known to you, the _defensive sword_
of New England is now drawn, it now studies just revenge; and it will
not be satisfied until your blood is shed—and the blood of every son
of violence under your command—and the blood of every traitorous
_Tory_ under your protection; therefore, depart with all your master’s
forces—depart from our territories, return to your master soon, or
destruction will come upon you; every moment you tarry in New England,
in the character of your Master’s General, you are viewed as an
_Intruder_, and must expect to be treated by us as our inveterate enemy.
“O, my dear New England, hear thou the alarm of war! the call of Heaven
is to arms! to arms! The sword of Great Britain is drawn against us!
without provocation how many of our sons have been fired upon and slain
in cool blood, in the cool of the day....
“I beseech you, for God’s sake, and for your own sake, watch
against every vice, every provocation of God Almighty against us;
against intemperance in drinking—against profane language and all
debauchery!—and let us all rely on the army of the Most High....”
* * * * *
That after a safe homeward voyage Captain Derby reported to General
Washington in person[22] on the 18th of July, appears from the _Essex
Gazette_ for that month as follows:
“CAMBRIDGE, July 21.
“Capt. John Derby, who sailed from Salem for London a few Days after
the Battle of Lexington, returned last Tuesday, and the same Day
came to Head-Quarters in this Place. Very little Intelligence has yet
transpired—we only learn, that the News of the Commencement of the
American War through the People in England, especially the City of
London, into great Consternation, and occasioned a considerable Fall of
the Stocks. That the Ministry (knowing nothing of the Battle till they
saw it published in the London papers) advertised, in the _Gazette_,
that they had received no Account of any Action, and pretended to
believe that there had been none. That the Parliament was prorogued two
Days before Capt. Derby arrived, but it was said would be immediately
called together again. That, when he left London, which was about
the 1st of June, no Account of Hostilities had been received by the
Ministry from General Gage, notwithstanding the Vessel he dispatched
sailed four Days before Capt. Derby. That our friends increased in
Number; and that many who had remained neuter in the dispute, began
to express themselves warmly in our Favor: That we, however, have no
Reason to expect any Mercy from the Ministry, who seem determined to
pursue their Measures (long since concerted) for ruining the British
Empire.
“Capt. Derby brought a few London Papers, some as late as the 1st of
June, but we have not been able to obtain a Sight of them. We are
informed they contain very little News, and scarce any Remarks on
American Affairs.”
It was singularly appropriate that this same Captain John Derby who
carried the news to England of the beginning of the American Revolution
should have been the shipmaster to carry home to the United States the
first tidings of peace in 1783, when he arrived from France in the ship
_Astrea_ with the message that a treaty had been signed.
This Captain John Derby won a claim to further notice in the history
of his times as one of the owners of the ship _Columbia_ which sailed
from Boston in 1787, circumnavigated the globe, and on a second voyage
discovered and named the mighty Columbia River on the northwest coast
of America. The vast territory which includes the states of Oregon,
Washington and Idaho was then an unknown and unexplored land, claimed
by Spain because her navigators discovered it, by Great Britain because
Francis Drake had sailed along the coast in 1759, by Russia because
Bering had mapped the North Pacific and prepared for the opening
in 1771 of the fur trade from Oregon to China. But no nation had
established a foothold in this territory and its extent and natural
features were wrapped in mystery.
In 1783, a young American seaman who had sailed with Captain Cook on
an exploring voyage of the North Pacific, published a chart and a
journal of the voyage, and first brought to the attention of American
shipowners the importance of the Northwest fur trade. Ledyard was
called an enthusiast, a visionary, until his story attracted the
serious consideration of the leading shipping merchants of Boston and
Salem. John Derby joined three men of Boston in the venture and the
quartette of partners subscribed what was then a huge capital of fifty
thousand dollars to equip and despatch a ship to the northwest coast
and open an American trade in furs with the Indians.
The _Columbia_ was chosen, a ship of two hundred and thirteen tons,
small even for that period, mounting ten cannon. Captain John Kendrick
was given the command. As consort and tender for coastwise navigation
and trade a sloop of ninety tons, the _Lady Washington_, Captain Robert
Gray, was fitted out.
Besides the ship’s stores, the two vessels carried a cargo of hardware,
tools, utensils, buttons, toys, beads, etc., to be bartered with the
Indians. The State and Federal Governments granted special letters
to the captains, and “hundreds of medals signalizing the enterprise
were put aboard for distribution wherever the vessel touched. Years
afterward some of these medals and cents and half-cents of the State of
Massachusetts were to be found in the wake of the _Columbia_ among the
Spaniards of South America, the Kanakas of Hawaii and the Indians of
Oregon.”[23]
The two little vessels fared bravely around Cape Horn, and steered
north until they reached the fur wilderness country of the great
Northwest. After many hardships and thrilling adventures the _Columbia_
returned to Boston with a cargo of tea from China. It was a famous
voyage in the history of American commercial enterprise, but it brought
so little profit to the owners that Captain John Derby and one other
partner sold out their shares in the _Columbia_. She was refitted,
however, and again sent to the Northwest in 1790 in command of Captain
Gray. On this voyage Captain Gray discovered the Columbia River shortly
after he had met at sea the English navigator, Vancouver, who reported
passing the mouth of a small stream “not worthy his attention.” By
so close a margin did Vancouver miss the long-sought great river of
Oregon, and the chance to claim the Northwestern America for the
British flag by right of discovery.
On May 19, 1792, Captain Gray landed with his seamen, after sailing
twenty-five miles up the river and formally named it the Columbia. “It
has been claimed for many men before and since Marcus Whitman that
they saved Oregon to the United States. But surely the earliest and
most compelling title to this distinction is that Captain Robert Gray
of Boston, and the good ship _Columbia_. They gave us the great river
by the powerful right of discovery, and the great river dominated
the region through which it ran.... The voyage of the _Columbia_ was
plainly and undeniably the first step which won for the United States
a grip on the Oregon territory that no diplomatic casuistry and no
arrogant bluster could shake.[23]
FOOTNOTES:
[22] (July 18, 1774.) “Captain John Derby who carried to England the
tidings of Lexington battle, appears at headquarters in Cambridge and
relates that the news of the commencement of the American war threw the
people, especially in London, into great consternation, and occasioned
a considerable fall of stocks; that many there sympathized with the
Colonies.” (Felt’s Annals of Salem.)
[23] “The American Merchant Marine,” by Winthrop L. Martin.