Chapter VI: The War in the Southern Department (4)

THE CAPTURE OF THE POSTS.—For the account of the capture of Fort Watson, Marion's report (April 23) to Greene has been the main reliance (Simms, _Marion_, p. 231; _Pol. Mag._, ii. 548; _Remembrancer_, xii. 127, etc.). Lee's narrative of this period (_Memoirs_, ii. 50) is detailed, but it was written too long after the war to be accurate. This is unfortunate, as we have no other account of the taking of Fort Motte (_Memoirs_, ii. 73) by an on-looker, unless we accept the letter sent by Greene to Congress as an original source. It is not known when Greene arrived at Fort Motte, which was at some time before the surrender.[1169]

At this time Marion became discouraged, and wrote to Greene that he contemplated retiring. These letters are in Gibbes, p. 67-69. Rawdon presented a report covering this period.[1170]

The siege of Augusta was much better chronicled, as with it McCall (Georgia, ii. 321) again becomes useful.[1171] Another description, though from what source is not stated, is in Johnson's _Traditions_, 354. Lee's account is in his _Memoirs_, ii. 81-95 and 100-118. The first part refers more especially to the capture of Fort Granby and of Fort Galphin, an outpost of Augusta. The official correspondence between Lee and Pickens on one side and Brown on the other has been printed over and over again.[1172]

SIEGE OF NINETY-SIX.—Cruger[1173] presented no formal report of his defence—so far as I know; but there is a good account of the siege in Mackenzie's _Strictures_, pp. 139-164, written by Lieutenant Hatton, of the New Jersey Loyalist Volunteers: cf. p. 129. Mackenzie himself is very severe on Tarleton's account (_Campaigns_, 495). Greene's very meagre report is dated Little River, June 20, 1781 (Caldwell's _Greene_; _Pol. Mag._, Tarleton, 498, etc.).[1174]

Rawdon's report of his successful attempt to relieve the garrison is in _Remembrancer_, xv. 9.[1175]

Neither Greene nor Lee (_Memoirs_, ii. 119) intimate that the stockaded fort was abandoned before Lee's assault, though the English authorities assert it. Nor does Greene allude to the gallant sally of the defenders of the "Star", which compelled the assailants to retire from the ditch, with great loss to themselves.[1176]

EUTAWS.—I should place first Greene's official report, though it is not as full as could be desired.[1177]

Williams has left two accounts: the first is a letter, dated Fort Motte, Sept., 1781 (Tiffany's _Williams_, p. 22). The important paper, however, is entitled: _Account furnished by Colonel Otho Williams, with additions by Cols. W. Hampton, Polk, Howard, and Watt_ (when written is not stated), in Gibbes (pp. 144-157). It is a long and detailed description of the battle by men who actually took part, but as it may have been written long after the event, too much reliance should not be placed upon it. Still another description of the campaign, though not of the battle, is contained in two letters from Major William Pierce to St. George Tucker (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, vii. 435). Lieutenant-Colonel Stuart presented a report to Cornwallis, which has been widely reprinted.[1178]

It differs from the American accounts in many particulars, especially as to the disorganization of his own troops, which very likely has been described in too glowing colors by American writers. Lee was present at the battle, but his description (_Memoirs_, ii. 276-301) of the contest is sometimes hard to reconcile with the accounts of his fellow-soldiers. Greene, according to Williams, was hardly satisfied with the conduct of that partisan leader, and Lee soon after retired from the army, ostensibly for other reasons. Neither Johnson (_Greene_, ii. 219) nor G. W. Greene (_Greene_, iii. 384) have added much to our knowledge of this action, and the same may be said of the other writers on the war.[1179]

GREENE'S LATER CAMPAIGNS.—There are many letters of this period in the third volume of Sparks's _Correspondence of the Revolution_, and in Gibbes's _Documentary History_ (1781-1782). Many of those in the latter are of merely local interest, a large number of them relating more especially to a quarrel between Horry and Mahem, Marion's two subordinates. Lee, too, after his return from Yorktown became discontented, and many letters which passed between him and his commander are printed by Gibbes. Much of Lee's uneasiness was doubtless due to the prominence which Greene awarded to Laurens. Leslie's letter proposing a cessation of hostilities was enclosed by Greene in a letter to the President of Congress (_Remembrancer_, xiv. 324). A truce not being acceded to, he demanded provisions (_Remembrancer_, xv. 28). This too being refused, he endeavored to seize them. One of the expeditions resulted in the death of Laurens.[1180] Gist made a report of this action, and there is a note from Greene to Washington.[1181] Benjamin Thomson,—afterwards Count Rumford,—at this time lieutenant-colonel in a regiment stationed near Charleston, wrote many letters in Jan., 1782, which have been printed by the Royal Commission on Hist. MSS. in their _Ninth Report_, Appendix, iii. p. 118.[1182]

An account of the march of the reinforcements sent south under St. Clair is in _Harmer's Journal_, while the "Journal" of Major Denny in _Penna. Hist. Soc. Memoirs_, vii. pp. 249 _et seq._, contains much of interest relating to the operations around Charleston.[1183] Mention should also be made of a series of letters from Major Pierce to St. George Tucker, bearing on this period, in _Mag. Am. Hist._ (1881), pp. 431-445, while there is an original account by Seymour in _Penna. Mag._, vii. 377. A British narrative of the same operations is in _Political Mag._, iv. 36-44.[1184]

There are several descriptions of the triumphant entry of the Americans into Charleston on the 14th of December, 1782; that by Horry in _Charleston Year Book_ (1883) is perhaps the best.[1185] Of the contemporary historians, Gordon (vol. iv. 173-177, 298-305) has given the best account of this time.[1186] In the library of the Mass. Hist. Soc. there is a manuscript giving details of the emigration at the evacuations of Savannah and Charleston.[1187] It appears from this that no less than 13,271 of the former inhabitants of those States, including 8,676 blacks, left with the British army when it finally retired from the South.

THE BRITISH IN VIRGINIA, 1779 AND 1780.—Besides the documents mentioned in the _Virginia Calendar of State Papers_, there are full and detailed accounts by Mathews and Collier of their doings at Portsmouth and Suffolk.[1188] There is some account also of the naval portion of this expedition in Town's _Detail of Some Particular Services performed in America, compiled from journals ... kept aboard the Ship Rainbow_, New York, 1835, pp. 77-88.[1189]

Clinton's instructions to Leslie are in _Clinton's Observations on Cornwallis_, App., pp. 25, 27. There is little else bearing on this movement except a few letters from Steuben in _Historical Mag._, iv. 301, and _Corres. of the Rev._, iii. 203.[1190]

ARNOLD AND PHILLIPS IN VIRGINIA, 1781.—With regard to the first part of Arnold's raid into Virginia, we have several letters from him to Clinton.[1191] On the American side there are many interesting letters in the _Maryland Papers_ (134-144), and in Muhlenberg's _Muhlenberg_, 404, etc. See also _Ibid._ 216-253, for a description of Gen. Muhlenberg's share in resisting these incursions. Steuben, as Greene's lieutenant, had the chief command in Virginia at the time, and Kapp in his _Steuben_ (Amer. ed., p. 371 _et seq._) has not failed to give him full credit for his courageous endeavors.[1192]

* * * * *

LAFAYETTE AND CORNWALLIS IN VIRGINIA.—Lafayette, during his campaign against Phillips, and afterwards against Cornwallis, was considered as under the command of Greene. He reported to Greene, and his reports may be found in the _Remembrancer_, (vol. xii.).[1193] He also kept up an incessant correspondence with Washington, and Sparks's _Corres. of the Rev._[1194] should therefore be compared with the papers in Lafayette's _Memoirs_.[1195] A few reports and letters from Cornwallis at this time will be found in his _Correspondence_ (i. 105 _et seq._). Tarleton (_Campaigns_, 279) gives a good account of the march from Guilford to Wilmington and thence to Petersburg, from his point of view. Gen. Graham was at that time a captain in the 76th regiment, which, with the 80th, bore the brunt of the action at the crossing of the James. The account of the affair in his _Memoirs_ (pp. 53-55) is one of the best we have. Simcoe, in his _Journal_ (ed. 1787, pp. 146-177; Am. ed., pp. 209-250), has given a detailed description of the campaign. He has exaggerated his own services, but has atoned, in part, for this by giving a set of good plans of the rencounters which he tried to dignify into battles.[1196] Giradin (_Continuation of Burk_, iv. 490) has given the Jeffersonian version of the period.[1197]

This gallant struggle of Lafayette against great odds was very creditable to him and to his soldiers; but it had little or no influence on the final result. Nevertheless, it has attracted the attention of recent writers, and has brought out two good articles: one from the pen of Carrington (_Mag. Am. Hist._, vi. 340, with map), the other from a less known writer, Mr. Coleman (_Ibid._ vii. 201).[1198]

* * * * *

THE YORKTOWN CAMPAIGN.—Clinton and Cornwallis, in their pamphlets on the conduct of the campaign, printed most of the important documents which passed between them and their superiors and subordinates. Others will be found in the documents printed by order of the Lords, and still others in the biographies of the different commanders. I shall point out only the most important. In a letter (Wilmington, April 18, 1781) Cornwallis explained the reasons for the Guilford campaign, gave an account of his later movements, and advocated a march into Virginia. On the 24th he wrote to Phillips that his situation at Wilmington was very distressing (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 155, etc.). On the preceding day he had announced his determination to Germain to go north (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 145; extracts in numerous places, among others in Tarleton, 325). But more valuable than these are two letters to Clinton written April 24th (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 156; extracts in Cornwallis's _Correspondence_, i. 94; Cornwallis's _Answer_, p. 55; and in many other places). Clinton disapproved this movement from the outset. (Cf. letter, May 29th, in Clinton's _Observations on Cornwallis_, App. p. 99.) Cornwallis tried to justify his conduct in a letter dated Portsmouth, July 24th (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 207, etc.). On the other hand, Germain was "well pleased to find Cornwallis's opinion entirely coincided" with his (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 135). Cornwallis therefore went north without any misgivings.[1199]

A contemporary type-sketch from the _London Magazine_. The _Political Mag._, 1784, p. 20, has a folding plan. The most detailed plan is in Stedman (ii. ch. 44), _The position of the English and French fleets immediately previous to the Action on the 5th of Sept., 1781_, which is reproduced in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Nov., 1881, p. 367. For the operations in and about the bay, see Carrington's plan in his _Battles_, p. 596. Contemporary charts of the bay are in the _No. Amer. Pilot_, nos. 26 and 27; the _Neptune Americo-Septentrional_, no. 20; and Des Barres's _Atlantic Neptune_. Graves's despatch on his failure, dated at sea, Sept. 14, is in the _Political Mag._, ii. 605, with other accounts (p. 620); with further explanations from Clinton and Graves (p. 668). Cf. _Ibid._ iii. 153. John G. Shea edited in 1864 two contemporary journals as _Operations of the French Fleet_, etc., with a plan. One of these journals was printed at Amsterdam in 1783 (_Murphy Catal._, no. 1,386). Cf. Stedman, ii. ch. 44; Chevalier's _Hist. de la marine française_ (Paris, 1877), ch. vii.; Léon Chotteau's _Les Français en Amérique_, p. 248; Moore's _Diary_, ii. 476.—ED.]

On June 11th Clinton ordered Cornwallis to seek some defensive position (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 160). Four days later he wrote that he should need some of Cornwallis's troops (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 175, and Cornwallis's _Answer_, App. p. 112). This request he repeated on the 19th, and again on the 26th (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 177, and _Germain Corresp._, 187). In this last he announced his purpose of marching on Philadelphia. On the 30th Cornwallis wrote one or two letters questioning the utility of the defensive post he was ordered to occupy (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 169, and at greater length in Cornwallis's _Answer_, App. p. 118). In another letter, dated July 8th, he again questioned the utility of a defensive post. Clinton on his part, in two letters of July 8th and 11th, censured the Virginia commander for repassing the James, and ordered him to occupy Old Point Comfort (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 171). Again, in another letter of the same date as the second of these, he reiterates his order to fortify a station in the Chesapeake for the protection of large ships. Admiral Graves also wrote to Cornwallis, urging him to seize and fortify Old Point Comfort (Cornwallis's _Answer_, App. p. 180). A board of officers was now sent to report on the practicability of holding Old Point Comfort as a station for line-of-battle ships. They reported (_Parl. Reg._, xxv. 182) that the proposed site was not suitable, and this decision Cornwallis communicated to Graves (Aug. 26th, in the App. to his _Answer_). He also wrote to Clinton on the next day somewhat bitterly in regard to his criticisms and orders (_Corn. Corresp._, i. 107). Thinking that his orders required him to fortify Yorktown, he repaired thither, though writing to O'Hara that the position was a bad one on account of the heat, etc. (_Corn. Corresp._, i. III.). Clinton also wrote three letters at about this time, which Cornwallis did not receive until after his surrender. The first and important one is in _Parl. Reg._, xxv. 182, while all three are in the Appendix to Cornwallis's _Answer_, pp. 237, 251, 257. Such are the most important documents bearing on the responsibility[1200] for the disaster at Yorktown.

Cornwallis's official report to Clinton (Yorktown, Oct. 20, 1781) was forwarded by Clinton to Germain on Nov. 15, 1781.[1201] The two commanders kept up a constant correspondence during the siege, and from their letters the details may be gathered. These are all printed in the Appendix to the _Parliamentary Register_ and in numerous other places.

As soon as it was known at New York that Cornwallis was besieged by such superior numbers, every effort was made to relieve him.[1202] The fleet had been so badly cut up during the recent encounter with De Grasse that Graves refused to venture again to sea before extensive repairs had been completed. Consequently, when the relieving fleet arrived off the capes of the Chesapeake the capitulation of Yorktown had been signed. The letters and reports relating to this abortive endeavor will be found in the _Parl. Reg._, xxv. pp. 190-200. There seems to be no reason to blame Clinton or Graves for this delay.[1203]

The correspondence between the opposing commanders as to the surrender has been often printed, as have the articles.[1204] As late as Oct. 19th Clinton wrote to some one in England giving an account of the operations leading to the siege.[1205] On Oct. 29th Clinton wrote to Germain the first official news concerning the surrender. This letter (_London Gazette_, Nov. 24-27, 1781, and _Remembrancer_, xiii. 33) is marked as received on Nov. 27th; but Wraxall, in a well-known passage, says that the first official news of the surrender was received on the 25th.[1206]

The _Ninth Rep. of the Hist. MSS. Commission_ (App. iii. pp. 112-114) contains four letters from "G. Damer" to Lord George Germain, relating to the Virginia campaigns from Phillips's expedition to the end. These letters are of exceeding value and interest. They bear out the assertion so often made in the preceding narrative as to the great want of harmony which prevailed in the higher ranks of the British forces in this country.

Washington's official report[1207] announcing the surrender (_Remembrancer_, xiii. 60, and innumerable other places) is of far less importance than his order-book and his journal (May to Nov., 1781), which last is in the State Department at Washington (T. F. Dwight in _Mag. Am. Hist._, vi. 81). The portion on this campaign is in _Ibid._ (vol. vi. pp. 108-125; vii. 122-133).

From the _Political Mag._, ii. 624, being the westerly half of the map there given, originally published in London, Nov. 30, 1781, by J. Bew. Faden published in 1781 _A Plan of the Entrance of Chesapeake Bay, with James and York Rivers, by an officer_, which shows the condition in the beginning of October.—ED.]

NOTE ON THE MAPS OF THE YORKTOWN CAMPAIGN.—There is among the Rochambeau maps the original sketch, done with a pen and a wash, 40×12 inches, showing the different encampments of the French army between Boston and Yorktown, which is etched in Soulés' _Histoire des Troubles de l'Amérique Anglaise_, and reproduced in Balch's _Les Français en Amérique_, and in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, v. p. 1, and vii. pp. 8, 12, 17.

_The route of the allies from Chatham to Head of Elk, by Lieutenant Hills_, a British map, is in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, v. 16. Cf., for a general view, _Harper's Mag._, lxiii. p. 328. The best account of this march and the return to Boston is by J. A. Stevens in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iii. 393; iv. 1; v. 1; vii. 1.

The earliest American map of the siege is one by Sebastian Bauman, an officer of German extraction attached to Lamb's artillery, whose draft was engraved in Philadelphia in 1782. There are copies in the N. Y. and Penna. Hist. Societies, and, reduced one half, it is given in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ (vol. vi. 57), and it is also in Johnston's _Yorktown_, p. 198. There is among the Rochambeau maps in the library of Congress (no. 63) a _Plan of the investment of York and Gloucester by Sebastian Bauman_; the French in yellow, the Americans in blue, and the English in red.

The earliest American maps issued to accompany narratives were Ramsay's in his _Rev. in So. Carolina_, ii. 545 (reproduced herewith, and followed in _Harper's Mag._, lxiii. 333, and Lowell's _Hessians_, 278); Gordon's, in his vol. iv. 196, also follows Bauman; Marshall's, in his _Atlas_ to his _Washington_ (reproduced herewith). Later published are the maps in Sparks's _Washington_, viii. 186; in Atlas to Guizot's _Washington_; in Irving's _Washington_, quarto ed., iv. 356; E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, 424; Carrington's _Battles_, 646; Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 518; Ridpath's _United States_; J. A. Stevens's _Yorktown Centennial Handbook_; Johnston's _Yorktown_ (pp. 133, 144).

The leading British map of the siege is _A Plan of Yorktown and Gloucester ... from an actual survey in the possession of Jno. Hills, late lieut. in the 23d Regiment_ (Faden, London, Oct. 7, 1785). There is another dated March 1, 1787, and, though a different plate, it corresponds nearly to the one in Stedman, ii. 412, which is reproduced in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, vi. p. 8; Tarleton's _Campaigns_, ch. vii.; R. E. Lee's ed. of Henry Lee's _Memoirs_, etc., p. 300; Hamilton, _Repub. of the U. S._, ii. 263. Other early English maps are: _A Plan of the Posts of York and Gloucester in the Province of Virginia, established by his Majesty's Army, etc., which terminated in the Surrender ... on the 17th Oct., 1781. Surveyed by Capt. Fage of the Royal Artillery_, which contains a small plan showing the position of the army between the ravines. What appears to be an original map is the _Plan of York Town shewing the Batteries and Approaches of the French and Americans, 1781_, on p. 61 of the _Memoir of General Graham_. A large map in colors is: _Plan of York Town in Virginia and adjacent country exhibiting the operations of the American, French, and English armies during the siege of that place in Oct. 1781_, by J. F. Renault. Leake's _Lamb_, p. 278, contains a fair map, with contours shown, although incorrectly.

There are MS. maps of the siege in the British Museum. Other MS. maps of Yorktown and the neighboring waters, including the drawn plan made for Faden's engraved map, are among the Faden maps (nos. 90, 91, 92) in the library of Congress.

There are among the Rochambeau maps in the library of Congress several illustrating the siege of Yorktown and attendant movements in Virginia:—

No. 50, _Carte des environs d'Hampton_, 1781, measuring 36 x 24 inches, and colored faintly.

No. 52, a pen-and-ink _Plan de Portsmouth, Va._, 15 x 12 inches.

No. 53, _Plan des ouvrages de Portsmouth en Virginie_, colored, 15 x 12 inches.

No. 54, _Carte detaillé de West Point sur la rivière de York au confluent des rivières de Pamunky et Matapony_, a colored sketch.

No. 55, a pen-and-ink sketch, _Batteries de West Point de la rivière York_, 15 x 12 inches.

No. 56, a pen-and-ink sketch, _Plan des environs de Williamsburg, York, Hampton and Portsmouth_, measuring 12 x 12 inches.

No. 57, a colored plan, 3 x 4 inches, showing the French army in camp, Sept., 1781, called _Carte des environs de Williamsburg en Virginie_.

No. 58, _Plan d'York en Virginie, avec les attaques faits par les armées français et Américain en Oct. 1781_, a colored sketch.

No. 59, _Siége d'York, 1781_, a colored plan, 23 x 24 inches.

No. 60, _Plan des ouvrages faits à Yorktown en Virginie_, a tracing, 24 x 20 inches.

No. 61, a sketch in ink and water-colors, with an elaborate key, _Notes sur les environs de York_, 24 x 12 inches.

Balch refers to a MS. map by Soulés, preserved in the Archives de la Guerre at Paris, and another attached to the MS. _Journal de mon séjour en Amérique_, which he attributes to Cromot-Dubourg. Soulés' map, _Plan d'York en Virginie avec les attaques et les campemens de l'Armée combiné de France et d'Amérique_, is given in his _Troubles_, etc., vol. iv., reduced in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ (June, 1880).

Another published French map is a _Plan de l'armée de Cornwallis, attaquée et faitte prisoniere dans Yorktown, le 19 8^{bre} par l'armée combinée Française et Américaine. Dessiné sur les lieux par les Ingenieurs de l'armée à Paris. Chez Le Rouge, X^{bre}, 1781._ Another good French map has no clew to its authorship except the words "M. fecit." It is entitled _Plan de l'Attaque des villes de Yorck et Gloucester dans lesquelles etoit fortifié le Général Cornwallis fait prisonnier le 19 Octobre, 1781_ (a copy in Harvard College library). Two anonymous French maps are: _Plan d'York en Virginia avec les attaques et les Campemens de l'armée de France et de l'Amérique_ (fac-simile in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, 1880, p. 440), and _Carte de la partie de la Virginie ... avec le plan de l'Attaque d'Yorktown et de Gloucester_. There is also a Paris map of Virginia, published by Esnauts and Rapilly, giving the _Baie de Chesapeake avec plan de l'attaque_.

There is a German map by Sotzman.

All these maps were based on more or less imperfect surveys. A map giving correct topography, _Yorktown, Virginia, and the Ground Occupied in the Siege of 1781; a topographical survey by direction of Brev.-Maj.-Gen. G. W. Getty, U. S. A., commanding Artillery School, Fort Monroe, 1880_, was drawn by Lieut. Caziare. A reduced fac-simile is given in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ (vii. 408,—described, p. 339). Caziare also drew the plan, embodying the lines of Faden and Renault, which is given in Patton's _Yorktown_, p. 34, and _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, vii. 288. A section of another and earlier government survey, by Major Kearney, showing the roads as they were in 1818, is in Johnston's _Yorktown_, p. 103. Cf. his list of maps in _Ibid._, p. 198.—ED.]

Portions of his orderly-books, extending, with breaks, from June 19, 1781, to April 30, 1782, were printed in the _Amer. Hist. Record_ (iii.; on the siege itself, pp. 403, 457-462). The orderly-books were reprinted at Philadelphia in 1865,[1208] while two orders of Sept. 15th and 25th, not included, are in the _Penna. Hist. Mag._ (1881), and in Johnston's _Yorktown_, 199. Many other important journals and orderly-books on the American side are preserved.[1209]

On the French side we have several contemporary accounts. First of all I should place an anonymous journal which has been attributed to Rochambeau.[1210] The _Diary of a French Officer, 1781_ (March 26 to Nov. 18, 1781), presumed to be the work of Baron Cromot-Dubourg, an aide to Rochambeau, was brought to light by Mr. Balch (_Mag. Am. Hist._, vii. 295), and is printed in _Ibid._ iv. 205, from an unpublished MS. then in the possession of Mr. C. Fiske Harris,[1211] of Providence, R. I.[1212] In some respects this is the most valuable paper of this class that we have. Still another important diary is the _Journal of Claude Blanchard, Commissary of the French Auxiliary Army sent to the United States during the American Revolution, 1780-1783. Translated from the French MS. by William Duane, and edited by Thomas Balch_ (Albany, 1876, pp. 92-184 especially including the march back to Boston).[1213]

In 1879 Mr. J. A. Stevens printed in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ a series of letters from Count Fersen to his father, occasionally inclosing a bit of journal, a great deal of which relates to the operations before and after Yorktown, and it is in all respects a very valuable contribution. The greater part of Deux-Pont's _Campaigns_[1214] relates to this period, while the _Journal of an Officer_ (pp. 148-164) and portions of the diaries kept by the naval officers refer to the same campaign.

The French accounts of the assaults on the redoubts are in the above. Hamilton's report to Lafayette is in _Remembrancer_, xiii. 61, while Lafayette's report to Washington is in _Corresp. of the Rev._, iii. 425.[1215]

There are good accounts of this campaign in the standard books.[1216] Of the more recent works, Henry P. Johnston's _Yorktown_[1217] stands first, though it was written with an evident bias. J. H. Patton[1218] also produced a small volume. Giradin's _Continuation of Burk_ (iv. 519) contains a one-sided description; and the lives of any of the Revolutionary worthies[1219] devote a considerable space to the campaign. Among these is the _Life of Muhlenberg_ by his son (268-276), in which an unfounded claim is advanced for the sire that he commanded the storming party led by Hamilton. The more popular books also have detailed accounts,[1220] while the subject has been repeatedly treated by orators, notably by Robert C. Winthrop.[1221]

EDITORIAL NOTES ON EVENTS IN THE NORTH, 1779-1781.

WHILE the events followed in the preceding chapter were all tending, both by Washington's victory and Greene's defeats, to a discouragement of the English necessary to induce the British government to desire a peace, the succession of events in the North had hardly any interdependence, and of themselves conduced but little to the same end. The campaigns of Sullivan in 1778 and 1779, the dismal failure of the Massachusetts expedition to Penobscot in 1779, and the plot of Arnold, are considered in other chapters. A brief commentary upon the other transactions of this period here follows. The spring of 1779 was not an encouraging one for the cause. Washington had kept his main army during the winter at Middlebrook (Irving, iii.; Greene's _Greene_, ii. 160), and he was now resolved on a defensive campaign (Bancroft, x. ch. 9). He gave his views to Congress (Sparks, vi. 158); but that body inspired little confidence. It did something to increase the efficiency of the army in creating an inspector-general (_Journals_, iii. 202); but its internal bickerings were sadly discouraging (Greene's _Hist. View_; Bancroft, x. 208; Greene's _Greene_, ii. 170, 175; John Adams's _Works_, i. 292). The legislators were powerless to regulate prices as they wished, and riots were in progress at their very doors (Reed's _Reed_, ii. ch. 6). They sent _A circular letter_ to their constituents, and urged enlistments in an address (May 26th; Niles's _Principles_, etc., 1876, p. 405); while Gouverneur Morris prepared for them some _Observations on the American Revolution, published according to a Resolution of Congress, by their Committee for the Consideration of those who are desirous of comparing the Conduct of the Opposed Parties, and the several Consequences which have flowed from it_ (Phila., 1779). (Cf. Sparks's _Gouv. Morris_, and the letter of Thomas Paine, _Hist. Mag._, i. 20.)

The British in New York were as inactive as Washington was. We get pictures of the life of the fortified town in the _Memoirs_ of the Baroness Riedesel; Duncan's _Royal Artillery_, ii. ch. 28; Montresor's account in _N. Y. City Manual_, 1870, p. 884,—also see that for 1863; Gen. Pattison's letters in _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1875; _Memoirs of General Samuel Graham_.

Heath was commanding east of the Hudson (_Memoirs_), and Gen. McDougall at West Point, which had been fortified the previous year (Sparks, v. 224, 282, 311; Ruttenber, _Obstructions_, 115; Lossing, _Field-Book_, ii. 132; Journal of Capt. Page in _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._, iv., v.) There is among the _Moses Greenleaf MSS._ (Mass. Hist. Soc.) an orderly-book beginning at West Point, Jan. 1, 1779, and ending at Morristown, Dec. 12, 1779.

There is annexed a sketch from the Hessian _Plan des opérations dans l'Amérique septentrionale depuis 12 Aoûst, 1776, jusqu'à 1779_. The broken lines mark the roads. Cf. _The Country west of the Hudson, occupied by the American army under Washington, from a MS. map drawn for Lord Stirling in 1779_, given in Evans's _Memoir of Kosciuszko_ (1883), etc.

Early in July (2d) there was an affair between Tarleton and Col. Sheldon at Poundridge in Westchester (Tarleton's _Memoirs_; _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iii. 685). Washington, as the season advanced, kept to the Highlands, and an attempt to draw him down was made by Clinton in dispatching Tryon with a marauding force to invade Connecticut by water. Tryon's instructions, July 2d, are in Charles H. Townshend's _British Invasion of New Haven and Connecticut, with some account of the burning of Fairfield and Norwalk_. They did not contemplate the destruction of houses; and Johnston, in his _Observations on Judge Jones_ (p. 59), controverts that Tory chronicler who charged such intent upon Clinton. Cf. Hinman, _Hist. Coll. of Conn._, 607; Stuart's _Jona. Trumbull_, ch. 37; Chauncey Goodrich in _New Haven Hist. Soc. Coll._, ii. 27; Moore's _Diary_, ii. 180; Ithiel Town's _Particular Services_, etc., p. 90; Gen. Parsons's letters in Hildreth's _Pioneer Settlers of Ohio_, 537; Dawson, i. 507; _Hist. Mag._, ii. 88; Lossing, i. 424; Sparks, _Corresp. of Rev._ i. 315; Leonard Bacon's oration on the Centennial; and addresses of E. E. Rankin and Samuel Osgood in the _Centennial Commemoration of the burning of Fairfield_ (New York, 1879). Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, iii. 103; _Diplom. Corresp._, ii. 253; iii. 99.

There is an address of Admiral Collier and Gen. Tryon, July 4th, to the inhabitants of Connecticut. Tryon subsequently published an _Address of Maj.-Gen. Tryon, written in consequence of his late expedition into Connecticut_ (Sabin, xiii. 53, 495). Trumbull feared another invasion in the autumn (_Hist. Mag._ ii. 10).

The posts at Stony Point and Verplanck's had been begun as outposts of West Point, and to protect King's Ferry, the crossing below the Highlands. Before the works were finished the British had captured them, in June (Sparks's _Washington_, vi. 292). Washington planned a surprise of the British garrison, and the two annexed sketches, furnished to him by Gen. Heath, seem to have been prepared in anticipation of the movement.

The first, "Stoney Point", is from a pen-and-ink sketch, indorsed "From Genl. Heath, letter 3d July, 1779", which is among the Sparks maps in Cornell University library, and carries the following KEY: 1, the capital work on the highest part of the point, commanding the out-flêches, which is conformed to the broken eminence it is built on; 2, 3, 4, 5, flêches built on so many little eminences, each with one embrasure; but in the principal work (1) the number of embrasures is uncertain, being covered by the works and the declivity of the hill. Two rows of abatis (× × ×) cross the point from water to water. The other plan, marked "Verplanck's Point", is sketched from a pen-and-ink drawing in the same collection, also indorsed "From Gen^l. Heath, letter 3d July, 1779", and bears this KEY: 1, Fort de la Fayette, with block-house and barbette battery; 2, board huts in form of tents; 3, American barbette; 4, British tents, about one regiment; 5, 6, two new flêches by the Britons; 7, block-house on a stony hill, with a redoubt. The abatis is marked × × ×.

The lead of the movement was entrusted to Wayne. His instructions, in Washington's handwriting, are given in Dawson, in fac-simile (p. 18). His orders are dated July 15 (Niles, _Principles_, 1876, p. 495; _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._, v. 7). Wayne's first report of his successful attack to Washington is given in fac-simile in Armstrong's _Wayne_, Dawson, and Lossing (ii. 179); and his longer account of the next day is in Sparks's _Washington_, vi. 537; and in _Ibid._ vi. 298, is Washington's report to Congress. H. B. Dawson's _Assault on Stony Point_ (Morrisania, 1863) is an elaborate monograph. H. P. Johnston has a special paper in _Harper's Monthly_ lix. 233 (July, 1879), and J. W. De Peyster another in the _N. Y. Mail_, July 15, 1879, while a controversy of Johnston and De Peyster is in the _Monmouth Inquirer_. "Who led the forlorn hope at Stony Point?" is discussed in the _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, Oct., 1885, p. 357. Cf. Armstrong's _Wayne_; Dawson's _Battles_; Moore's _Diary_, ii. 192; _Penna. Archives_, vii.; Marshall's _Washington_, iv. ch. 2; Irving's _Washington_, iii. 465; Hull's _Rev. Services_, ch. 16; Reed's _Reed_, ii. 110; Kapp's _Steuben_, ch. 11; Hamilton's _Republic_, i. 443; acc. of Col. Febiger in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, March, 1881; Duncan's _Royal Artillery_, 3d ed., ii. 353; Pattison in _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1875, p. 95; and Gen. Joseph Hawley's _Centennial Address_, July 16, 1879. The British later reoccupied the post (Sparks's _Corresp. of Rev._, ii. 328).

The chief map of the attack is a _Plan of the Surprise of Stoney Point, 15 July, 1779, from surveys of Wm. Simpson, Lt. 17th Regt. and D. Campbell, Lt. 42d Regt., by John Hills, Lt. 23d Regt., London, Faden, March 1, 1784_. There is a fac-simile in the _N. Y. Calendar of Hist. MSS._, p. 347, and in Dawson. It needs the following KEY: 1, Two companies of the 17th regiment. 2, Ditto. 3, Sixty of the loyal Americans. 4, Two grenadier companies of the 17th regiment. 5, A detachment of the royal artillery. A, Ruins of a block-house erected and destroyed by the Americans. B, A temporary magazine. C, One 24 and one 18 pounder, ship guns. D, Ditto. E, One iron 12-pounder. F, One 8-inch-howitzer. G, One brass 12-pounder. H, One short brass 12-pounder. I, One long brass 12-pounder. Cf. plans in Hull's _Revolutionary Services_, ch. 16; Sparks's _Washington_, vi. 304; Guizot's _Washington_, Atlas; Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 175. The medals given to Wayne, De Fleury, and Stewart are described in Loubat. (Cf. Lossing, ii. 180, 181.) A rude view of the capture in Bickerstaff's (Boston) _Almanac_, 1780, is reproduced in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, xvi. 592.

A few weeks later (Aug. 19), Major Henry Lee emulated Wayne in a sudden attack on Paulus Hook (Jersey City). We have reports on both sides. That of the British, General Pattison's, is in Duncan's _Royal Artillery_, ii. 355, and his letter to Townshend in _N. Y. Hist. Coll._, 1875, p. 79. On the American side we have accounts in Sparks's _Washington_, vi. 317, 326, 332-336, 376; Lowell (_Hessians_, 228) says that R. E. Lee's statement (in H. Lee's _Memoirs_) that Paulus Hook was captured by a stratagem is not borne out by Marshall (_Washington_, iv. 87) or by the German accounts (Ewald, ii. 295). Cf. Moore's _Diary_, ii. 206; Irving's _Washington_, iii. 475; Dawson's _Battles_; Quincy's _Shaw_, 65; Reed's _Reed_, ii. 125; Duer's _Stirling_, 204; Bancroft, x. 229; J. W. De Peyster in _N. Y. Mail_, Aug. 18, 1879; and S. A. Green in _Hist. Mag._, Dec., 1868 (2d ser., iv. 264). George H. Farrier prepared a _Memorial of the centennial celebration of the battle of Paulus Hook, Aug. 19th, 1879_ (Jersey City, 1879), which has an appendix of documents.

Loubat and Farrier give an account of the medal presented to Lee.

The annexed sketch, "Paulus Hook", is from a draft of an original Hessian map in the library at Cassel, furnished by Mr. Edward J. Lowell (cf. his _Hessians_, p. 228), with the following KEY: A, Covering force of the attacking Americans. B, Line of attack on the block-houses (1, 2, 3) and fort (C), which mounted seven six-pounders, which were not used. D, Barracks in which one hundred and ten prisoners were taken. E, Work occupied by a Hessian captain, one officer and twenty-five men, possessed at the time the Americans retired, at daybreak. (Cf. plan in Lossing, ii. 828.) Farrier gives a plan from an original in the library of Congress.

The winter of 1779-80 was an exceptionally severe one in the North (Jones's N. Y., i. 320; Greene's _Greene_, ii. 184; Leake's _Lamb_; Almon's _Remembrancer_, ix.) After Clinton had gone South to attack Charleston, Knyphausen was left in command in New York (Eld's journal in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xviii. 73; Eugene Lawrence on life in N. Y. in Hist. Mag., i. 37; Jones's _N. Y. during the Rev._, vol. ii.).

Washington was encamped at Morristown, New Jersey. Views of his headquarters are in Lamb's _Homes of America_; _Appleton's Journal_, xii. 129; Lossing's _Field-Book_, i. 309, and his _M. and M. Washington_, 191. (Cf. _Poole's Index_, p. 873; _Harper's Mag._, xviii. 289; _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, iii. 89, 118.) Letters of Washington, while in Morristown, in addition to those given in Sparks, are in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iii. 496. Orderly-books are in N. Y. Hist. Soc. cabinet and in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xvii. 48.

The trials and deprivations of the army were so great that Washington did not dare take advantage of an ice-bridge formed across the Hudson, for an attack on New York, though the British feared that he might. There were varying councils on this point in the American camp (Duer's _Stirling_, ch. viii.). The British apprehension (Feb., 1780) is shown in Duncan's _Royal Artillery_, ii. 359; _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1875, pp. 147, 152. The difficulties in the American camp are followed in Irving's _Washington_, iv. ch. 1 and 4; Thacher's _Mil. Journal_; J. F. Tuttle in _Hist. Mag._, June, 1871, and _Harper's Mag._, Feb., 1859. A lack of money in the paymasters' chests caused dissatisfaction, which grew into an insurrection. The British, seeking to increase the trouble, marched into New Jersey, under General Matthews, but they were driven back, and waited on the coast till Clinton, returning from Carolina, reinforced them, when they again advanced. Washington, meanwhile, suspecting an incursion up the Hudson, had gone thither with a large part of his troops, leaving Greene at Morristown. Greene met the British and defeated them at Springfield, when they returned to New York. The progress of these events can be followed. On the American side, Greene's _Greene_, ii., and his letters in Sparks's _Washington_, vii. 75, 506; Gordon, iii. 368; Marshall's _Washington_; Sedgwick's _Livingston_; Bancroft, x. ch. 18; Irving's _Washington_, iv. 6; Carrington, 502; Lossing, i. 322; in histories of N. Jersey; Atkinson's _Newark_, 104; Hatfield's _Elizabeth_, ch. 22; _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iii. 211, 490. On the British side, Moore's _Diary_, ii. 285; Simcoe's _Queen's Rangers_; in letters in _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1875, p. 458. George Mathew, of the Coldstream Guards, wrote an account (_Hist. Mag._, i. 103,—App., 1857), and some details are in the _Court Martial of Col. Cosmo Gordon_ (London, 1783). For maps, John Hill's, published by Faden, 1784, is the principal one. Cf. Carrington; Lossing's _Field-Book_, i. 322; and the map of Elizabethport Point (1775-1783) by E. L. Meyer, published in 1879.

What is known as the affair of Bull's Ferry (July 21, 1780) was an unsuccessful attempt by Wayne upon a block-house garrisoned by Tories. (Cf. _Mag. Amer. Hist._, v. 161; Armstrong's _Wayne_; Sparks's _Washington_, vii. 116; and his _Corresp. of Rev._, iii. 34, 37; Sargent's _André_, 234.) André wrote on this misadventure of Wayne the well-known doggerel verses called _The Cow-Chace_, part of Wayne's project having been to gather cattle. The verses appeared in three numbers of _Rivington's Gazette_ (New York, Aug. 16, 30, Sept. 23, 1780; Menzies, $23), and were republished by Rivington separately, 1780 (J. A. Rice's sale, $265), and also in Philadelphia, 1780. The book was reprinted at London with notes in 1781; at New York in 1789 (Morrell's _Catal._, $36); at London in 1799, with Dunlap's tragedy of _André_ (Menzies, 61, $23); at Albany in 1866, edited by F. B. Hough; at Cincinnati in 1869. André seems to have made several copies of the MS. Sargent prints it from one of these. Another belonged to Dr. W. B. Sprague, and Lossing printed from this (_Field-Book_, ii. 878; _Two Spies_, 68). It will also be found in Moore's _Songs and Ballads_, 299; J. A. Spencer's _United States_, vol. ii. etc.

The summer was barren of military interest. Steuben was trying to reorganize the army (Kapp's _Steuben_, ch. 12-15). The low condition of the army is shown in Washington's letters (Sparks, vii. 156; _Corresp. of Rev._, iii. 15; _Mag. Amer. Hist._, Aug., 1879). Washington issued a circular letter on the army's distress (_New Hampshire State Papers_, viii. 870; cf. _Journals of Congress_, iii. 469). The British intercepted some mournful letters, and printed them (_Political Mag._, ii. 73).

In August there was a gathering of delegates from the New England States at Boston, "to advise the most vigorous prosecution of the war, and provide for the reception of our French allies." The _Proceedings_ of this meeting have been edited from the original MS. by F. B. Hough (Albany, 1867). In November a convention of the Northern States at Hartford sought methods of furnishing men and supplies (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, Oct., 1882, viii. 688; and Clinton's knowledge of it in _Ibid._ x. 411).

Hope revived with the prospect of the arrival of Rochambeau and the French, in July, 1780 (Heath's _Memoirs_, 243; _Corresp. of Rev._, iii. 12). The first communications of Washington and Rochambeau are in Sparks's _Washington_, vii. 110, and App. 4, with an account of Lafayette's conference with the French. Rochambeau's instructions are in _Ibid._ vii. 493. The letters of Rochambeau and Lafayette are in the _Sparks MSS._, lxxxv.

The English fleet blockaded the French in Newport harbor. The _Political Mag._, 1780, has a map showing the blockade of the French admiral Ternay by Arbuthnot. Letters of the English admiral are in the _Hist. MSS. Com. Report IX._, App. iii. p. 106.

On the occupation of Newport by the French, see Mason's _Newport_; _Newport Hist. Mag._, ii. 41; iii. 177; Stone's _French Allies_, 256; _Lippincott's Mag._, xxvi. 351; Drake's _Nooks and Corners of the N. E. Coast_; _Harper's Mag._, lix. 497. The correspondence of Rochambeau and the Rhode Island authorities is in the _R. I. Col. Rec._, ix. There is a diary of a French officer in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iv. 209; and Fersen's letters are in _Ibid._ iii. 300, 369, 437.

Several maps of Newport and vicinity are given in the _Mag. Amer. Hist._, like the plan of the town by Blaskowitz; the _Defences of Newport, 1781_, from a MS. French chart; and the _Scene of Operations before Newport, 1781_, from a MS. survey by Robert Erskine, geographer to the American army, of which the original is in the cabinet of the N. Y. Hist. Society.

There are among the Rochambeau maps several plans of Newport and its neighborhood, including no. 38, _Plan de Rhodes Isle et position de l'armée française à Newport_, measuring 5 x 3 inches, colored and showing roads, fences, forts, and the fleet in the harbor; no. 39, _Plan de la ville, port, et rade de Newport, avec une partie de Rhode Island, occupée par l'armée française_, evidently by the same draftsman as the preceding, dated 1780, colored, measuring 24 x 30 inches, showing forts, Gen. Sullivan's old camp, the old line of the English, etc.; no. 41, a plan, 8 x 15 inches, called _Quatre positions de la flotte française et position de la flotte anglaise_; no. 42, evidently by Montresor, colored, measuring 4 x 3 inches, dated 1780, called _Plan de la position de l'armée française au tour de Newport, et du mouillage de l'escadre dans la rade de cette ville_. Le Rouge published a map of this title in Paris, in 1783. Cf. map in _Political Mag._, i. 692.

On the French participation in the war we have Rochambeau, _Mémoires_, with an English translation by Wright, and the _Troubles_ of Soulés, which is supposed to have been inspired by Rochambeau. Cf. Walsh's _Amer. Register_, ii. The other French contemporary accounts are the _Mémoires_ of Count Ségur and the Duc de Lauzun; the _Travels_ of Abbé Robin and of Chastellux, of which there is an English translation by George Greive (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, April, 1869); the _Journals_ of Deux-Ponts, edited by S. A. Green, and of Claude Blanchard. (Cf. _Revue militaire française_, and Tuckerman's _America and her Commentators_.) The later French accounts in general are Leboucher's _Hist. de la guerre de l'indépendance des Etats-Unis_; Balch's _Les français en Amérique_ (1872), Chotteau's _Les français_, etc. A comprehensive later American account is E. M. Stone's Our _French Allies_. Cf. Lossing in _Harper's Mag._, xlii. 753.

Counter attacks of Clinton on Newport and of Washington and Rochambeau on New York were prevented by untoward circumstances (Sparks's _Washington_, vii. 130, 137, 171, with App. 6; Jones's _New York during the Rev._, i. 358; _Mémoires_ of Rochambeau).

In September, 1780, Washington had an interview with Rochambeau at Hartford to devise further operations, but the plot of Arnold disconcerted all measures (E. M. Stone, 281; Irving's _Washington_; J. C. Hamilton's _Republic_, ii. 49). Alexander Hamilton had drawn up a plan of combined operations.

In October there was an unsuccessful expedition to Staten Island (_Life of Pickering_, i. ch. 17; _R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll._, ii. 257; _Hist. Mag._, i. 104).

Washington was now in camp at Totowa and Preakness, in New Jersey. There are a map and view of his headquarters in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, Aug., 1879. Cf. orderly-book in _2 Penna. Archives_, xi., and Journal of Capt. Joseph McClellan in _Ibid._

The Pennsylvania line was at Morristown, under Wayne, and in January, being without pay and supplies, they revolted, and marched towards Philadelphia to claim redress of Congress. The New Jersey line was similarly affected. Prompt and judicious measures quelled the mutiny, but not till some emissaries, whom Clinton had sent to increase the trouble, had been hanged by the insurrectionists. Original sources: Wayne's letters to Washington, in the _Corresp. of Rev._, iii. 192; Sparks's _Washington_, vii. 348, with App. x.; proposal of a Committee of Sergeants, with Wayne's comments, in the _Sparks MSS._, xxxix. p. 100 (also no. liv. 5); documents in _Penna. Archives_, viii. 698, 701, 704, and ix.; second series, xi.; _Colonial Records_, xii. 624; _Hazard's Register_, ii. 160; _St. Clair Papers_, i. 108, 532; _Bland Papers_, ii. Cf. also Marshall's _Washington_, iv. 393; Irving's, iv. 195; Hamilton's _Hamilton_, i. 323, and _Works_, ii. 147; Amory's _Sullivan_, 181; _Madison Papers_, i. 77; Reed's _Reed_, ii. ch. 14. Clinton's report is in Almon's _Remembrancer_, xi. 148. The information reaching the British camp is in Clinton's _Secret intelligence_, in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, x. 328, 331, 418, 497; an account of the hanging of the British emissaries is in the _Hist. of First Troop of Philad. City Cavalry_, p. 28.

Washington and Rochambeau had held a conference at Weathersfield, Conn. (May 22, 1781), to arrange for a plan of combined action (Sparks's _Washington_, viii. 517, for their views respecting the safety of Newport, meanwhile). The conference was held at the Webb House (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, June, 1880). The French army then moved by way of Providence to the Hudson, and there is among the Rochambeau maps in the library of Congress a plan of their route, with key, giving their twelve encampments on the way (nos. 42 (bis), 43, 44). _Marche de l'armée française de Providence à la Rivière du Nord, 1782._ In the _Mag. Amer. Hist._ (iv. 299) there is a map of the _Route of the French from Providence to King's Ferry_, following a MS. attached to a diary of a French officer.

Rochambeau established his headquarters at the Odell House, in Westchester (Stone, _French Allies_, 394; C. A. Campbell in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iv. 46). On June 12th, the two commanders held a council of war at New Windsor (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, iii. 102). Clinton's secret journal shows how well the British commander was informed of what was going on (_Ibid._ xii. 73, etc., 162, etc.). Beside the correspondence of Washington at this time, in Sparks, there are other letters in Ibid. iv. and v. Washington's first attempt to act in union with the French was in the proposed attack on the forts on New York Island. (Cf. Washington's journal in _Ibid._ vi. 117; xi. 535.) There is among the _Lincoln Papers_ (_Sparks MSS._, xii.) a "memorandum to regulate the movements of the allied army on the night of the 31st of July, 1781." J. A. Stevens follows the operations of the combined armies at this time (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, iv., Jan., 1880). He gives a map of the attempt at King's Bridge, July 3, 1781. There is among the Rochambeau maps an excellent draft, about thirty inches wide by fifteen high, showing New York with Long Island, with the French camp as high up as Tarrytown, called _Position du camp de l'armée combinée de Phillipsbourg du 6 Juillet au 19 Août, 1781_. Stevens gives a fac-simile of this, and also a map of the environs of New York between the Sound and the Hudson, called _Surveys in New York and Connecticut States for his Excellency, Gen. Washington, by Robert Erskine, Anno 1778, W. Scull delin._,—a MS. plan in the New York Hist. Soc. library (_Proc._, 1845, p. 56), where is also a MS. _Chart of the Harbour of New York, with a map of the Country bordering upon the Sound, and extending to the Connecticut, with the names of the principal places laid down thereon, by Robert Erskine, 1779_ (_N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc._, 1848, p. 188). The Rochambeau maps contain other evidences of the activity at this time of the French topographical engineers; as, for instance, a plan (no. 29) done in ink and color, measuring ten inches wide by twelve high, and not very exact, called _Reconnaisance Juillet, 1781, ouvrages [de] Morrisania, Isle de New York_, by Montresor and Buchanan, and a second (12 x 15 inches) which gives the works at Frog's Point (no. 30), and adds to the title "Plan d'une batterie de Long Island." Another (no. 32), called _Reconnaisance des ouvrages du nord de l'Isle New York, 22-23 Juillet, 1781_, measures twelve inches wide by fifteen high, apparently the work of Montresor, and shows Fort Washington, Laurel Hill, etc. It was Washington's purpose at this time to make Clinton expect an attack on New York (Sparks's _Washington_, viii. 54, 130, 517; _Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc._, 2d series, i. 327). Clinton has recorded his reason why he did not venture to attack Washington in July and August, while the Americans were encamped at King's Bridge (_New York City during the Rev._, New York, 1861, pp. 177-184). By August 14th, the coöperation of the French fleet being assured, Washington decided to march to Virginia (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, vii.; also xi. 343; _Diplom. Corresp._, xi. 417). He said the main cause of his coming to this decision was the failure of the New England States to supply men (_Mag. Amer. Hist._, vi. 125). Washington's headquarters at this time were in the Livingston mansion (Lossing, ii. 195).

The question of Washington having been made a marshal of France has caused some discussion. _Hist. Mag._, ii., iii.; E. M. Stone's _French Allies_, 373; Balch, _Les Français en Amérique_, 122.

While Washington marched towards Virginia, the marauding expedition which Clinton had sent under Arnold, along the Connecticut coast, failed to divert him from his purpose, as the British commander had hoped it would. The attack fell upon New London and Groton, early in September. Trumbull's letter to Washington is in the _Corresp. of Rev._, iii. 403. Cf. Stuart's _Trumbull_, ch. 45; Arnold's account in the _Polit. Mag._, ii. 666; Sparks's _Arnold_, and Arnold's _Arnold_; "Sir Henry Clinton and the burning of New London", in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, March, 1883, p. 187. There are contemporary accounts in _N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg._, x. 127 (1856); Niles's _Principles_ (1876), p. 143; Moore's _Diary_, ii. 479; and in the _Narrative of Jonathan Rathbun, with accurate accounts of the capture of Groton fort, the massacre that followed, and the sacking and burning of New London, Sept. 6, 1781, by the British forces_, by Rufus Avery and Stephen Hempstead, with an appendix (1810).

The principal monograph is William W. Harris's _Battle of Groton heights: a collection of narratives, official reports, records, etc., of the storming of Fort Griswold, the massacre of its garrison and the burning of New London by British troops. With introd. and notes; rev. and enl. with additional notes, by Charles Allyn_ (New London, 1882). The original issue was in 1870. The perfected edition is enriched with many documentary proofs.

There have been other anniversary addresses: Tuttle's at Fort Griswold (1821); W. F. Brainerd's (1825); Griswold's in commemoration of Col. Ledyard (1826), who was run through by his own sword after he had surrendered it; R. C. Winthrop's (1853) in his _Addresses_ (1852-1867, p. 84); Leonard W. Bacon's, with an historical sketch by J. J. Copp, in the _Battle of Groton Heights_ (1879).