Chapter VII (2)

After the navy of the United States, which was officered and built or purchased by Congress, the largest separate force was that of the State of Massachusetts. So soon as O'Brien and his friends seized the "Margaretta", as has been told, the provincial government took her into its service, and christened her the "Liberty", keeping her at first under the care of O'Brien.

For the first five years of the war, Massachusetts was governed by a committee of the Council. Many of the members of this committee, from time to time, were Boston merchants, of large experience in maritime affairs. The State was acting as an independent sovereignty. It contributed to the resources of its allies, the other States in the confederation, but none the less did it carry on war against the common enemy. It would sometimes happen that the State needed to make a remittance to France in its purchase of military stores. If the market were favorable, the merchants on the council boards would arrange for the purchase or charter of a vessel on State account, and the State bought and sent to Europe the freight by which it made its payments to its agents. The naval archives of the commonwealth are therefore a curious mixture of warlike operations and of commercial adventure. It will sometimes happen that the vessel which appears in one month as a cruiser, officered and manned for war by the authority of the State, shall appear in another month as a merchantman, freighted for a foreign port and intended to bring home a cargo to be sold to the credit of the State. An interesting instance of the promptness of the government was its readiness in taking up and fitting for use a little brigantine which carried to Franklin, in Paris, the first news of Burgoyne's surrender. Paul Jones hoped, as has been seen, to carry out the same news in the "Ranger" from Philadelphia; but although his passage was but twenty days in length, he did not arrive at Bordeaux till the same day on which Austin, the messenger of Massachusetts, was telling the great news to Franklin and the commissioners at Passy.[1256]

The navy of Massachusetts, between the beginning and end of the war, numbered at least thirty-four vessels. One or two of these were vessels which ranked in the language of that day as frigates. The finest and largest of them was the "Protector", built on state account at Salisbury, Mass., where the fine frigate "Alliance", which proved so successful and popular, was also built, almost at the same time. It may be said, in passing, that the names of the New England vessels showed very distinctly that men had not yet lost the traditions of their ancestry. The "Tyrannicide" was a favorite cruiser in the state navy, and the action which has been spoken of, in which she took the "Revenge", was one of the best fought battles of the war. The "Oliver Cromwell" was a Massachusetts privateer, and the name of the "Hampden" appears twice on the lists of those days. The keel of the "Protector" was laid in 1778, and she sailed first in 1780. But she was also one of the unfortunate squadron destroyed in the Penobscot. The failure of the well-planned but disastrous expedition to that river resulted in the destruction of all the important vessels belonging to the State.

We have only a partial catalogue of the privateers commissioned by the State between 1775 and 1783. It is sometimes difficult to draw the line between state cruisers and privateers, and it will sometimes happen that a vessel which has one year been chartered by the State, and officered in her commission, falls back the next year into the hands of her owners, and is equipped and fought by them under a privateer's commission. In this list there are rather more than three hundred names of separate vessels. Of the privateersmen sent out from Salem there is a separate list. Between the beginning and end of the war, the Salem vessels alone numbered nearly one hundred and fifty. The _Massachusetts Archives_ give a list of three hundred and sixty-five, as commissioned and belonging in Boston. If we had lists, equally full, of the privateers which sailed from Falmouth (Portland), from the Merrimac, from Marblehead, from Falmouth, Dartmouth, Plymouth, Barnstable, and the other towns on Cape Cod, it is probable that we should enlarge the list of Massachusetts privateers so that it should include more than six hundred vessels. It is to be remembered that all the regular operations of the fishing fleet were stopped, and that therefore, in every town on the coast, there were vessels and men ready for service, and very easily commissioned if a spirited commander appeared. To this number must be added the considerable list of what were virtually New England privateers among the vessels commissioned in France by Deane and Franklin.

The largest of these privateers, at starting, carried one hundred and fifty men. Such an exploit as Whipple's, which has been already recorded, would have been impossible unless he had as many as ten prize crews on his vessel, of fifteen men each. With each prize sent in, the fighting force of the captor was reduced, and in such reduction is the reason to be found why we often find that at the last a privateer captain was not able to fight his own ship, and, after he had sent in many prizes, was himself taken. On the other hand, the smallest of these vessels, equipped for short cruises, carried but few guns and few men.

Mr. Felt's statement of the privateer force of Salem and Beverly at the end of the war gives a total force of fifty-nine ships, carrying four thousand men. This would give an average of about sixty-six men to a vessel. The general estimate is higher, and we suppose that the average crew of a Massachusetts privateer, when she sailed, was about one hundred men.

If this estimate is correct, we must modify Hutchinson's statement so far as to say that, sooner or later, Massachusetts alone probably sent sixty thousand men out in warfare upon the seas. Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Connecticut probably sent twenty thousand more. Next to this fleet was that of the Delaware; next to that, the privateers commissioned in France; and to these must be added those from the Chesapeake and more southern waters.

The number of seamen and officers employed by the Continental Congress was probably largest in the earlier years of the war. No papers now exist which give full returns of this force. But it would probably be fair to estimate it as varying in different years from five thousand to ten thousand men. The several state navies represented, perhaps, as many more.

When one considers these forces in the privateer fleet and the national and state navies, the English force opposed seems surprisingly small. We have the official returns of the officers and men in the whole English navy for every year of the contest. The number comes up to 87,000, after England was well engaged with America, France, and Spain. But of this fleet a very considerable part was in the East Indies and on other stations. Almon's _Remembrancer_ says distinctly that the number of men engaged against the colonies at sea in 1776 was 26,000. It is very sure that in that year the colonies had many more men at sea engaged against England. There were some English privateers; but their number was not considerable.

A comparison between the military and naval forces of America in the Revolution shows that the navy, in its various forms, embodied almost as many men as the army, and sometimes, indeed, more.

In a report sent by General Knox to Congress on the 11th of May, 1790, he gives the number of men actually in the Continental army year by year, the number of militia called out from time to time, and the number of men demanded in the quotas fixed by Congress. The last figures are of no great importance now, though they have some historical curiosity. The others exhibit the forces for seven years, thus:—

_Continentals._ _Militia._
1775 27,443 37,623
1776 46,891 42,760
1777 34,820 33,900
1778 32,899 18,153
1779 27,699 17,485
1780 21,015 21,811
1781 33,408 16,048
1782 14,256 3,750
1783 13,476 _No militia._

A curiously extravagant estimate of the extent of the continental forces engaged has been commonly set forth by adding these yearly figures, a process which takes no recognition of the fact that a man serving through three years, for instance, is counted in each year. The history of this confusion is traced in a paper by Justin Winsor in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Jan., 1886.—ED.

It is to be observed that the number of militia stated here is largely conjectural; and in no instance were the men called out in service for any considerable time. A comparison of these figures with figures quite as authentic, which give the number of men who were afloat year by year for purposes of offence, either in the national or state navies, or in larger numbers in privateers, will show that, in some of the later years of the war, this naval service enlisted a larger number of men than were serving in the army. Indeed, as has been shown, Great Britain appears to have often had more American enemies afloat on the Atlantic than she had seamen and officers of her own upon that ocean.

GENERAL EDITORIAL NOTES.

THE earliest account of the Revolutionary navy was in Thomas Clark's _Naval History of the United States from the Commencement of the Revolution_ (Philad., 1813; second ed., 1814), in two volumes.

Chas. W. Goldsborough's _United States Naval Chronicle_, bringing the story down to 1822, was printed in Washington in 1824.

In 1828 there appeared at Brooklyn, N. Y., a _General View of the rise, etc., of the American Navy_,—a book of little importance.

The most important of all the accounts is the _Naval Hist. of the United States_, by James Fenimore Cooper, first published in Philadelphia in 1839, and in a second edition in 1840. In some respects, relating to the war of 1812, Cooper's views have been called in question; but his story of the Revolutionary navy is the result of investigations that have not, on the whole, been improved upon.[1257] Cooper gives a list of the Continental cruisers, with the fate of each; and Lossing, in the summary of the Revolutionary naval history in his _Field-Book_, ii. 851, copies this list. An official and authentic record, with no attempt at a readable narrative, is found in G. F. Emmons's _Navy of the United States, 1775-1853, with a brief history of each vessel's service, to which is added a list of private armed vessels, previous and subsequent to the Revolutionary War_ (Washington, 1853, published under authority of the Navy Department). The book contains a list of captures during the Revolution, both by public and private armed vessels.

On the British side, the earliest connected narrative is that in the fourth and fifth volumes of Robert Beatson's _Naval and Military Memoirs of Great Britain_, 1727-1783 (London, 1804). Among the later books are C. D. Yonge's _Hist. of the British Navy_,[1258] and Allen's _Battles of the British Navy_.[1259]

SPECIAL EDITORIAL NOTES.

I. PAUL JONES.—In respect to the lives of Paul Jones, Sabin's (ix. nos. 36,546, etc.) enumeration includes many anonymous and unimportant ones not now to be mentioned. The earliest biography of any original authority was one issued at Washington in 1825 (second ed. 1851), _Life and Character of John Paul Jones_, by John Henry Sherburne, register of the U. S. navy, and this was reprinted in an abridged form at London, the same year as _The life of Paul Jones from original documents in the possession of John Henry Sherburne, register of the Navy of the U. S._ This life was based upon documents in the naval archives of the government, upon some letters contributed by Thomas Jefferson, and upon some papers brought to light in a baker's shop in New York (_No. Amer. Rev._, Oct., 1826, p. 292). These papers had been left by Jones, when he went to Europe, in the hands of his friend Ross, of Philadelphia. At Jones's death, and on his heirs' orders, these papers were handed over to Robert Hyslop, and, upon this gentleman's death, came into the charge of his cousin, John Hyslop, the baker, in whose shop they were found by Mr. George A. Ward, of New York, by whom they were put at Sherburne's disposal. This biographer, hearing of other papers in Scotland, applied for them, but was refused, as it was intended to use them in another memoir. This other narrative appeared as _Memoirs of Rear Admiral Paul Jones, now first compiled from his original journals and correspondence_ (Edinburgh, 1830, in 2 vols.; London, 1843, in 2 vols.). The author of it referred rather slightingly to the New York MSS. as "a few fragments", and claimed that Jones took to Europe the essential part of his papers, which by his will passed to his sisters in Scotland, and eventually to his niece, Miss Janette Taylor, of Dumfries, who possessed several bound volumes of them, beside other loose papers. Some of Jones's papers are in the possession of J. C. Brevoort, of Brooklyn; others are among the Force Papers in the library of Congress; and others in the Lee Papers in the libraries of Harvard College and of the University of Virginia. Franklin's letters to him are in Sparks's ed., vol. viii. The Taylor MSS. were the original material mentioned in the title of this Edinburgh edition, which was reprinted, under the editing of Robert Sands, in New York (1830) as _The life and Correspondence of Paul Jones from original letters and manuscripts in the possession of Miss Janette Taylor_. The Sparks Library has a copy of this book, with Miss Taylor's MS. annotations. Based upon the same material, but with some alterations and additions, was the _Life of Rear Admiral John Paul Jones, compiled from his original Journals and Correspondence_ (Philad., 1845, 1847, 1853, 1858, 1869), which appeared under the editing of B. Walker. The _Life of Paul Jones by Alexander Slidell Mackenzie_ (Boston, 1841, in two vols.) was written at the instance of Jared Sparks, and its merit is that it has sifted all the existing material, making a more readable and better constructed narrative than the others. Mackenzie acknowledges his use of the preceding lives, but says he has used guardedly a _Memoir of the Life of Capt. Nathaniel Fanning, an American naval officer, who served during part of the American Revolution under Commodore John Paul Jones_ (New York, 1808), which is known in another edition as _A narrative of the Adventures of an American Naval Officer_ (New York, 1806). Fanning is said to have been Jones's private secretary, though he is also spoken of as a midshipman on the "Bon Homme Richard." Thomas Chase, of Chesterfield, Va., published _Sketches of the life, character, and times of Paul Jones_ (Richmond, 1850), which is of small extent, and in part derived from stories told by the author's grandfather, who had served with Jones.

A French _Mémoire de Paul Jones_ (Paris, 1798) purports to be a translation under his own eyes, by "Citoyen André", of a narrative written by Jones himself. _Poole's Index_, p. 695, gives various periodical references to articles on Jones; and his career is the subject of J. F. Cooper's novel of _The Pilot_, and of its sequel, Dumas' _Capitaine Paul_. Cf. Herman Melville's _Israel Potter_. The Rev. E. E. Hale gives a chapter (no. xiv.) to his career in his _Franklin in France_.

For Jones's services in the "Ranger", see, beside the lives of Jones, the _Annual Register_ (xxi. 176); Parton's _Franklin_ (vol. ii.); a journal of Dr. Ezra Green in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, 1875, edited by Admiral Preble (whose own copy with additions is in the Mass. Hist. Soc.). A log of the "Ranger" is cited as belonging to a gentleman in Greenock in 1830; and one, Aug. 24, 1778, to May 10, 1780, is printed in the _Granite Monthly_, v. 64. The _Memoirs of Andrew Sherburne, a pensioner of the navy of the Revolution_ (Utica, 1828; Providence, 1831) covers the service of a lad on the ship.

Of the remarkable fight of the "Bon Homme Richard" and the "Serapis" we have Jones's account in his letter from Texel to Franklin, also transmitted to Congress; the narrative of Dale, his lieutenant; and the letter sent to the admiralty by Capt. Pearson, of the English ship. These are given by Sherburne, the Edinburgh editor, and others. The account in Cooper's _Naval History_ passed under the eye of Dale. The log-book of the "Richard" was in 1830 in the possession of George Napier, of Edinburgh. The statements about the progress of the fight are somewhat contradictory, and Dawson (_Battles_, 554) collates them. A letter of Jones to Robert Morris, Oct. 13, 1779, is in the _N. Y. Hist. Coll._, 1878, p. 442. Beside the accounts in the lives of Jones and the general histories, see Parton's _Franklin_ (ii. 335); _Analectic Mag._ (vol. viii.); Allen's _Battles of the British Navy_; J. T. Headley's _Miscellanies_. The effect in England is depicted in Albemarle's _Rockingham and his Contemporaries_ (ii. 381). The story of the flag of the "Bon Homme Richard" is told by Admiral G. H. Preble in his _Three Historic Flags_ (_N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Jan., 1874, and separately with additions, Boston, 1874,—the author's annotated copy being in the Mass. Hist. Soc.). There is a contemporary print of the fight by Peltro, after a painting by Robert Dodd (London, 1781). Cf. Barnard's _Hist. of England_, p. 693.

Jones accused Landais, who commanded the "Alliance", of failure to afford assistance, and of even firing into the "Bon Homme Richard." Landais published a _Memorial to justify Peter Landais' conduct during the late war_ (Boston, 1784), and a _Second Part_ (New York, 1787?), being his defence against the specifications of _Charges and proofs respecting the conduct of Peter Landais_ (New York [1787]). Landais' quarrel with Jones and his subsequent career are traced in Hale's _Franklin in France_, ch. xvii. For Landais' claims on government, see B. P. Poore's _Descriptive Catal. of govt. publications_, pp. 61, 67, 82, 94; and Jones's claims can be traced in _Ibid._ Cf. _Journals of Congress_, iv. 796.

The _Diplomatic Correspondence_ (vol. i.) shows the complications which the harboring of Jones and his prizes in Holland caused. For titles on this point, see Sabin (ix. 36,562, etc.) and Muller, _Books on America_ (1872), p. 187, and nos. 1,181-1,187. The difficulty occasioned by the captures of Wickes and Conyngham, and their efforts to refit in French ports, as well as those of Jones, are set forth in Hale's _Franklin in France_.

* * * * *

II. PRIVATEERING.—The Provincial Assembly of Massachusetts, Nov. 13, 1775, authorized private-armed vessels to cruise, and established a court for condemning their prizes,—the law being drawn by Elbridge Gerry (Austin's _Gerry_, i. 92, 505; Barry's _Mass._, iii. 58, and references; Sparks's _Washington_, iii. 155; Frothingham's _Siege of Boston_, 261; _Gent. Mag._, Jan., 1776; Almon' s _Remembrancer_, ii. 149). For the provincial legislation, see Goodell's _Provincial Laws_, vol. v., under "Admiralty", "Letters of Marque", "Armed Vessels", and "Privateers", in the index.

For the early captures, see _Siege of Boston_, 269, 272, 289, 308; Adams's _Familiar Letters_, 208, 220, 230. Abigail Adams wrote, Sept. 9, 1776, "The rage for privateering is as great here as anywhere, and I believe the success has been as great" (_Familiar Letters_, 226). The _Massachusetts Archives_ show how large the number of privateers was that hailed from that State. Cf. _Mem. Hist. Boston_, iii. 118, with references; and the _Report on the Mass. Archives_ (1885), pp. 25, 27-29, 31, 34. Cf. a letter of Thomas Cushing on the building of armed vessels in Mass., in _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, Oct., 1886, p. 355; and a list by Admiral Preble of those fitted out in Massachusetts, 1776-1783, in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Oct., 1871. After Boston, the most activity was in Salem. Cf. extracts from _Salem Gazette_, quoted in A. B. Ellis's _Amer. Patriotism on the Sea_ (Cambridge, 1884, and _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Jan., 1884); _Annals of Salem_, by J. B. Felt; _Curwen's Journal_, 589; W. P. Upham's _General Glover_; life of E. H. Derby in Hunt's _Amer. Merchants_, vol. ii; T. W. Higginson, in _Harper's Monthly_, Sept., 1886.

The records of the proprietors of the New Hampshire privateer "Gen. Sullivan" (1777-1780), showing how the business part of such enterprises was conducted, and the instructions given to commanders, have been printed by Charles H. Bell in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, 1869, pp. 47, 181, 289. Correspondence of Josiah Bartlett and William Whipple on privateering is in _Hist. Mag._, vi. 73.

Concerning the Rhode Island privateers, we have William Paine Sheffield's _Rhode Island privateers and privateersmen_ (an address, Newport, 1883); and an account of the privateer "Gen. Washington", in E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, p. 275. (Cf. Arnold's _Rhode Island_, etc.) Newport is thought to have furnished more seamen than any port except Boston.

For those of Connecticut, see _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, 1873, p. 101; and on the whale-boat warfare, of which a large part was on Long Island Sound, see _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, March, 1882, p. 168; _N. Y. Evening Post_, July 18, 1853 (quoted by Ellis); Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 851; Onderdonk's _Rev. Incidents of Long Island_, i. 170-234. Cf. also F. M. Caulkins's _New London_, ch. 31; Hinman's _Conn. during the Rev._, 592. The British expedition to Danbury was offset by the incursion of Connecticut whale-boats (May, 1777), under Return Jonathan Meigs, to Sag Harbor, where captures were made and shipping burned. Cf. Hildreth's _Pioneer Settlers of Ohio_, 532; Sparks's _Washington_, iv. 440; _Mag. of American History_, April, 1880. Judge Jones (_N. Y. during the Rev._) asperses Meigs's character, and Johnston (_Observations_, etc., 23) defends him.

For those of New York, see _N. Y. City Manual_, 1870, p. 867. We know less about the privateers fitted out south of New York; but Robert Morris is said to have grown rich on the profits of such enterprises (Chastellux's _Voyages_, Eng. tr., i. 199, etc.). These ventures were far from uniformly successful, and the losses were many (cf. such instances as are detailed in Moore's _Diary_, i. 284, 316, etc.), but the losses inflicted by privateers on the British were vastly greater. Lecky (iv. 17) thinks that, though the allurements of such service helped to stay enlistments in the army, it was quite worth such a cost in the damage which the British suffered.

Congress first authorized privateers under Continental commissions March 23, 1776, and regulations were adopted April 2d and 3d,—Washington having made suggestions (_Journals_, i. 183, 296, 305; John Adams's _Works_, iii. 37). A collection of _Extracts from the Journals of Congress relative to prizes and privateers_ was printed at Philad. in 1777 (Brinley, no. 4,112). For prize claims, see Poore's _Descriptive Catalogue_ p. 1347; and for lists of prize cases, cf. _Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc._, 2d ser., ii. 120.

We have various journals and narratives of cruises in privateers: the MS. _Journal_ of Capt. J. Fish in the Amer. Antiq. Soc. (1776-77); Timothy Boardman's _Log-book, kept on board the privateer Oliver Cromwell, during a cruise from New London, Ct., to Charleston, S. C., and return, in 1778; also, a biographical sketch of the author, by S. W. Boardman_, issued under the auspices of the Rutland County Historical Society (Albany, N. Y., 1885); Solomon Drowne's _Journal of a cruise in the fall of 1780, in the private sloop of war Hope, with notes by H. T. Drowne_ (New York, 1872), and reprinted in _The R. I. Hist. Mag._, July, 1884; narrative of Capt. Philip Besom, of Marblehead, in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, v. 357.

After the medal struck in his honor by Congress, to commemorate his victory over the "Serapis." Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xi. 299; Loubat's _Medallic Hist. U. S._; Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 845; Gay's _Pop. Hist. U. S._, iii. 622; Thomas Wyatt's _Memoirs of the Generals, Commodores_, etc. (Phil., 1848, no. 23); John Frost's _Pictorial Book of the Commodores_ (New York, 1845). Madison called Houdon's bust of Jones "an exact likeness." The familiar portrait by C. W. Peale represents him full face, with chapeau, has been engraved by J. B. Longacre, and is in Sherburne's _Life of Jones_. For a contemporary English print, see J. C. Smith's _British Mezzotint Portraits_, v. 1735.]

Respecting the international complications occasioned by the privateers, see the _Diplom. Corresp. of the Rev._ Capt. John Lee, of Marblehead, carried some prisoners taken from prizes, which he had sent home, into Bilbao in 1776, where he was put under arrest; but the news of the Declaration of Independence arriving at Madrid, he was discharged (George Sumner's _Oration at Boston_, July 4, 1859, p. 12; _Dipl. Corresp._, i. 53). The Grantham correspondence, copied in the _Sparks MSS._ (no. xxiii.), shows much on these complications. The histories of American diplomacy in Europe at this time necessarily cover these points; and the copies of the Lord Stormont and Sir Joseph Yorke Papers, among the Sparks MSS., show the complications which the ministers of England had to encounter in France and Holland. E. E. Hale's _Franklin in France_ has a chapter on the American privateers sailing from Dunkirk. On the participancy of Franklin and Deane in the movements of the privateers, see Parton's _Franklin_, ii. 239. There were instances of privateers being retaken by their prisoners and carried into England (P. O. Hutchinson's _Gov. Hutchinson_, ii. 86).

* * * * *

III. THE RHODE ISLAND CAMPAIGN OF 1778.—In 1776 all the entrances to Narragansett Bay had been fortified, except the westerly, or that one lying between Conanicut Island and the western shore of the bay; and accordingly, in December of that year, Sir Peter Parker with a British fleet entered by this passage, and, passing round the northern end of Conanicut, landed Sir Henry Clinton and a force of British and Hessians on Rhode Island, and occupied Newport (_New Hampshire State Papers_, viii. 411, 431; Bancroft, ix. 200, 357. Cf. G. C. Mason on the English fleet in R. I. in the _R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll._, vii. 301). The _Journals_ of Congress, ii. 233, show a proposition to send fire-ships against the British in August, 1777. The Americans, under the direction of a French engineer, Malmedy, completed at once the defences of all vulnerable points round the bay, and the chart of the bay, made by the English engineer Blaskowitz in 1777, shows what some of these points were. The American as well as the British defences are enumerated in Gen. George W. Cullum's _Historical sketch of the fortification defences of Narragansett Bay_ (Washington, 1884). Cf. also his paper in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, June, 1884. A section of Blaskowitz's map of the bay, 1777, given in E. M. Stone's _French Allies_, shows the defences of Providence.

D'Estaing, by reason of the draft of his heavier ships, had declined to risk entering New York harbor (Sparks, _Corresp. of the Rev._, ii. 155; _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, iii. 387). A sketch in the Montresor Papers (_N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1881_, p. 505) gives the positions of the English and French fleets, July 22, 1778, respectively, within and without Sandy Hook. When D'Estaing sailed to Newport, it was in pursuance of a plan contrived with Washington for the capture of that place and the British forces there. On July 29, 1778, D'Estaing anchored near Point Judith. Sullivan was now in command of about ten thousand men, largely militia, and under him were Greene and Lafayette commanding divisions, and they all were gathered about the head of the bay. Copies of Lafayette's letters during this campaign, made by him for Sparks, are in the _Sparks MSS._ no. lxxxiv. There were about 6,000 men under Maj.-Gen. Pigot in the Newport defences. On Newport in the hands of the British, see _Hist. Mag._, iv. 1, 34, 69, 105, 133, 172, and the Journal in _Narragansett Hist. Reg._, i. 28, 91, 167, 277. There was a small British fleet, mostly of thirty-two guns each, protecting their water-front. When on August 5 D'Estaing began to send his ships in, the British burned or sunk their ships. The plan agreed upon by the joint forces was to attack the British on August 10; but Sullivan had crossed his troops over to the island earlier than D'Estaing expected, since he found that Pigot was drawing in his troops from the northern end of the island, and massing them nearer Newport, while the French troops had not yet landed so as to be ready to act in concert. This was the condition, when one morning, as the fog lifted, the English fleet of Howe was seen off the entrance of the bay. Some of the French ships were outside and exposed, and so D'Estaing promptly passed out to keep his fleet together and present his strongest front. Howe declined battle, because the French had the weather-gauge. A gale coming on, both fleets sought sea-room and were widely scattered, so that little fighting took place except as opposing vessels chanced to come together. The storm damaged both fleets equally, and each commander sought a harbor as best he could; Howe at New York, and D'Estaing at Newport.

After a copperplate engraving of a picture by Bonneville.]

The movements of the British fleet are followed in a _Candid and impartial narrative of the transactions of the fleet under Lord Howe_ (London, 1779). Cf. also Sir John Barrow's _Life of Richard, Earl Howe_ (London, 1838). In the _Third report of the Hist. MSS. Commission_, p. 124, there is noted a diary on the fleet, July 29-Aug. 31, 1778. There is an account of a participant on the French fleet, given in Moore's _Diary_, ii. 85. Paul Revere speaks of the storm as being of unexampled severity (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xiii. 251).

From Andrews' _Hist. of the War_, London, 1785, vol. i. It is also engraved in _Extrait du Journal d'un officier de la marine_ [Paris?], 1782 (two editions, but with different engravings). Cf. the portrait in Hennequin's _Biographie Maritime_ (ii. 221); an engraving by Porreau in Jones's _Georgia_,] vol. ii.; Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 78, etc.]

Meanwhile, on August 15, Sullivan began a movement down the island, and the British retired behind their two lines of defences. When D'Estaing reëntered the bay on the 20th, Sullivan had begun his approaches against the British works, but not wisely in plan, as General Cullum says. Sullivan urged D'Estaing to join in the attack; but that officer thought that his first duty, under his instructions, was to make the safety of his fleet sure, and accordingly did not dare risk, in his shattered condition, an attack from Howe, should the English admiral chance to have fared better in the gale, and have made ready to fall upon him. So D'Estaing told Sullivan he must go to Boston to refit, and on the 22d he set sail, expressing regret that Sullivan had been so precipitate in passing over from the main. He declared that he could not help the American general, and this purpose he insisted upon, despite the protests of Sullivan and his officers. The predicament of the American commander was certainly an unfortunate one, but he was not steady enough of head to refrain from publicly casting reproach on the French general, in an order which he found he must in part recall after the mischief had been done (Lodge's _Hamilton's Works_, vii. 557. Cf. Lafayette's letter to Washington in Sparks's _Corresp. of the Rev._, ii., Aug. 25; and a letter of Greene, in _Ibid._, Aug. 28; also Greene's _Greene_, iii. 148). Sullivan thus gave the militia an excuse for deserting him. While in front of the British works and in this condition, Sullivan got intelligence from Washington that Clinton had sailed from New York with reinforcements for Pigot. Beginning a retrograde movement on the 26th, Sullivan stopped at the northern end of the island and strengthened his position, while Lafayette made a fruitless visit to Boston to induce D'Estaing to return. That officer was not yet ready; his ships not yet repaired.

From the map in the atlas of Marshall's _Washington_. Cf. E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, p. 68; and the map given in Diman's address on the capture of Prescott. A MS. plan of the attack on Rhode Island, Aug., 1778, is among the Faden maps (no. 88) in the library of Congress.]

This plan, by Charles Blaskowitz, was published by Faden in 1777, and is here somewhat reduced. Cf. fac-simile in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, July, 1879. A MS. map of the mouth of Taunton River and Newport harbor, by Charles Blaskowitz, is among the Faden maps (no. 89) in the library of Congress. There is another plan by Des Barres, published April 24, 1776, and making part of the _Atlantic Neptune_. A plan of Newport and the bay is in the _American Atlas_, nos. 17 and 18. The British had contemplated founding a navy yard at Newport in 1764 (_Rhode Island Hist. Mag._, July, 1885, p. 42). Rider (_Hist. Tracts_, no. 6) gives a fac-simile of an old map.]

Meanwhile, on the 29th, the British, who had followed Sullivan, began to press him, and some fighting took place. The centennial of this action was celebrated August 29, 1878, and S. S. Rider includes an account of it in his _R. I. Hist. Tracts_, vi. S. G. Arnold delivered the historical address. This book has also Sullivan's Report, Aug. 31st; Pigot to Clinton; and the German account from Eelking's _Hülfstruppen_, translated by J. W. De Peyster. Cf. also _R. I. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (1877-78), p. 88. A letter of Col. Trumbull, Aug. 20th, is in the _Trumbull MSS._, and the fight is described in his _Autobiography_. A letter of James Lanman, Sept. 16th, is in the _Sparks MSS._ (xlvii. p. 29). Cf. Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 89, and Arnold's _Rhode Island_ and other histories of the State, and of Newport.

The British strength on the island, Aug. 22d, is given as 6,860 men; and the loss in the action of the 29th is given at 207 in all. _Sparks MSS._, xlix. vol. iii.

As night fell, the Americans deceived Pigot into thinking them at work on their defences, when in fact they were crossing to the mainland by two ferries. An hour before midnight Lafayette got back from Boston, and found this retreat going on. He took at once charge of the rear-guard, and by midnight the entire army was rescued.

This follows a sketch in E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, p. 108, which is a reduction of the original (38 inches long,—scale, one inch to mile), given by Sullivan, after the retreat, to the government of Rhode Island, and discovered in the State House a few years ago.

KEY: A, "American army under the command of the Hon'ble Gen'l Sullivan." B, "British lines." B L W, "British Lines and works." B A, "British Army. Order of March." "Here a severe cannonading and bombarding on both sides began Aug. 17, 1778, and continued till the 27th." C, "British Army. Order of Battle." D, "Daify Hill" is properly Durfee's Hill. Y, Turkey Hill. A H, Almy's Hill. O, "British redoubts", north of Easton's pond. _Windmill._ "Here the British army came up with the Light Corps of Gen. Sullivan, which was in advance Aug. 29th, 1778, 7 o'c'k A. M., when the battle of that day began." A B, "American batteries and covered way." R, Howland's Ferry. "Here the American army landed Aug. 9th, 1778, beginning after 6 o'clock A. M., and retreated the 30th in the evening."

The sentences above in quotation-marks are legends on the map at the points indicated. A letter of Sullivan, Oct. 25, 1778, respecting this map is in the _Trumbull MSS._, iv. p. 181.]

The conduct of Sullivan in this brief campaign has been much criticised, and Thomas C. Amory attempts his defence in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (Sept., 1879), vol. xvii. p. 163; and _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ (1879), vol. iii. pp. 550, 692. Cf. Amory's _Sullivan_, p. 70, and his papers in the _R. I. Hist. Mag._, 1884, p. 106; 1885, pp. 244, 271. Sullivan's general orders are in the _Sparks MSS._, no. xlvii., and in Upham's _John Glover_, p. 46. Letters of Sullivan are in _Sparks MSS._, no. xx., including his correspondence with Pigot; others are in the _Trumbull MSS._; some to Laurens, Aug. 6th and 16th, in the _Laurens Corresp._ (ed. by F. Moore), pp. 116, 120. One of the miscellaneous volumes of MSS. in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library (_Letters and Papers, 1777-1780_) is mostly made up of the papers of Meshech Weare, President of New Hampshire, and they include various letters from Sullivan, Whipple, and others during this campaign.

The French side of the controversy with D'Estaing is given in Chevalier's _Histoire de la Marine Française pendant la guerre de l'Indépendance Américaine_, and in a _Journal d'un officier de la Marine_ (1782). The correspondence of D'Estaing is in the Archives de la Marine at Paris, and copies of much of it are in the _Sparks MSS._ (lii. vol. i.) Arnold (_Rhode Island_, vol. ii.) used papers from these French archives.

NOTE.—This view of the action of August 25th, taken from Mr. Brindley's house, is from the _Gentleman's Mag._, 1779, p. 100. The key is wanting. Cf. Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 83, and Drake's _New England Coast_.]

NOTE.—The map on the preceding page is sketched from a colored map belonging to the Lafayette copies in the Sparks collection at Cornell University, called _Carte des positions occupées par les troupes Américaines après leur retraite de Rhode Island, le 30 août, 1778_.

The contemporary English engraved maps of Narragansett Bay of the most importance are those published by Des Barres and Faden. That of Des Barres is called _A chart of the harbour of Rhode Island and Narreganset Bay, published at the request of the Right Honourable Lord Viscount Howe, by F. F. W. Des Barres, 20 July, 1776_, in two sheets, which subsequently made part of the _Atlantic Neptune_. It bears the following "Notes and references explaining the situation of the British ships and forces after the 29th of July, 1778, when the French fleet under the command of Count D'Estaing appeared and anchored off the harbour. The same day two French frigates went up the Seakonnet Passage. July 30th two French line-of-battle ships anchored in the Narraganset Passage, on which the king's troops quitted Connanicut Island. Aug. 5th the French ships came towards Dyer's Island where the British advanced frigates were destroyed and the seamen encamped. 8th, the rest of the French fleet came into harbour and anchored abreast of Gold Island [small island south of Providence Island], upon which the king's troops withdrew within the lines [north of Newport]. 9th, the enemy's forces landed." It places the sinking and burning of the "Alarm" (10 guns), "Cerberus" (28), "Juno" (32), "Kingfisher" (18), "Lark" (32), "Orpheus" (32), "Pigot" (8), "Spitfire" (8), "Flora" (32), and "Falcon" (18).

The Faden map was published July 22, 1777, and is entitled _A Topographical Chart of the Bay of Narraganset, in the Province of New England, with all the Isles contained therein, among which Rhode Island and Connonicut have been particularly surveyed ... to which have been added the several Works and Batteries raised by the Americans, taken by order of the Principal Farmers on Rhode Island, by Charles Blaskowitz_.

A marginal table gives the names of the farmers, and enumerates ten batteries, mounting one hundred and twenty-seven guns in all. The map is dedicated to Earl Percy.

A French reproduction of it. _Plan de to Baie de Narragansett_ makes part of the _Neptune Américo-septentrional_, no. 6. It is given in fac-simile in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, July, 1879.

The _Sparks Catalogue_, p. 206, shows a "Map of the Nara Gansett Bay, by Lieut.-Col. Putnam, Jan. 7, 1776, presented to his Excellency, George Washington, Esq.;" but it is not among the maps at Cornell University.

There is in the British Museum a colored plan (1778) of Rhode Island and the adjacent islands and coast, made by Edward Page, second artillery (measuring 1 2-12 × 7 6-12 inches); and a colored view of Bristol Neck (1765).

Modern eclectic war maps of the bay are given in Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 80; Carrington's _Battles_, 456 (the last repeated in the _R. I. Hist. Mag._, 1884, p. 106).]

The despatch of Pigot to his government is in the _Gent. Mag._, Nov., 1778, p. 537; in Dawson; in Rider's _R. I. Hist. Tracts_, vi.; in _Newport Hist. Mag._, ii. 253; in E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, p. 111. Cf. also paper of Aug. 31, to Clinton, in _London Gazette_, Oct. 15; _Gent. Mag._, Nov., 1778; Almon's _Remembrancer_; Stone's _French Allies_. See diaries at Newport in _Hist. Mag._, 1860, and Mrs. Almy's in _Newport Hist. Mag._, July, 1880. Stedman (ii. ch. 23, 24) tells the story.

The loyal wits had now their chance, and some of their effusions can be seen in Moore's _Songs and Ballads of the Rev._, p. 231. Wells (_S. Adams_, iii. 38) traces the effect of Sullivan's retreat on the country. Upon the general management of the campaign a committee of Congress reported, Aug. 7, on the early stages (_Journals_, iii. 9). An orderly-book of Glover's is in the _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._ (vol. v.; cf. also i. p. 112), and another is noted in the _Cooke Catal._ no. 1,897. Maj. Gibbs' diary (Aug.) is in _Penna. Archives_, vol. vi. A diary of Manassah Cutler, who was a chaplain in Titcomb's regiment, is in E. M. Stone's _Our French Allies_, p. xv. Lafayette gave an account fifty years afterwards which is in the _Hist. Mag._, Aug., 1861. His letters to Washington are in Sparks's _Corresp. of the Rev._ (ii. 181, 196). Cf. also Sparks's _Washington_, v. 29, 40, 45; vi., etc.; Irving's _Washington_, iii. ch. 36; Marshall's _Washington_, iv.; Bancroft, ix. 209, 357; x. ch. 5; Greene's letter in Sparks's _Corresp. of the Rev._, ii. 188, and Greene's _Greene_, ii. 100, etc. A long letter of Dr. Cooper of Boston, Aug., 1778, to Franklin, defending D'Estaing's action, in Hale's _Franklin in France_, p. 183; Heath's _Memoirs_; John Trumbull's _Autobiog._ 51; Stuart's _Gov. Trumbull_, ch. 32; Williams' _Gen. Barton_, ch. 3; Arnold's _Rhode Island_, ii. 419; Barry's _Mass._, ii. 150; Hamilton's _Republic of the U. S._, i. ch. 17. There are rolls of the campaign in the _Mass. Archives_; and in _N. H. Rev. Rolls_, ii. 500, 508. Connecticut did not respond (_Hist. Mag._, ii. 7; cf. also iv. 145).

Sketched from a colored plan among the Sparks maps at Cornell University, which follows a plan made for Lafayette. It is called _Plan de Rhode Island avec les différentes opérations de la flotte Française, et des troupes Américaines, commandées par le Major Général Sullivan, contre les forces de terre et de mer des Anglais, depuis le 9 Août, jusqu'à la nuit du 30 au 31 du même mois, 1778, que les Américains ont fait leur Retraite_.

KEY: The British works are solid black, their troops diagonally black and white; the American works of open lines, and their troops shaded obliquely. The British in Newport were protected on the water side by batteries (3, 3, 3); on the land side by an inner line of defence (4) and an outer line (5, 6, 7, 8), with nine guns (8) commanding the water approach by Easton Pond. At the north end of the island they had works (16, 18, 20,—solid black) to resist attack from the mainland. Upon the entrance of the French fleet by the Newport batteries, the English evacuated these advanced posts, and some frigates were sent into the East passage (15) to protect the movements of the Americans, who, moving over to the island, threw up redoubts (17) to protect their first position, and erected a battery of two guns at 20 to cover their retreat across Howland's Ferry, should that become necessary. They now advanced, and on August 15th took position on the line 11, and began their approaches (9). The French had landed from the ships at 22, and joined the left wing under Lafayette. The redoubts on the extreme left and right of the line 11 were never completed. The fire from the parallels was kept up from the 19th to the evening of the 28th, when the retreat began, and the Americans in the night of the 28th, erected the breastworks (19, 19) flanking the abandoned British forts (18), and during the night of the 30th left the island by Howland's Ferry, while the British were at Turkey Hill (16). The position of the British fleet was at 1.

Sparks has added to the plan these references: 12, Overing's house, where Col. Barton captured Gen. Prescott; 13, guard-house; 14, round redoubt thrown up by the New Hampshire militia,—skirmishing commenced here under Col. Laurens; and 10, Bishop Berkeley's house. The broken lines are roads.

The most elaborate of the manuscript contemporary maps is one belonging to the Mass. Hist. Society, which is reproduced, full size, in the _Proceedings_ of that society (vol. xx. p. 350), and is given in its essential parts in Gen. G. W. Cullum's _Historical Sketch of the Fortification Defences of Narragansett Bay_ (Washington, 1884). It is on a scale of nearly an inch and a quarter to the mile, and is signed "J. Denison scripsit." The French fleet is represented as going out to join battle with Lord Howe's fleet, exchanging shots with the English shore batteries, which are more numerous than in the Lafayette map. The French ships in the East passage are shown as sailing out to sea, to join D'Estaing on his way to Boston. In the battle of the 29th, near Butt's Hill, English ships are drawn as engaging both the American right and a battery on the Bristol shore. The first line of the Americans stretches across the island in this order from west to east,—Livingston, Varnum, Cornell, Greene, Glover, Tyler. These are without the breastworks. Behind them are Lovell at the west, Titcomb between the abandoned British forts, with a reserve under West behind them.]

There are general surveys in Carrington and Dawson; in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, by J. A. Stevens, July, 1879; in Stone's _Our French Allies_ (Providence, 1884), part iii. On the British side see the contemporary account in _Gent. Mag._, xlix. 101; the Tory account in Jones, _N. Y. during the Rev._, ii. ch. 12; the German in Ewald, _Belehrungen_, ii. 249; Eelking's _Hülfstruppen_, i. 105; ii. 14, 30; epitomized in Lowell's _Hessians_, 215, 220. Cf. J. G. Rosengarten on the German soldiers in Newport, in _R. I. Hist. Mag._, vii. 81. Silas Talbot, a Rhode Islander, who had gained credit in the land service, and had managed some fire-ships against the British fleet in New York, captured a floating battery of the enemy near Newport, and made his subsequent record on the water as an officer of the navy. Henry T. Tuckerman wrote the _Life of Silas Talbot_, which had been intended for Sparks's _Amer. Biography_, but was published separately in N. Y. in 1850. Cf. Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 849.

The next morning Clinton's reinforcements appeared, brought by Howe's fleet. They were not needed; and so, while Gen. Grey made some raids, with transports and light craft, upon Fairhaven and other ports, whose privateers had annoyed the British (cf. _Harper's Monthly Mag._, 1885, p. 823; and statement of losses in _Sparks MSS._, lii. vol. ii. 29), Clinton took his troops back to New York, and Howe went round Cape Cod and cruised off Boston harbor, trying in vain to allure D'Estaing to battle. The French commander remained in port till November. As the time for his sailing approached, another English fleet, under Admiral Byron, appeared off the harbor; but a storm scattering his ships, the French, on the 3d of November, left the port unmolested, and sailed for the West Indies.

D'Estaing, while in Boston, addressed a letter to Congress (_Sparks MSS._, lii. vol. iii.), and promulgated a proclamation (Oct. 28th) to former French subjects in Canada, seeking to detach them from English interests (Andrews's _Late War_, iii. 171; Niles's _Principles_, 1876 ed., p. 136, _Doc. rel. to Col. Hist., N. Y._, x. 1165).

The reports which reached Boston relative to the campaign under Sullivan, and the impressions respecting the French, are given in Ezekiel Price's diary (_N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Oct., 1865, p. 334). Hancock, who had been in command of the Massachusetts militia during the campaign, returned to Boston to do what he could by his hospitality to prevent the general indifference of the Boston people producing evil effects on the French (_Memorial Hist. Boston_, iii. 185; Loring's _Hundred Boston Orators_, 102; Adams's _Familiar Letters_, 342; Greene's _Greene_, ii. 143). On the unfortunate riot (Sept. 17, 1778) in the town, in which the French were roughly handled, see _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, viii. 785, 856, xv. 95. Considerable apprehension was felt lest the British, elated by success, should push towards Boston from Rhode Island, and beacons were got in readiness (Sept. 7th) on Blue Hill in Milton. A regiment of artillery had been raised for the defence of the town, and an orderly-book covering its service, June 8, 1777, to Dec. 18, 1778, is given in the _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._, xiii. 115, 237; xiv. 60, 110, 188. Heath (cf. his _Memoirs_ for this period), at a time when the French were making ready to sail, wrote from Boston, Oct. 22, 1778, to Weare, of New Hampshire, that he feared the British were planning an attack by water (_Letters and Papers, MSS._, 1777-1780, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet).

* * * * *

IV. THE PENOBSCOT EXPEDITION, 1779.—This expedition was fitted out in Boston by the Massachusetts authorities, with some assistance from New Hampshire, for the purpose of dislodging a British force, which in June, under General McNeill, supported by a few vessels under Captain Mowatt, had taken possession of the peninsula now called Castine. The treasury of Massachusetts issued bills to cover the cost (Goodell's _Province Laws_, v. 1191).

Solomon Lovell was put in command of 1,200 militia and 100 artillery, while Peleg Wadsworth was second in command, and Paul Revere had charge of the artillery. The general government lent the "Warren" and "Providence", Continental vessels, and Dudley Saltonstall, a Continental officer, commanded the fleet. The expedition, consisting of nineteen armed vessels, of three hundred and twenty-four guns, with twenty transports, and 2,000 men in all, left Boston harbor July 19th. Quarrels between Lovell and Saltonstall prevented prompt action, and before success could be insured the expedition was overcome by a naval force which Clinton had sent from New York when he heard of the undertaking. Our main sources on the American side are _The original Journal of General Solomon Lovell, kept during the Penobscot Expedition, 1779, with a sketch of his life by Gilbert Nash_, published in 1881 by the Weymouth (Mass.) Hist. Society; the _Boston Gazette_, March 18, 25, April 1, 8, 1782; journal on board the Continental sloop "Hunter", July 19-Aug. 11, in _Hist. Mag._, viii. 51. Further on the American side Thacher's _Military Journal_; Heath's _Memoirs_; Thomas Philbrook's account in Cowell's _Spirit of '76 in Rhode Island_; Pemberton's journal in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, ii. 172; letters of Artemas Ward, Peleg Wadsworth, and Charles Chauncey; a letter of James Sullivan, saying that it had involved Massachusetts in a debt of $7,000,000, "which is not so distressing as the disgrace" (Amory's _James Sullivan_, ii. 376; _Sparks MSS._, xx.); Wheeler's _Pentagoet_, p. 36; Kidder's _Military Operations in Eastern Maine_, p. 265; Williamson's _Maine_ (ii. 471) and _Belfast_, ch. 12; Willis's _Portland_, ch. 19; William Goold's _Portland in the Past_, p. 374; Barry's _Mass._, ii. ch. 14; J. W. De Peyster in the _N. Y. Mail_, Aug. 13, 1879.

The _Revolutionary Rolls_, in the Massachusetts Archives, give the _personnel_ of the expedition; the orders, vessels, etc. (vols. xxxvii., xxxviii., xxxix.)

On the English side we have John Calef's _Siege of Penobscot by the Rebels_ (London, 1781,—Sabin, iii. no. 9,925), which is copied in Wheeler; the journal, July 24-Aug. 12, in the _Nova Scotia Gazette_, Sept. 14, 1779, which is reprinted in the _Maine Hist. Soc. Coll._, vii. 121, and that in the _Particular Services_, etc., edited by Ithiel Town. There is a Tory view in Jones's _N. Y. during the Rev._, i. 297.

Lovell's troops and the seamen struggled in disorder through the Maine wilderness, and the general himself reached Boston about Sept. 20th. A court of inquiry, under Gen. Artemas Ward, exonerated Lovell, and blamed Saltonstall. Nash prints its report, which is preserved in the _Mass. Archives_, vol. cxiv. It is examined by Eben Hazard in a letter printed in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, iv. 129, in which he intimates that the blame was not all the naval commander's, and that it was a part of the plan to throw the responsibility on a Continental officer, in order to force the cost of the expedition upon Congress.