Chapter IX: The West, (21)

[1360] "A company of minute-men, before the 19th of April, had been embodied among the Stockbridge tribe of Indians, and this company repaired to camp. On the 21st of June two of the Indians, probably of this company, killed four of the regulars with their bows and arrows, and plundered them" (Frothingham's _Siege of Boston_, p. 212). A letter of July 9th says: "Yesterday afternoon some barges were sounding the river of Cambridge (Charles) near its mouth, but were soon obliged to row off, by our Indians (fifty in number), who are encamped near that place" (_Ibid._ p. 212, note). On the 25th (June): "This day the Indians killed more of the British guard." On the 26th: "Two Indians went down near Bunker Hill, and killed a sentry" (_Ibid._ p. 213). Frothingham's authority is given as "John Kettel's diary. This commences May 17, and continues to Sept. 31, 1775." Through the kindness of Mr. Thomas G. Frothingham I have examined the original diary, which, in addition to the extracts given, contains several others showing that our riflemen picked off the British sentries. _The Boston Gazette and Country Journal_ (August 7, 1775) contains the following: "Watertown, August 7. Parties of Rifle Men, together with some Indians, are constantly harassing the Enemy's advanced Guards, and say they have killed several of the Regulars within a Day or two past." (_Ibid._ 14th): "We hear that last Thursday Afternoon a number of Rifle men killed 2 or 3 of the Regulars as they were relieving the Centries at Charlestown lines." The fact that two Indians were wounded by our own sentries in August is recorded in Craft's Journal, etc. (Essex Institute Hist. Coll., iii. p. 55). As there were no Indians with the English, this must have been an accidental collision.

[1361] The correspondence of Allan and Haldimand is in the _Quebec Series_, vol. xvii. (Public Record Office), and is chronicled in Brymner's _Report on the Dominion Archives_ (1883). Cf. further in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, 1858, p. 254, _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, 1882, p. 486; W. S. Bartlet's _Frontier Missionary_ (1853); G. W. Drisko's _Life of Hannah Weston_ (Machias, 1857); Journal of sloop "Hunter" in _Hist. Mag._, viii. 51; Ithiel Town's _Particular Services_, etc. There is a portrait and memoir of Frederic Kidder in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, April, 1887.—ED.

[1362] Cf. N. S. Benton's _Herkimer County_; Harold Frederic in _Harper's Mag._, lv. 171; Dawson's _Battles_, ch. 36; Lossing's _Field-Book_, i. ch. 12, etc.

[1363] This work was reviewed in the _Monthly Review_, iii. p. 349; _The New York Review_, iii. p. 195; _Christian Examiner and General Review_, xxvi. p. 137; _Christian Review_, iii. p. 537; _No. Amer. Rev._, Oct., 1839, by J. H. Perkins. (Cf. _Poole's Index_.)

The two volumes originally published in 1838 were edited by the son in 1865. An abridgment of it, known as the _Border Wars of the Rev._, makes part of Harper's Family Library.

There is some account of the early life of Brant in J. N. Norton's _Pioneer Missionaries_ (N. Y., 1859), and of his posterity by W. C. Bryant, of Buffalo, in _Amer. Hist. Record_, July, 1873; reprinted in W. W. Beach's _Indian Miscellany_. S. G. Drake told Brant's story in the _Book of the Indians_, and in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, ii. 345; iii. 59. There are references to letters of Brant among the Haldimand Papers, in the _Index of MSS._ (Brit. Mus.), 1880, p. 195. Mr. Lyman C. Draper, of Madison, Wisconsin, has been an amasser of material respecting Brant for forty years, but has not yet published his studies.

[1364] Col. Stone speaks of two conferences held in 1775, one at Ontario and one at Oswego. He says: "Tha-yen-dan-e-gea had accompanied Guy Johnson from the Mohawk Valley first westward to Ontario, thence back to Oswego" (_Brant_, i. p. 149). Lossing, upon the evidence at his command, adopted the same opinion: "Johnson went from Ontario to Oswego" (_Schuyler_, i. p. 355). I have made some effort to discover the site of Ontario, which apparently was to the "westward" of Oswego, but have been unable to find it, and have been forced to the conclusion that the officers who dated their letters from Fort Ontario at Oswego, and who spoke of the post in their correspondence, used the words Ontario and Oswego indifferently to express the same place. Guy Johnson dates several letters at Ontario. Col. Butler, in his correspondence in connection with the St. Leger expedition, dates his letters first at Niagara, then at Ontario. On Guy Johnson's map of the country [see _ante_, p. 609] the site is designated as Fort Ontario, and no other Ontario is put down. Guy Johnson reported that St. Leger had gone "on the proposed expedition by way of Ontario" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. p. 714). We know that he went by Oswego, and except that Col. Butler writes from Ontario, we have no mention of Ontario in any of the accounts of this expedition. Gen. Haldimand, in speaking of the proposed reëstablishment of the post, calls it Oswego (_Ibid._ viii. p. 777). Guy Johnson, in the same connection, calls it Ontario (_Ibid._ p. 775) and Fort Ontario (_Ibid._ p. 780). Rev. Dr. Wheelock, describing Johnson's movements, said he had withdrawn with his family by the way of Oswego (_N. H. Provincial Papers_, vii. p. 548).

Shortly after Johnson's arrival in Montreal he wrote a brief account of his transactions to the Earl of Dartmouth, in which he spoke of the conference at Ontario, but said nothing of a second at Oswego (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. p. 636). This journal, certified by Joseph Chew, Secretary of Indian Affairs, appears to account for his motions continuously during this period, and speaks only of the conference at Ontario. He arrived at Ontario June 17th, embarked at that point July 11th for Montreal, and arrived at the latter place July 17th, with 220 Indians from Ontario (_Ibid._ viii. p. 658; Ketchum's _Buffalo_, i. p. 243). Mr. Berthold Fernow informs me that in Guy Johnson's account for expenses in the Indian Department in 1775 this item occurs: "July 8, 1775. For cash given privately to the chiefs and warriors of the 6 Nations during the treaty at Ontario, £260." No other conference in that immediate neighborhood is mentioned in the _Johnson MSS_. An instance of indifference in the application of the two names will be found in Mrs. Grant's _Memoirs of an American Lady_. Mr. B. B. Burt, of Oswego, writes to me that "there was not any Ontario west of Oswego except the _lake_", and kindly calls my attention to several instances in the records which tend to show the confusion in the use of these names. Among others he refers to a letter of Sir William Johnson's, in which he speaks of Ontario and Oswego, apparently meaning the same place (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. p. 530). A similar instance, as I believe, is to be found in the letter of Capt. Walter N. Butler to Gen. Clinton, Feb. 18, 1779, quoted in Stone's _Brant_, i. p. 384. In this latter case it is not surprising that the identity of the two places was not suspected by Col. Stone. At first sight Butler seems to be speaking of two distinct spots. In Orasmus H. Marshall's _Niagara Frontier, embracing Sketches of its early history and French and English local names_ (1865), Ontario as a town or site is not mentioned. O'Reilly's _Rochester_ contains an Indian account of the alliance, which makes no mention of Ontario (see pp. 388, 389). On the other hand, the Duc de la Rochefoucault Liancourt's _Travels through the United States of North America, the country of the Iroquois and Upper Canada, in the years 1795, 1796, and 1797_, mentions a place called Ontario on the Genessee River, but he gives no other description of it than of the log-cabin where he spent the night.

Hough, in his _Northern Invasion of October, 1780_, gives his reason for disputing Stone's statement that the Oneida settlements were destroyed by the enemy in the winter of 1779-1780. The reasons for believing that Hough was correct are stated elsewhere.

Stone places the invasion of the Schoharie Valley in October, 1780; but Simms (_Frontiersmen_, ii. p. 392 _et seq._) makes it clear that there were two invasions during that year, as indeed Stone himself (vol. ii. p. 97) seems to allow in quoting from Almon's _Remembrancer_ (part ii., 1780).

In his enthusiasm for his hero, Col. Stone is betrayed into calling Brant the principal war-chief of the confederacy; but Morgan, in his _League of the Iroquois_ (p. 103), speaking of the celebrated Joseph Brant Ta-yen-dä-ná-ga, says his "abilities as a military leader secured to him the command of the war parties of the Mohawks during the Revolution. He was also but a chief, and held no other office or title in the nation or in the confederacy." (Ketchum's _Buffalo_, i. p. 331). Stone (ii. p. 448) further says "the Six Nations had adopted from the whites the popular game of ball or cricket", but the _Jesuit Relations_, as well as La Potherie and Charlevoix, would have put him right in this respect.

[1365] Tryon County was formed in 1772 (Albany County then embracing all the northern and western part of the colony), so as to cover all that part of New York State lying west of a line running north and south nearly through the centre of the present Schoharie County. Campbell's work, by its title, therefore fairly included the scene of all the border warfare of New York. Many of the notes in the appendix are valuable, and they contain sketches of the lives of Sir William Johnson, Brant, Gen. Clinton, and Gen. Schuyler; Moses Younglove's account of his captivity and his charges against the English; and an account of the Wyoming massacre. Franklin's successful imitation, the Gerrish letter, is copied (as genuine in the first edition) from a local newspaper of the Revolutionary period. A table of the number of Indians employed by the English in the Revolutionary War is given, and an article, by the author, on the direct agency of the English government in the employment of Indians in the Revolutionary War is reprinted. The sketch of Clinton's life was separately published as _Lecture on the Life and Military Services of General James Clinton, read before the New York Historical Society, Feb., 1839_.

[1366] _Life of Kirkland_, by S. K. Lothrop, in Sparks's _Amer. Biog._, vol. xv. A sketch will also be found in the _History of the town of Kirkland, New York_, by Rev. A. D. Gridley (New York, 1874).

[1367] In the _History of the United States for families and libraries_, by Benson J. Lossing (New York, 1857), the author deals briefly, but accurately, with the events covered by this chapter. Cf. also his earlier _Seventeen Hundred and Seventy-Six_ (New York, 1849).

[1368] Historical writers have been greatly at variance on this point. John M. Brown (pamphlet _History of Schoharie County_, quoted by Simms and Stone) says the event took place in June or July, 1776; but Stone (_Brant_, ii. p. 313), in giving Brown's account, corrects the date to July, 1778. In the Gansevoort Papers Stone found the affair assigned to the close of May, 1778, corresponding with the date in Thacher, and with the account given in McKendry's journal of the disaster to "Capt. Partrick" at "Coverskill;" this was adopted by Simms in his _Frontiersmen_ (ii. p. 151), and Stone put his narrative under this date in his _Brant_ (ii. p. 354). Campbell (_Border Warfare_) places it in 1779, but Stone (_Brant_, ii. p. 412) says that Capt. Patrick could not possibly have commanded the troops, as he was killed in the attack of the previous year. It seems to me that Simms clearly establishes that there was but one attack on Cobleskill.

[1369] See Vol. V. p. 616. Fort Stanwix, which is sometimes spoken of as a log fort, is thus described by Pouchot: "This fort is a square of about ninety toises on the outside, and is built of earth, revetted within and without by great timbers, in the same fashion as those at Oswego" (vol. ii. p. 138). We find no mention of Ontario.

[1370] See _ante_, ch. iv.—ED.

[1371] De Peyster seems to have misinterpreted the language of St. Leger's letter, where St. Leger states that Lieut. Bird was led to suppose that Sir John Johnson needed succor, and in consequence of this false information Bird went to the rescue, thus leaving the camp without defenders. On page cxi, De Peyster says: "The white troops, misled by the false reports of a cowardly Indian, were recalled to the defence of the camp." There is no phrase in any accounts that I have met with in which action on the part of the troops is predicated on the information of a "cowardly Indian", except that contained in St. Leger's account, which De Peyster himself quotes, p. cxxx, as follows: "Lieut. Bird, misled by the information of a cowardly Indian that Sir John was prest had quitted his post; to march to his assistance." In spite of his mistake as to which marched to the other's assistance, on page cxxxiv he says "When the Indians began to slip out of the fight, the Royal Greens must have been hurried to the scene of action, leaving the lines south of the fort entirely destitute of defenders."

[1372] The troops which were intended for St. Leger are named in the _Parl. Reg._, viii. p. 211. He was to have 675 regulars and Tories, "together with a sufficient number of Canadians and Indians." St. Leger was to report to Sir William Howe at Albany. The numbers of the force which he took with him, although different in detail, corresponded as a whole with the estimate. He was so confident of success that at Lachine he detached a sergeant, a corporal, and thirty-two privates to accompany the baggage of the king's royal regiment by way of Lake Champlain to Albany. Ten "old men" were also ordered to be left at Point Clair (_Johnson's Orderly-Book_, p. 63). Carleton on the 26th of June reported as follows: "St. Leger has begun his movement, taking the detachment of the 34th regiment [100 men], the royal regiment of New York increased to about 300 men, and a company of Canadians [say 75 men]. He will be joined by the detachment of the 8th regiment [100 men] and the Indians of the Six Nations with the Misasages, as he proceeds. About 100 Hanau chasseurs have since arrived, and are on their way to join him" (_Parl. Reg._, viii. p. 215). The king's (8th) regiment, which was to join as the expedition proceeded, and the Hanau chasseurs, were at Buck Island July 10th (_Johnson's Orderly-Book_, p. 67). The increase of Johnson's regiment is to be accounted for by the presence of "Jessup's corps" (_Ibid._ p. 36, note 17). This force, apparently numbering 675 men, was increased at Oswego by Butler's rangers, a company of 70 to 75 men, making the total force of whites nominally about 750 men. From that number 44 men had been detached, as above. Forty days' provisions for 500 men were on the 17th of July ordered to be made ready to be embarked. From this order De Peyster and Stone argue that St. Leger's total effective force of whites was 500 men. In the same order Lieut. Collerton was directed "to prepare ammunition for two 6-pounders and 2 cohorns, and 50 rounds ball cartridges per man for 500 men", showing by the same reasoning that there were 500 men who bore muskets. No entry is made in the order-book concerning provisions for the Indians and rangers after leaving Buck Island. Col. Claus reported "150 Mississaugas and Six Nation Indians" at that point (Claus to Secretary Knox, _N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. p. 719), and said that St. Leger had 250 with him when he arrived at Oswego (_Ibid._). Brant joined the expedition at this point with 300 more (_Ibid._). A company of rangers raised by Col. Butler participated in the campaign (Carleton to Germain, July 9 and Sept. 20, 1777, _Parl. Reg._, viii. pp. 220, 224). They apparently joined the expedition at "Ontario", as Butler calls "Oswego." The Western Indians and the Senecas had been summoned by Col. Butler. He reported that "the number of Indians at Ontario and the Senecas at 'three rivers' cannot fall much short of 1,000" (_Ibid._ 226). The Indians were stopped at "three rivers" by Col. Claus; but from those assembled at Oswego and "three rivers", there were "upwards of 800" who went forward with the expedition to Fort Stanwix (Claus to Secretary Knox, _N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. p. 719). Among these were some Senecas, who participated in the ambuscade under the leadership of chiefs of their own tribe, in concurrence with Sir John Johnson and Col. Butler (_Parl. Reg._, viii. p. 226). It is evident that the rations for 500 men did not make provision for the Indians nor for the company of rangers. Making every allowance for the reduction of the force by illness, it would seem as if the allowance of 650 whites to St. Leger's effective force must be within limits. The presence of each separate command alluded to by Carleton in his report of what had gone forward, is recognized at some point in the _Orderly-Book_. The "upwards of 800 Indians" mentioned by Claus makes a total of about 1,450. St. Leger throws a doubt over the number of Indians present by saying that all of them participated in the ambuscade. Both Butler and Claus say there were 400 of them in the fight. The probability is that some of them were engaged in transporting supplies across the portage, and that all in camp were sent forward. Col. Stone gives Brant credit for devising the ambuscade and leading the Indians. Butler says not a ward of Brant, but praises the Senecas. Here again we must resort to conjecture for explanation. It may be that Brant was on one side of the road with his "poor Mohawks", of whose sufferings in the battle he afterwards spoke, while Butler with his Senecas was on the other side. St. Leger's statement that all the Indians went to the front shows one thing at least,—that the force with which he undertook to cut off Willett's 250 men must have been whites. He had men enough with him while engaged in clearing the creek and in transporting provisions—with 80 men at the front, and with Lieut. Bird's command, decoyed from camp by false intelligence—to return to intercept Willett. Cf. _Precis of the Wars in Canada_ (London, 1826), which states that St. Leger's corps "consisted of 700 regulars, with eight pieces of ordnance and about 1,000 Indians."

In all this discussion I have assumed that Sir John Johnson's orderly-book contained all the orders with reference to rations. As such orders were not a necessary part of the record, it may he doubted whether other orders not affecting that corps would not be found in St. Leger's order-book.

[1373] Mary Jemison puts the loss of the Senecas alone above what Claus and Butler reported the total Indian loss. Claus states the British loss at three officers, two or three privates, and thirty-two Indians killed (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. p. 720). Col. Butler puts the English loss in the action at four officers killed and two privates wounded; the Indian loss at thirty-three killed and twenty-nine wounded (_Parl. Reg._, viii. p. 226). Mary Jemison (p. 116) says: "Previous to the battle of Fort Stanwix the British sent for the Indians to come and see them whip the rebels; and at the same time stated that they did not wish to have them fight, but wanted to have them just sit down, smoke their pipes, and look on. Our Indians went, to a man, but, contrary to their expectation, instead of smoking and looking on, they were obliged to fight for their lives; and in the end were completely beaten, with a great loss of killed and wounded. Our Indians alone had thirty-six killed and a great number wounded. Our town exhibited a scene of real sorrow and distress when our warriors returned, recounted their misfortunes, and stated the real loss they had sustained in the engagement. The mourning was excessive, and was expressed by the most doleful yells, shrieks, and howlings, and by inimitable gesticulations."

[1374] The exaggerated rumors of the losses at Minisink which first reached Sullivan's camp were immediately displaced by more accurate accounts. "The accts we rec'd from the Delaware at Minisings on the 29th are more favorable than at first represented. The Tories and savages made a descent upon that settlement, and, having burned several houses, barns, etc., were attacked by a Regt. of Militia, who repulsed and pursued them a considerable distance. Forty men were killed on our side, the Colo. and Major included" (Major Norris's journal in _Publications of the Buffalo Hist. Soc._, i. p. 225).

The account which appears in the _Boston Gazette and Country Journal_, Sept. 6, 1779, is singularly free from exaggeration. Indeed, it underrates the whole affair. It speaks of the destruction of the town as "an excursion on old Minisink", and says the militia marched to the assistance of their neighbors and followed the savages thirty miles into the wilderness. An action ensued in which upwards of twenty of the enemy were killed, and our losses, killed, wounded, and missing, were upwards of thirty. The later accounts are in E. M. Ruttenber's _Orange County_ (Newburgh, 1875); Charles E. Stickney's _Minisink Region_ (Middletown, 1867); in the _N. Y. Columbian_, copied in Niles's _Principles and Acts_, and in Dr. Arnell's _Address to the Med. Soc. of Orange Co._; and the addresses at the dedication of the monument at Goshen (showing forty-five names of the slain), in Samuel W. Eager's _Outline Hist. of Orange County_.

[1375] Almon's _Remembrancer_, viii. 51. The _Boston Gazette and Country Journal_ (July 27, 1778) contains a letter from Samuel Avery, July 15, 1778, giving the "disagreeable intelligence, brought by Mr. Solomon Avery, this moment returned from Wyoming, on the Susquehanna River", which says: "The informant conceives, that of about five thousand inhabitants one half are killed and taken by the enemy prisoners, and the other half fleeing away naked and distressed." The same paper (August 3) contains the Poughkeepsie account.

[1376] Botta's account is reprinted in the _Penna. Register_ (i. 129; cf. vi. 58, 73, 310; vii. 273).

[1377] Miner, in 1806, called Judge Marshall's attention to some of the errors in his account. In 1831 the judge revived the correspondence on the subject, and expressed his intention to avail himself of the information furnished by Mr. Miner.

[1378] William L. Stone, in the _Life and Times of Red Jacket_, referring to his father's _Life of Brant_, says (p. 75): "Indeed, until this work appeared, it was universally believed that Brant and his Mohawk warriors were engaged in the massacre of Wyoming. Gordon, Ramsay, Thacher, and Marshall assert the same thing." Thacher in his account of Wyoming, under date of August 3, does not mention Brant's name, but charges the responsibility for the atrocities upon Col. John Butler.

Ramsay (ii. 323, etc.) mentions Brant's name, but does not charge upon the invaders an indiscriminate slaughter. He says the women and children were permitted to cross the Susquehanna and retreat through the woods to Northampton County. Stone claimed an _alibi_ for Brant in his _Border Wars_, while Caleb Cushing (_Democratic Rev._) thought the case not proved; but Stone, again, in his _Wyoming_, reasserted it, and Peck, in his _Wyoming_ (3d ed., N. Y., 1868), sustains Stone. The question is also discussed by Thomas Maxwell in Schoolcraft's _Indian Tribes_, v. 672.

On this subject see "Letter to the Mohawk chief, Ahyonwaegho, commonly called John Brant, Esq., of the Grand River, Upper Canada, from Thomas Campbell, Jan. 20, 1822", published in the _New Monthly Magazine_, London, 1822 (vol. iv. p. 97).

It has been already stated that the correspondence of Guy Johnson shows that in the plan of campaign Brant's field of operations in 1778 did not include Wyoming. Gen. John S. Clark in a private note quotes from a MS. in the handwriting of Col. Daniel Claus, entitled _Anecdotes of Captain Joseph Brant, 1778_, a copy of which is in the possession of Hon. J. B. Plumb, of Niagara, Canada, a statement that Sakayenwaraghton led the Senecas at Oriskany (1777), and that after the battle a council was held at Canadesege, at which it was agreed that this chieftain should attack Wyoming in the early spring, and that Brant should attack the New York settlements. This MS. further says that the Indians "bore the whole brunt of the action, for there were but two of Butler's rangers killed." What is known of the life of this Seneca chieftain is given by Geo. S. Conover in his pamphlet, _Sayengueraghta, King of the Senecas_ (Waterloo, 1885).

[1379] Ryerson in his _Loyalists of America_ (ii. ch. 34) compares the accounts of Wyoming given by Ramsay, Bancroft, Tucker, and Hildreth, and credits Hildreth with the most accurate story. He copies Stone's account from the _Life of Brant_, and expresses himself in approbation of it. There is an account of the Wyoming affair in _The History of Connecticut from the first Settlement to the present time_, by Theodore Dwight, Jr. (New York, 1841), which is unusually full of errors. I should be strongly inclined to quote here from the pages of Murray's _Impartial History of the present War_, etc., to show that British opinions were as strongly pronounced in their expressions against the reported acts of Butler, and that they held the authorities who permitted him to bear a commission responsible, were it not that I find so many pages in this book identical with _An Impartial History of the War in America_, which was published about the same time in Boston, that I am at a loss to determine which was the original book. The two books are not in all respects the same. The one purports to be an English composition, the other an American recital. Phrases in which the enemy are alluded to in the one are reversed in the other, while topics which are elaborated in one are barely mentioned in the other; still, there are enough pages identical in the two, except for the toning down of the adjectives, to make me doubtful of the authorship of the Rev. James Murray. The bibliography of these books is examined elsewhere in this _History_.

[1380] In order to show what has been accepted as history on this point, I quote a portion of the account in this history, which is typical: "After the savages had completed their work of slaughter in the field, they proceeded immediately to invest Fort Kingston, in which Col. Dennison had been left with the small remnant of Butler's troops and the defenceless women and children. In such a state of weakness the defence of the fort was out of the question; and all that remained to Dennison was to attempt to gain some advantageous terms by the offer of a surrender. For this purpose he went himself to the savage chief; but that inhuman monster, that Christian cannibal, replied to the question of terms that he should grant them _the hatchet_. He was more than true to his word, for when, after resisting until all his garrison were killed or disabled, Col. Dennison was compelled to surrender at discretion, his merciless conqueror, tired of scalping, and finding the slow process of individual murder insufficient to glut his appetite, shut up all that remained in the houses and barracks, and by the summary aid of fire reduced all at once to one promiscuous heap of ashes. Nothing now remained that wore the face of resistance to these savage invaders but the little fort of Wilksborough, into which about seventy of Col. Butler's men had effected their retreat, as has been said. These, with about the same number of Continental soldiers, constituted its whole force, and when their enemy appeared before them they surrendered without even asking conditions, under the hope that their voluntary obedience might find some mercy. But mercy dwelt not in the bosoms of these American Tories; submission could not stay their insatiable thirst of blood. The cruelties and barbarities which were practised upon these unresisting soldiers were even more wanton, if possible, than those which had been exhibited at Fort Kingston. The seventy Continental soldiers, _because_ they were _Continental_ soldiers, were deliberately butchered in cruel succession; and then a repetition of the same scene of general and promiscuous conflagration took place, which had closed the tragedy at the other fort. Men, women, and children were locked up in the houses, and left to mingle their cries and screams with the flames that mocked the power of an avenging God."

[1381] Chapman's sketch, although it repeats many of the errors in the popular accounts, says that the women and children fled from the valley. It also gives a copy of the articles of capitulation at the final surrender (note ii.). This account is a long step towards the story as at present accepted.

[1382] It is also given, with other official documents, in Dawson's _Battles_, i. ch. 38.

[1383] This report is also given in a sketch of the life of Zebulon Butler, which forms a part of the article headed Edmund Griffin Butler, in Geo. B. Kulp's _Families of the Wyoming Valley_ (Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1885, vol. i.).

[1384] Bancroft has necessarily treated such events briefly, but the peculiar facilities which he has enjoyed for gaining access to the papers in foreign archives give especial value to his statistics in connection with such incidents in the war as the battle of Oriskany and the destruction of Wyoming.

[1385] In the _N. E. Hist. and Gen. Register_ (xiv. p. 265) an article, "Mrs. Skinner and the Massacre at Wyoming", by D. Williams Patterson, opens with a quotation from Col. Stone's book, and then proceeds as follows: "The above account, which was probably taken by Col. Stone from a newspaper article, published soon after the death of Mrs. Skinner, contains so many errors that it seems proper to place on record a version of the story more nearly in accordance with facts." The facts stated are of a biographical and genealogical character.

[1386] In a previous note I have reproduced one of the typical accounts of the Wyoming massacre, as the story was told by the earlier historians. The details given in accounts of that class were accepted for a long time without question. Fortunately for the good name of the human race, Butler, with all his responsibility for the wrongs done during the continuance of this border warfare, was not the inhuman wretch which he was represented to be, and the wholesale slaughter of the women and children turned out to be a pure invention. Horrors enough remain unchallenged to raise a doubt if even now all errors have been removed. I have not introduced any of these shocking stories in my narrative, but they can be found in Chapman, Miner, and Stone.

The story of the horrors of the night is told in Hubbard's _Life of Van Campen_ in such a way as to make it seem more probable than the same story appears when read in some of the other accounts.

Among the more general accounts are those in Egle's _Pennsylvania_; Hollister's _Connecticut_, with a good account of the Connecticut colony in Pennsylvania; H. Hollister's _Lackawana Valley_ (N. Y., 1857), following Miner closely; Stuart Pearce's _Luzerne County_ (Philadelphia, 1860); Campbell's _Tryon County_, App.; Mrs. E. F. Ellet's _Domestic Hist. of the Amer. Rev._ (N. Y., 1850), ch. 13, and her _Women of the Amer. Rev._ (N. Y., 1856), ii. 165; Henry Fergus's _United States_ in Lardner's _Cab. Cyclopædia_, reproducing the old erroneous accounts; and even so late a history as _Cassell's United States_, by Edmund Ollier, is little better. A marked instance of the heedless method of popular historians is J. A. Spencer's _United States_ (N. Y., 1858), who seems to have followed at that late day Thacher as he found his account in Lossing, _Seventeen Seventy-Six_ (_Hist. Mag._, ii. 126-128), which author reasonably complained that if he were to be trusted at all, he should have been taken in the later research of his _Field-Book_, or even of his school history, since Dr. Spencer was fond of quoting such authorities.

Poole's _Index_ gives references to several periodical articles. Chief among such contributions are those in the _Worcester Mag._, i. 37; the reviews of Peck in the _Methodist Quarterly_ (3d ser., xviii. p. 577, and the 4th ser., vol. xl.), and the paper in _Household Words_, xviii. p. 282; A. H. Guernsey in _Harper's Mag._, xvii. 306 (also see vii. 613); L. W. Peck in _National Mag._, v. 147; Erastus Brooks in the _Southern Lit. Messenger_, vii. 553.

The whole subject of the invasion of the valley was reviewed by Steuben Jenkins in an historical address, which is embodied in "_A record of the one hundredth year commemorative observances of the battle and massacre_", etc., etc., edited by Wesley Johnson (Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1882).

The bibliography of Wyoming, by H. E. Hayden, is given in the _Proc. of the Wyoming Valley Hist. and Geol. Soc._ (1885).

[1387] There are contemporary letters in the _Hist. Mag._, x. 172.

[1388] The story of Cherry Valley is one of the numerous incidents connected with the border war included in the _Historical Collections of the State of New York_, edited by John W. Barber and Henry Howe (New York, 1845). Such accounts in this work are generally transferred bodily from Campbell or Stone, but occasionally some old newspaper cutting is reproduced. At the celebration in 1840, addresses were made by William W. Campbell and by William H. Seward. They were published in pamphlet form, and Mr. Campbell printed his own address as a note to the 2d edition of the _Annals of Tryon County_.

The speeches made at centennial anniversary in 1878 were published in the _Centennial Celebration of the State of New York_ (Albany, 1879). The main address was delivered by Major Douglass Campbell (p. 359). Cf. H. C. Goodwin's _Cortland County_ (N. Y., 1859); Dawson's _Battles_, i. ch. 45; Lossing's _Field-Book_, i. 268, 297.

[1389] _Ibid._, Jan. 4, 1779, has a letter from Cherry Valley, dated Nov. 24, 1778.

[1390] See _Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc._, 1886. One hundred copies of McKendry's journal were privately printed from these proceedings in 1886, with the title,—_1779_. _Sullivan's Expedition against the Indians of New York_, edited by the writer of this chapter.

[1391] See note E, at the end of this chapter.—ED.

[1392] In a note, vol. iii. p. 312, he says: "Sullivan in his account says forty: but if a few old houses which had been deserted for years were met with and burnt, they were put down for a town. Stables and wood hovels and lodges in the field, when the Indians were called to work, these were all reckoned as houses." He charges that Sullivan was importunate in absurd demands for supplies, and amongst other things called for eggs to take upon his Indian campaign. This statement of Gordon undoubtedly rests upon something which he had seen in print. Is it not probable that his prejudice prevented him from seeing the humor in a newspaper squib inserted by some wag, in which Sullivan's slow movements and pertinacious demands for supplies are thus ridiculed? Cf. Eben Hazard in _Belknap Papers_, i. 23. The writers of "Allen's History" follow the same lead. "He lived during the march in every species of extravagance, was constantly complaining to Congress that he was not half supplied, and daily amused himself in unwarrantable remarks to his young officers respecting the imbecility of Congress and the board of war" (_Allen's Amer. Rev._, ii. 277). Bancroft (x. 231) speaks of Sullivan as "wasting his time writing strange theological essays", and gives him credit for destroying only "eighteen towns."

[1393] The attendant controversies touching Sullivan's career as a soldier and a legislator are examined in another place in this _History_, but reference may be here made to T. C. Amory's paper on this expedition in the _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iv. 420, and to another on the same subject in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xx. 88.

[1394] Quotations from Haldimand's correspondence and speeches are given elsewhere. The openness of Clinton's movements seemed to Washington such a complete betrayal of the whole scheme that on the 1st of July he wrote to Sullivan that Clinton "had transported, and by last accounts was transporting, provisions and stores for his whole brigade three months, and two hundred and twenty or thirty batteaux to receive them; by which means, in the place of having his design concealed till the moment of execution, and forming his junction with you, in a manner by surprise, it is announced" (Sparks's _Washington_, vi. p. 281). During the whole of this hazardous proceeding Clinton was not molested, nor did Haldimand seem to derive any conception of what it meant. Yet Washington was so far right in saying that the intention of the movement was "announced" that on the 5th of July the following appeared in the _Boston Gazette and Country Journal_: "The stores are all arrived, and the greatest exertions are made by Gen. Clinton to transport them unto Lake Otsego, over a carrying-place of about thirty miles. Everything will be then ready to go down the Susquehanna and join Gen. Sullivan."

[1395] The latest official figures given by Sullivan are those of July 21st,—2,312 rank and file; the entire number given in the report footing up, according to Craft, 2,539. In the same estimate, Craft puts Clinton's force at 1,400, and the total marching column at 3,100 to 3,200 men. It was promised by Washington that Lieut.-Col. Pawling should join Clinton at Anaguaga with 200 men (Sparks's _Washington_, vi. p. 275). Stone says Clinton was joined at "Oghkwaga" by a detachment of Col. Pawling's levies from Wawarsing (_Brant_, ii. p. 18). Peabody in his _Life of Sullivan_ makes the same statement. Bleeker in his order-book makes no mention of Pawling's regiment. Erkuries Beatty, August 16th, says: "Major Church marched to meet the militia here. Returned in the evening and saw nothing of them" (_Cayuga Co. Hist. Soc. Coll._ no. i. p. 64). McKendry in his journal corroborates this statement (_Sullivan's Expedition against the Indians_, p. 30). In a letter (Aug. 24, 1779) from Gen. Clinton to his brother, contained in the Sparks collection, the general states that the expected reinforcement by Pawling was not effected. _Geo. Clinton papers—Sparks MSS._, no. xii. (Harvard Col. library).

[1396] Washington in his instructions to Sullivan had insisted that Sullivan should dispense with everything possible, on the ground that the delays incident to the transportation of a great bulk of stores might balk the expedition (Sparks, vi. 264; _Hist. Mag._, xii., Sept., 1867, p. 139). He was indignant when he heard that Clinton had taken to great a quantity of stores with him. Referring to this, Sullivan wrote to Clinton, July 11, 1779 saying "Gen. Washington has wrote to me as he has to you, but I have undeceived him by showing him that in case you depended on our magazines for stores we must all starve together, as the commissaries have deceived us in every article" (Bleeker's _Order-book_, p. 15). Lt.-Col. Adam Hubley wrote to the President of Pennsylvania: "Our expedition is carrying on rather slow, owing to the delay in provisions, etc. I sincerely pity Gen. Sullivan's situation. People who are not acquainted with the reasons of the delay, I'm informed, censure him, which is absolutely cruel and unjust" (_Penna. Archives_, vii. p. 554). "The long stay at Wyoming was owing to the infamous conduct of the commissaries and quartermasters employed in furnishing the necessary provisions and stores. And finally, when the army did move, it was so scantily supplied that the success of the expedition is by that means rendered exceedingly precarious" (Diary of Jabez Campfield, surgeon, etc., _N. J. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 2d Series, iii. p. 118). "Various opinions prevailed about our proceeding any further on account of our provisions" (Hubley, in Miner's _History_, App., p. 97).

[1397] Sullivan to Col. John Cook, July 30, 1779: "Nothing could afford me more pleasure than to relieve the distressed, or to have it in my power to add to the safety of your settlement; but should I comply with your requisition, it would most effectually answer the intentions of the enemy, and destroy the grand objects of this expedition" (_Penna. Arch._, vii. p. 593).

[1398] "We converted some old tin kettles, found in the Indian settlements, into large graters, and obliged every fourth man not on guard to sit up all night and grate corn, which would make meal, something like hominy. The meal was mixed with boiled squash or pumpkin, when hot, and kneaded into cakes and baked at the fire" (Nathan Davis, in _Hist. Mag._, April, 1868, p. 203).

[1399] Adam Hubley says 500 savages, 200 Tories (Miner's _History_, Appendix, p. 93); Daniel Livermore says 600 chosen savages (_N. H Hist. Soc. Coll._, vi. p. 308); Lieut. Barton, 200 whites, 500 Indians (_N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc._, ii. p. 31); Daniel Gookin, 600 Indians, 14 regulars, 200 Tories (_N. E. Hist. and Gen. Reg._, xvi. p. 27); Jabez Campfield, 1,000 strong, 300 or 400 of whom were Tories (_N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc._, iii. 2d Series, p. 124); George Grant, 1,500 (_Hazard's Reg._, xiv. p. 74); Major Norris, 1,500 Indians (Jones's _New York_, vol. ii. p. 613); Gen. Sullivan, 1,500 (_Remembrancer_, ix. p. 158); Rev. David Craft, after a study of the subject, estimates the force at 200 to 250 whites, and probably not less than 1,000 Indians (_Centennial Celebration_, etc., p. 127, note). Cf. _Mag. Amer. Hist._, iv. 420, and F. Barber's letter in _Sparks MSS._, xlix. vol. iii.

[1400] Dr. Campfield says: "The Indian houses might have been comfortable had they made any convenience for the smoke to be conveyed out; only a hole in the middle of the top of the roof of the house. The Indians are exceedingly dirty; the rubage of one of their houses is enough to stink the whole country" (_N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc._, iii., 2d Series, p. 132). Erkuries Beatty, speaking of the houses at Onoguaga, says that they were good log houses, with stone chimneys and glass windows (_Cayuga Hist. Soc. Coll._, no. i. p. 64). Van Campen says that the houses were generally built by fixing large posts in the ground, at a convenient distance from each other, between which poles were woven. This formed the covering of the sides. The roof was made by laying bark upon poles, which were properly placed as a support. To afford greater warmth the sides were plastered with mud. The houses that were found on the route were all of this description (John N. Hubbard's _Border Adventures of Major. Moses Van Campen_, Bath, N. Y. 1842). "They were built chiefly with split and hewn timbers, covered with bark and some other rough materials, without chimneys or floors" (Norris in Jones's _New York_, ii. p. 613). Col. Dearborn (_MS. Journal_) uses almost identical language with Norris. "Newtown—here are some good buildings of the English construction" (Capt. Daniel Livermore, in _N. H. Hist. Coll._, vi. pp. 308-335). The huts or wigwams were constructed of bark, and very narrow in proportion to their length, some being thirty or forty feet long, and not more than ten feet wide, generally with a bark floor, except in the centre, where there was a place for the fire (Nathan Davis, in _Hist. Mag._, April, 1868, p. 202). According to Hubley, Chemung contained fifty or sixty houses built of logs and frames; Catharine's town, fifty houses, in general very good; Canadea, about forty well-finished houses, and everything about it seemed neat and well improved; Kanadalauga, between twenty and thirty well-finished houses, chiefly of hewn plank; Anayea, twelve houses, chiefly of hewn logs (_Penna. Archives_, 2d Series, vol. xi.). Nukerck describes the houses at "Kandaia" as "large and elegant; some beautifully painted" (Campbell, _Annals Tryon County_, p. 155); speaking of "Kanandagua", he says: "This town, from the appearance of the buildings, seems to have been inhabited by white people. Some houses have neat chimneys, which the Indians have not, but build a fire in the centre, around which they gather" (_Ibid._ p. 157). McKendry speaks of the "cellars and walls" of the houses at "Onnaguago", and says it was a "fine settlement, considering they were Indians." This place had been destroyed fifteen years before by Capt. Montour, and Sir William Johnson then described it as having houses "built of square logs, with good chimneys" (_N. Y. Col. Docs._, vii. p. 628). McKendry says some of the houses at "Appletown" were of "hew'd timber." At "Canondesago", some of them built with hewed timber and part with round timber and part with bark.

[1401] Hildreth and others speak of Niagara as if it were Sullivan's objective point. John C. Hamilton (_History of the Republic_, i. p. 543) says: "Instructions from Hamilton's pen were addressed to Sullivan", etc. (p. 544). "A surprise of the garrison at Niagara and of the shipping on the lakes was to be attempted." By whom was Niagara to be surprised? Hamilton leaves it to be inferred that Sullivan was instructed to attempt it, whereas it was only mentioned as one of the possible advantages to be gained from the Indians in case they should sue for peace.

[1402] Washington's letters in Sparks, and in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, Feb., 1879, p. 142.

[1403] Ryerson in his _Loyalists of America_, etc., devotes a chapter to the Sullivan campaign, which he terms "Revenge for Wyoming." He confounds Zebulon Butler with William Butler, which is not perhaps to be wondered at, for Campbell and Stone did the same thing, although the fact that there were two English officers of the name of Butler engaged in the border wars on the English side, and two American officers of the same name opposed to them in the same campaigns, and the further fact that at Wyoming the forces on each side were commanded by a Butler, were warnings enough that especial scrutiny should be observed in distinguishing these persons.

[1404] General Stryker (p. 7) gives Clinton's force at 1,700, and Sullivan's at 3,500. He states that his account was compiled from twenty published (by typographical error, the compositor has put thirty) and five unpublished diaries. He suggests that Sullivan's delay may possibly have been a part of Washington's strategy. T. C. Amory shares this opinion.

Sullivan's fight at Newtown is thus described by H. C. Goodwin in _Pioneer History of Cortland Co._, etc.: "The contest was one which has but few parallels. The enemy yielded inch by inch, and when finally forced at the point of the bayonet to leave their intrenchments and flee, terror-stricken, to the mountain gorges or almost impassable _lagoons_, the ground they had occupied was found literally drenched with the blood of the fallen victims." Accounts of varying length are given in other local histories: _Delaware County and Border Wars of New York_, etc., by Jay Gould (Roxbury, 1856); _Centennial History of Erie County, New York_, by Crisfield Johnson (Buffalo, 1876); _Annals of Binghamton and of the Country connected with it, from he earliest settlement_, by J. B. Wilkinson (Binghamton, 1840); _History of the Pioneer Settlement of Phelps and Gorham's Purchase, and Morris reserve, etc._, by O. Turner (Rochester, 1851); J. M. Parker's _Rochester_ (1884, p. 236); Ketchum's _Buffalo_ (ii. 318); Campbell's _Tryon County_; Simms's _Frontiersmen_, etc.

There is a monograph on the campaign by A. T. Norton,—_Hist. of Sullivan's Campaign_ (1879),—and special chapters in Dawson (i. 537), and accounts in the more general works, like Stone's _Brant_; Ryerson's _Loyalists_ (ii. 108), examining Stone's account; O. W. B. Peabody's _Life of Sullivan_; Hamilton's _Republic of the U. S._; some local traditions in Timothy Dwight's _Travels_ (iv. 204). Gen. J. Watts De Peyster has some essays on the campaign in the _N. Y. Mail_, Aug. 26, 29, and Sept. 15, 1879.

There are various letters respecting the campaign in the Gansevoort Papers, as copied by Sparks (_Sparks MSS._, vol. lx.). Cf. the autobiography of Philip van Cortlandt in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, ii. 289, and William M. Willett's _Narrative of the military actions of Col. Marinus Willett_ (N. Y., 1831).

[1405] The New Jersey Historical Society has a MS. order-book kept by Lieutenant-Colonel Barber, of the Third New Jersey Regiment, who was also appointed deputy adjutant-general for the Western army. The last entry made is dated Sept. 6, 1779. In Hammersly, and in the roster compiled by General Stryker, Francis Barber is put down as lieutenant-colonel of this regiment. This order-book has been attributed by some to George C. Barber. The library of Cornell University owns one kept by Thomas Gee, quartermaster's sergeant in Col. John Lamb's regiment of artillery, which contains the orders of the day issued at Fort Sullivan from Aug. 27, 1779, to Oct. 2, 1779 also the return march to Easton, the last entry being Oct. 26, 1779. My knowledge of these MS. order-books was derived from Gen. John S. Clark, of Auburn, N. Y. I am indebted to Hon. Steuben Jenkins for details concerning the Barber order-book, and to Professor Moses Coit Tyler, of Cornell University, for a description of the Gee order-book. Dr. F. B. Hough edited the _Order-book of Capt. Leonard Bleeker, major of brigade in the early part of the expedition under Gen. James Clinton against the Indians in the Campaign of 1779_ (N. Y., 1865). On Clinton's share in the expedition, see W. W. Campbell's _Services of James Clinton_ (N.Y. Hist. Soc., 1839); Chaplain Gano's _Biog. Memoirs_ (1806). For a portrait of Clinton, see Irving's _Washington_, 4^o ed., v., and Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 112.

[1406] Craft, May 9, 1879, had already furnished a list of journals of the campaign, and had appealed to the public for further information (_Penna. Mag. of Hist._, iii. pp. 348, 349).

[1407] See note E, at end of chapter.—ED.

[1408] The journals thus used are Erkuries Beatty's, covering Clinton's movements; Thomas Grant's and George Grant's, covering the march up the east side of Lake Cayuga; and Henry Dearborn's, for the march up the west side of the same lake.

[1409] _Boston Gazette and Country Journal_, Nov. 1, 1779.

[1410] The expedition is referred to by Gordon, Ramsay, and Marshall, each of these writers giving a brief account of the march and the work accomplished. On the 27th of October, 1779, Congress resolved that "the thanks of Congress be given to his excellency General Washington for directing, and to Colonel Brodhead and the brave officers and soldiers under his command for executing, the important expedition against the Mingo and Munsey Indians, and that part of the Senecas on the Allegheny River, by which the depredations of those savages, assisted by their merciless instigators, subjects of the King of Great Britain, upon the defenceless inhabitants of the Western frontiers have been restrained and prevented."

[1411] A descriptive article entitled "Mohawk Valley in the Revolution", by Harold Frederic, was published in _Harper's Magazine_ (lv. p. 171). Cf. _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Oct., 1879. The activity of the Tories and Indians in the Mohawk Valley gave rise from time to time to various rumors, some of which found their way into print. It was stated in 1779 that Fort Stanwix had surrendered to the English. This was repeated in a pamphlet of the day, a mere chronological register of events, published in 1783, and entitled _The American and British Chronicle of War and Politics; being an accurate and comprehensive Register of the most memorable occurrences in the last ten years of his Majesty's reign, etc. From May 10, 1773, to July 16, 1783_. The entry of Nov. 2, 1779, was, "Col. Butler, with some Indians, surprise and take Fort Stanwix, Mohawk River." In 1780 this rumor was repeated, and found its way into the _Remembrancer_ (x. 347): "New York, Sept. 23.... We are informed that about a fortnight ago Fort Stanwix, after having been five or six weeks closely invested, was taken by 600 British troops commanded by a Lieutenant-Colonel, supposed to be the King's or 8th Regiment: Our faithful friend, Capt. Joseph Brant, with a party of Indians, shared in the glory of the conquest."

Occasionally we meet, in the accounts of the fighting in the Mohawk Valley and vicinity, with the statement that some Indian was present who was commissioned by the Continental Congress. In the _Journals of Congress_ (v. 133) we find that on the 3d of April, 1779, the board of war submitted a report, whereupon it was resolved, "That twelve blank commissions be transmitted to the commissioners of Indian affairs for the Northern Department, and that they or any two of them be empowered to fill them up with the names of faithful chiefs of the Oneidas and Tuscaroras, giving them such rank as said commissioners shall judge they merit." (Cf. _Remembrancer_, viii. p. 121)

[1412] Stone relied upon the statement of John T. Kirkland (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, iv. p. 69): "In the year 1780, the hostile Indians, British troops, and refugees drove them from their villages", etc.

[1413] _Sparks MSS._ (Harvard College library,—no. xiii. p. 281), where are various letters of John Butler, Brant, Lt.-Col. Bolton, etc., taken from the headquarters or Carleton Papers, and they include Brant's report on the Minisink affair and Butler's report of the Newtown fight. The letter of Guy Johnson is in Ketchum's _Buffalo_ (i. 337).