Vindication of the Captors of Major John Andre E-Book

Egbert Benson

• Herausgeber: Charles River Editors
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 80

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

Vindication of the Captors of Major John Andre is a history of the patriots who captured British spy John Andre.

Das E-Book Vindication of the Captors of Major John Andre wird angeboten von Charles River Editors und wurde mit folgenden Begriffen kategorisiert:
revolutionary war; spy; culper ring; talmadge; simcoe

Leseprobe

VINDICATION OF THE CAPTORS OF MAJOR JOHN ANDRE

..................

Egbert Benson

LACONIA PUBLISHERS

Thank you for reading. If you enjoy this book, please leave a review or connect with the author.

All rights reserved. Aside from brief quotations for media coverage and reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced or distributed in any form without the author’s permission. Thank you for supporting authors and a diverse, creative culture by purchasing this book and complying with copyright laws.

Copyright © 2016 by Egbert Benson

Interior design by Pronoun

Distribution by Pronoun

TABLE OF CONTENTS

“CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

From the New York Courier, February 18, 1817,—Mr. Barent Gardenier the Editor.

Isaac Van Wart’s affidavit.

John Paulding’s affidavit.

Extract from an Act of the Legislature of the 24th June, 1780, “more effectually to prevent supplies of cattle to the enemy.”

Extracts of letters from General Washington tothe president of congress.

REMARKS.

VINDICATION

OF THE

CAPTORS OF MAJOR ANDRE.

BY

EGBERT BENSON.

VINDICATION

OF THE

CAPTORS OF MAJOR ANDRE.

“CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

..................

“JANUARY 18, 1817.

“MR. CHAPPELL MADE A REPORT unfavourable to the petition of John Paulding, (one of the citizens who captured the British Adjutant General Major Andre, during the late Revolutionary War,) who prays for an increase of the pension allowed to him by government in consequence of that service.

“A debate of no little interest arose on this question, the early part of which our reporter did not hear.

“Mr. Wright moved to reverse the report of the committee, and to declare that the prayer of the petitioner ought to be granted.

“The report was opposed by Messrs. Wright, Smith of Md., Gold, Forsyth, Robertson, and Sharp, on the ground of the importance of the services of this person and his companions, the magnitude of the virtue they displayed, and the justice of making such an addition to the pension allowed to them, as should keep pace with the depreciation of money since the amount of that pension was established. The report was supported by Messrs. Chappell, Jewitt, Tallmadge, and Pickering, on the injustice of legislating on a single case of pension for services, which were, in fact, though important, but the common duty of every citizen, and in which no disability was incurred; whilst there were many survivors of the Revolution, whom the favour of the government had not distinguished, and who are languishing in obscurity and want, and to whom no relief had been or would be extended.

“What gave interest principally to the debate, was the disclosure, by Mr. Tallmadge of Connecticut, (an officer at the time, and commanding the advance guard when Major Andre was brought in,) of his view of the merit of this transaction, with which history and the records of the country have made every man familiar. The value of the service he did not deny, but, on the authority of the declarations of Major Andre, (made while in the custody of Colonel Tallmadge,) he gave it as his opinion that, if Major Andre could have given to these men the amount they demanded for his release, he never would have been hung for a spy, nor in captivity on that occasion. Mr. T’s statement was minutely circumstantial, and given with expressions of his individual confidence in its correctness. Among other circumstances, he stated, that when Major Andre’s boots were taken off by them, it was to search for plunder, and not to detect treason. These persons, indeed, he said, were of that class of people who passed between both armies; as often in one camp as the other, and whom, had he met with them, he should probably as soon have apprehended as Major Andre, as he had always made it a rule to do with these suspicious persons. The conclusion to be drawn from the whole of Mr. Tallmadge’s statement, of which this is a brief abstract, was, that these persons had brought in Major Andre, only because they should probably get more for his apprehension than his release.

“This statement was received with surprise and incredulity, as to Major Andre’s correctness, by the gentlemen on the other side of the question. It was very extraordinary, it was said, that at a day so much nearer the transaction than at the present, there had existed no doubt on the subject, and Congress, as a mark of public gratitude for their honourable conduct on this important occasion, settled on these persons pensions for life. Though testimony was strongly stated by one of the gentlemen (General Smith) to Major Andre’s high character and honour, it was impossible, it was said, that the character and conduct of the men should have been at this day represented, yet so differently depicted. The statement of Major Andre, subject as it must have been to be discoloured by the misapprehensions of the character and motives of Americans, among whom patriotism pervades every rank in life, it was urged, ought to have no weight, indeed it ought not to have been mentioned, in competition with facts on record, and established by full investigation, during the life-time of General Washington, who certainly knew all the circumstances of the transaction.

“Though this topic made a prominent figure in the debate, it is perhaps proper to say, that the question was decided on the ground taken in the report, and above stated as having been urged in the debate in favour of it.

“A motion was made by Mr. Forsyth, (and lost,) to postpone the report, to give further time to examine the correctness of the extraordinary view of the subject, which had been presented by Mr. Tallmadge.

“It was moved to amend the resolution, so as to direct the committee to report a bill for increasing the compensation of the other two of the captors of Major Andre yet surviving, as well as of the petitioner, which motion was negatived.

“The question on the reversing the report of the committee was decided in the negative; ayes 53, noes 80 or 90.

“Mr. Little having made an unsuccessful motion to postpone the further consideration of the report, in the hope that a full examination would be made of the question to-day raised as to the merits of these men, whom history described as pure and incorruptible patriots, and whom he fully believed to have been so:—

“The report was agreed to.”

FROM THE NEW YORK COURIER, FEBRUARY 18, 1817,—MR. BARENT GARDENIER THE EDITOR.

..................

“VINDICATION OF VAN WART, PAULDING, and Williams, the three virtuous and patriotic American Yeomen, who arrested Major Andre.

“Colonel Benjamin Tallmadge, a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, in a speech which he lately delivered in that body, ventured to ascribe to the celebrated captors of Andre, a character the most infamous and detestable; and to their conduct, on that occasion, motives the most sordid and odious. He accused these men of being as often in the camp of the enemies of their country, as in our own; of being men, destitute not only of patriotism, but of common honesty and honour; of belonging to that detestable gang usually known by the name of cow-boys. He charged them, in effect, therefore, with being the vilest of thieves and robbers; and in doing so, represented General Washington and the Congress as bestowing the public praise and the public bounty upon wretches, utterly base and contemptible, from mere motives of policy. There was, in this attempt, an intrepidity worthy of a better cause; but at the same time a rashness which he will never cease to repent. Col. Tallmadge has endeavoured to tear the fairest leaf from our history, and to deprive the yeomenry of our country of a theme in which they gloried, and of an example, whose influence is not less extensive and important, than was that of the immortal William Tell. If he has done so, when there was the least possibility that he might be in an error, he could never upon reflection justify himself But if he has done so upon slight, upon very slight grounds; not from his own knowledge, but from the calumnies of the envious, and the mere suspicions of an enemy, he has incurred a responsibility which he must meet; a responsibility, from which the personal respect with which he may have been heretofore regarded, ought not to protect him, nor general coincidence of political opinion to release him.

“Upon what grounds did the Colonel accuse these men of being cowboys? of being as often in the enemy’s camp, as in our own? Did he know the facts? If he did, he must have seen them steal; he must have seen them in the enemy’s camp! But he does not pretend this. What then is the evidence of these facts? At most, hearsay—which might indeed be true—but it might also be, as in fact it was, false. This evidence was assuredly too loose for the charge he advanced—against men whose service had certainly been important; and who, absent, were not in a condition to justify themselves. The Colonel is a Christian. Did he here observe the golden rule? The Colonel has his enemies: how would he feel, if the community should judge of his character, by their calumnies?

“The utmost that can be said in palliation of Col. Tallmadge’s conduct, is, that he believed what he said to be true. He believed them to be cow-boy plunderers, because he heard so! He believed they would have permitted Andre to proceed, if he had had more to give them, because Andre said