Food on Arnold’s March to Quebec

Lots of things didn’t work out as planned with Benedict Arnold’s expedition to Quebec, and food was one of them. The army took a lot of food with them, but perhaps not enough, and a lot of what they took got spoiled; for example, they had some barrels of dry bread, but water leaked into them, “swelled the bread, burst the casks, as well as soured the whole bread. The same fate attended a number of fine casks of peas.”

By early October, wrote surgeon Isaac Senter, the army had little more to eat than salt pork and flour. By late October, they hardly even had any of that. Senter recorded some memorable things that they ate.

October 25th: “I found them [a few soldiers who were giving up and turning back for fear of starving to death] almost destitute of any eatable whatever, except a few candles, which were used for supper, and breakfast the next morning, by boiling them in water gruel, &c.”

October 27th: “Our bill of fare for last night and this morning consisted of the jawbone of a swine destitute of any covering. This we boiled in a quantity of water, that with a little thickening constituted our sumptuous eating.”

November 1st: “Our greatest luxuries now consisted in a little water, stiffened with flour, in imitation of shoemakers’ paste, which was christened with the name of Lillipu. Instead of the diarrhea, which tried our men most shockingly in the former part of our march, the reverse was now the complaint, which continued for many days. We had now arrived as we thought to almost the zenith of distress. Several had been entirely destitute of either meat or bread for many days. … The voracious disposition many of us had now arrived at, rendered almost any thing admissible. In company was a poor dog, [who had] hitherto lived through all the tribulations, became a prey for the sustenance of the assassinators. This poor animal was instantly devoured, without leaving any vestige of the sacrifice. Nor did the shaving soap, pomatum [a salve or ointment that was used kind of like hair gel], and even the lip salve, leather of their shoes, cartridge boxes, &c., share any better fate…”

A soldier named Richard Vining wrote about eating an owl.

Fortunately, on November 2nd, some men who had gone ahead sent back some food from a Canadian settlement, and the soldiers “sat down, eat our rations, blessed our stars, and thought it luxury.”

Sources

The Journal of Isaac Senter on a Secret Expedition against Quebec.

The Revolution Remembered: Eyewitness Accounts of the War for Independence. Edited by John C. Dann.

Dr. Benjamin Church: First American to Spy for the British

“I think it best to introduce Mr. Maxwell to General Washington,” wrote Henry Ward to General Nathanael Greene, “and for you and the General, with not more than one trusty person besides, to consider as to the most prudent measures to discover the traitor.” This was the first hint that George Washington and his fellow officers had of a high-ranking spy in their midst.

Dr. Benjamin Church, a prominent revolutionary, was arrested as a spy in September 1775.

The detection of the spy happened largely by accident. A baker named Godfrey Wainwood, living in Newport, Rhode Island, had received a visit from an acquaintance of his, a young woman from Massachusetts. She wanted his help to deliver a letter to a British official who could send it into Boston (then besieged by American troops) by ship. Wainwood thought this a bit odd, but he agreed to help. She left the letter with him, trusting that he would deliver it soon, and went back to Cambridge, Massachusetts.

That was in late July 1775. Wainwood was suspicious that somebody at Cambridge — the American army headquarters — might be acting as a spy and trying to secretly send information to the British army in Boston. But if the letter had been written by a spy, what should he do about it? Who should he tell?

Weeks went by. Unsure what to do, Wainwood simply kept the letter. After a while, in need of advice, he turned to a schoolteacher named Adam Maxwell. Together they decided to open the letter, and found that it was written in code, which increased their suspicions. When the woman wrote to Wainwood, expressing uneasiness that he might not have delivered the letter, they decided to share their suspicions with Henry Ward, secretary of Rhode Island.

So it was that Ward wrote to General Greene in late September, urging him to “discover the traitor.” Greene immediately told Washington, and the molehunt began. The woman, “a suttle, shrewd Jade,” was arrested; after a night of being in custody and a great deal of questioning, she finally admitted that Doctor Benjamin Church had written the letter and given it to her to take to Newport.

That was enough to rock the world of the American revolutionaries. Dr. Church had seemed to be an outstanding patriot for years. He was a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives and the Committee of Safety, and he was currently serving as director of the American army hospitals. But on 29 September 1775, after the woman (who was Church’s mistress) had confessed, he was arrested and the detective work began.

Three people — Samuel West, Elisha Porter, and Elbridge Gerry — went to work on the letter. As they deciphered it, they learned what Church had been trying to communicate to the British in Boston:

I hope this will reach you—three Attempts have I made without Success in effecting the last the Man was discovered in attempting his Escape, but fortunately my Letter was sewed in the Waisband of his Breeches…. for the Sake of the miserable convulsed Empire solicit Peace, repeal the Acts, or Britain is undone. this Advice is the Result of warm Affection to my King & to the Realm. … A View to Independance gr[ows] more & more General—should Britain declare War against the Colonies they are lost forever. … I wish you could contrive to write me largely in Cypher by the Way of New Port…. make Use of every Precaution or I Perish.

Church admitted that he had written and sent the letter, which was intended for his brother-in-law, John Fleming, “a warm stickler for the Honour, Dignity & Power of Britain”, in Boston. But he still claimed that he wasn’t a traitor: the letter, he said, intentionally exaggerated American military strength; by feeding this information to Fleming (and, through him, to the British commanders), Church was trying to influence the British to give up the war and make a peaceful compromise with the colonists’ demands — or so he said.

It was hard to absolutely prove that Church was a spy, but a council of war and the Massachusetts House of Representatives both pronounced him guilty — and they were right. However, the Articles of War — the regulations established by the Continental Congress for the American army — didn’t provide a severe enough punishment for the kind of crime he had committed, and nobody was quite sure what to do with him. After being imprisoned for a couple of years, Church was finally allowed to leave the country in January 1778. He sailed for the West Indies, but the ship he sailed on was lost at sea.

For another example of Church’s espionage activities, see Spy Letters of the American Revolution.

Question and Answer

Good morning! I thought I’d start the week out with a question: What was the first battle in the Revolutionary War in which more than one colony participated?

Know the answer? Leave a comment on this post. Have a question of your own? I’ll try to find the answer for you.

Happy Monday!

“I Am Heartily Sorry”

To recant: “To retract; to recall; to contradict what one has once said or done.” -Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language

I’ve been thinking about recantations — that is, public statements, often in writing, that people made during the Revolution to convince other people that they had changed their ways. Here are some examples:

Whereas, I the subscriber, have, for a long series of time, both done and said many things that I am sensible has proved of great disadvantage to this Town and the Continent in general; and am now determined by my future conduct to convince the publick that I will risk my life and interest in defence of the constitutional privileges of this Continent, and humbly ask the forgiveness of my friends and the Country in general for my past conduct.

James McMaster.

Portsmouth, N.H., May 11, 1775.

Whereas my past conduct hath made an ill impression upon the minds of many of the inhabitants of this Town and Province; and as many view me unfriendly to the rights and liberties of British America, I hereby declare that I am heartily sorry that any part of my conduct should have given uneasiness to any of the friends of America; and hereby engage to aid and assist in supporting the common cause of America to the utmost of my power; and I hope my future conduct will render me worthy of the friendship and protection of this Country.

Thos. Achincloss.

Portsmouth, N.H., May 22, 1775.

Kensington, New-Hampshire, May 27, 1775.

Whereas I have offended the community in times past, by refusing to equip myself with arms and ammunition, and by my opposition to military orders, for which I am sorry: I hereby engage to equip myself according to orders, and be ready to take up arms in defence of my Country, in the present contest between Great Britain and the Colonies.

Ebenezer Loverin.

Why did people write things like this? Sometimes it was because somebody had spread rumors about them, and they were anxious to protect their reputation. Sometimes it was because they had been shunned or boycotted for not complying with things that the Continental Congress said, or for doing things that were politically unpopular. Either way, they did it because they wanted to be safe, respected, and prosperous.

The Tyrannical Rabble of America

Being an American, and inclined to approve of the Revolution, I tend to emphasize the things that put the Americans in a good light — though I can add, in fairness to myself, that the Americans wrote more about the war than the British did, and not surprisingly, since most of it was happening on their doorstep instead of across the sea. I can’t claim to be unbiased, but I do try to be fair.

Another reason why it’s easier to find things that were said in favor of the Revolution than against it is because that some people were intimated from speaking against it. For example, one person in Philadelphia wrote home to England on August 1, 1775, condemning the revolutionaries, but didn’t want anybody to know about it, because they were afraid of reprisals. They wrote:

You would hardly conceive, without seeing it, to what a height the political fury of this Country is arrived. I most heartily wish myself at home among free-born Englishmen, not among this tyrannical and arbitrary rabble of America. They have made many protestations of respect for England, and of their desire of union with the Mother Country, but you may take my word for it, my dear friend, it is the meanest and basest hypocrisy that ever was assumed. … You would feel the indignation I do every day, when I hear my King and Country vilified and abused by a parcel of wretches who owe their very existence to it. … Are the friends of Great Britain and their property to be left exposed at this rate to the dictates of an inhuman rabble? I expect, with many others, if I do not join in the seditious and traitorous acts in vogue, to be hauled away and confined in a prison, with the confiscation of all I have in the world. … Conceal my name; or I should run a great risk of my life and property, were it discovered here that I had sent you any account of these proceedings. Indeed, I incur some danger in writing at all; nor should I, if I could not confide in my conveyance.

American Archives, 4th Series, vol. 3, pp. 3-5

While being grateful for what came of the Revolution, let’s not forget that there were mobs and other things that we shouldn’t be proud of in the Revolution. As the above writer mentioned, the people, and not just a king or dictator, can be tyrannical.

Also on this day, recruiters for the Royal Highland Emigrants started enlisting soldiers in Quebec to fight against the Americans.

The Twelve Colonies

The Olive Branch Petition was signed by representatives from twelve colonies, and the Address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain was from “The Twelve United Colonies”. Why only twelve?

Georgia was late. Not only was it founded later than the other twelve colonies (it was only 43 years old when the Revolutionary War started), but it took longer for Georgia to pull together and send delegates to the Continental Congress. Some reasons for this, in my opinion, are that it was relatively “young” and therefore more sparsely settled and less established than the other colonies, and that it was off by itself, being the farthest south of any of them (except East and West Florida, which are a different story). But perhaps there were other, more compelling, reasons.

Georgia didn’t send any delegates at all to the First Continental Congress in 1774. And while the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia on May 10, 1775, it wasn’t until July 7 that Georgia’s Provincial Congress chose delegates to send to Philadelphia.

Archibald Bulloch, president of the Georgia Provincial Congress in 1775

No doubt many of the members of the Continental Congress were glad to have all thirteen colonies represented, and no doubt the president of Georgia’s congress (Archibald Bulloch, who also happened to be one of the delegates chosen to go to Philadelphia) was glad to report to the Continental Congress that Georgia was ready to fully join in. He wrote to the president of the Continental Congress:

As we appear so late in the American Cause, We must introduce ourselves with Expressions of Regret, that our Province has been so long divided, A Number of Incidents have Contributed thereto, which we think the less necessary to particularize as we hope they are pretty well got over…

We have already Resolved strictly to adhere to the Continental Association, and are heartily disposed Zealously to Enter into every measure that your Congress may deem necessary for the Saving of America…

Journals of the Continental Congress, vol. 2, pp. 192-3

The delegates chosen were John Houstoun, Archibald Bulloch (sometimes spelled Bullock; president of the Georgia Provincial Congress), John Joachim Zubly (a clergyman who had preached a sermon entitled “The Law of Liberty” when the Provincial Congress convened on July 4th), Lyman Hall (who later signed the Declaration of Independence), and Noble Wimberly Jones.

A Continental Fast

In the Olive Branch Petition, the Continental Congress appealed to King George III to defend their rights and help stop the war. But even before doing that, they decided to appeal to a higher King.

“We have appointed a continental Fast,” wrote John Adams to his wife, Abigail, on June 17, 1775. “Millions will be upon their Knees at once before their great Creator, imploring his Forgiveness and Blessing, his Smiles on American Councils and Arms.” The “day of public humiliation [i.e., publicly humbling oneself before God], fasting and prayer” was set for Thursday, July 20, and the Continental Congress issued a proclamation urging everyone in the American colonies to observe it. The proclamation said that the objective of the fast was

…that we may, with united hearts and voices, unfeignedly confess and deplore our many sins; and offer up our joint supplications to the all-wise, omnipotent, and merciful Disposer of all events; humbly beseeching him to forgive our iniquities, to remove our present calamities, to avert those desolating judgments, with which we are threatned, and to bless our rightful sovereign, King George the third, and inspire him with wisdom to discern and pursue the true interest of all his subjects, that a speedy end may be put to the civil discord between Great Britain and the American colonies, without farther effusion of blood: And that the British nation may be influenced to regard the things that belong to her peace, before they are hid from her eyes: That these colonies may be ever under the care and protection of a kind Providence, and be prospered in all their interests; That the divine blessing may descend and rest upon all our civil rulers, and upon the representatives of the people, in their several assemblies and conventions, that they may be directed to wise and effectual measures for preserving the union, and securing the just rights and priviledges of the colonies; That virtue and true religion may revive and flourish throughout our land; And that all America may soon behold a gracious interposition of Heaven, for the redress of her many grievances, the restoration of her invaded rights, a reconciliation with the parent state, on terms constitutional and honorable to both; And that her civil and religious priviledges may be secured to the latest posterity.

The fast was indeed observed with “strictness and devotion” in many places throughout the colonies. In Newport, Rhode Island, the Reverend Ezra Stiles (who later became president of Yale College) addressed “the most crouded Assembly that I ever preached to in my Meetinghouse.” His sermon was based on 2 Chronicles 20, which tells of how God protected the ancient Jews from their enemies in response to their prayers and fasting. Also in Newport, Rabbi Samuel Cohen “of the holy Land” preached to his congregation, using Numbers 25:11-12 as his text. (Incidentally, the synagogue in Newport is the oldest one in America.)

But not everybody was as enthusiastic as Reverend Stiles or Rabbi Cohen. Some pastors and priests refused to take part in the fast: some of them said it was against their personal convictions; others (particularly those of the Church of England) said they might lose their jobs if they participated. But as it turned out, some of them lost their jobs for not participating.

In our day, when the phrase “separation of church and state” is often taken to mean that religion has little or no place in public life, it may seem strange to us that a congress would tell people to turn to God for help in a time of national crisis. But this was a common practice both during and after the Revolution — and even after the U.S. Constitution was adopted (which, incidentally, sheds some light on what the people who wrote the Constitution thought “separation of church and state” meant).

Sources

John Adams to Abigail Adams, 11 June 1775

Journals of the Continental Congress, vol. 2, 87-8

Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, vol. 1, 590-1

The Sword and the Olive Branch

Thomas Jefferson, John Dickinson, and Richard Henry Lee. Jefferson and Dickinson wrote the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking Up Arms; Dickinson wrote the Olive Branch Petition; and Lee was probably the main author of the Address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain.

In general, American political leaders wanted peace — but they were determined to keep fighting, if necessary, in order to protect their liberties. They wanted to be united with Britain, but they also wanted to enjoy the same rights as the people in Britain did. So, in early July 1775, the Continental Congress published a declaration of why they had taken up arms against the British, a petition asking King George III to step in and solve the problem, and an address asking the British people to stand up for them. Here are some excerpts from these documents:

Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking Up Arms

We are reduced to the alternative of chusing an unconditional Submission to the tyranny of irritated Ministers, or resistance by Force. The latter is our choice. We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary Slavery. Honour, Justice, and Humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that Freedom which we received from our gallant Ancestors, and which our innocent Posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding Generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary Bondage upon them.

Second Petition to the King (a.k.a. Olive Branch Petition)

We therefore beseech your Majesty, that your royal authority and influence may be graciously interposed to procure us releif from our afflicting fears and jealousies occasioned by the system before mentioned, and to settle peace through every part of your dominions, with all humility submitting to your Majesty’s wise consideration, whether it may not be expedient for facilitating those important purposes, that your Majesty be pleased to direct some mode by which the united applications of your faithful colonists to the throne, in pursuance of their common councils, may be improved into a happy and permanent reconciliation; and that in the meantime measures be taken for preventing the further destruction of the lives of your Majesty’s subjects; and that such statutes as more immediately distress any of your Majestys colonies be repealed…

Address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain

A Cloud hangs over your Heads and ours; ‘ere this reaches you, it may probably burst upon us; let us then (before the remembrance of former Kindness is obliterated) once more repeat those Appellations which are ever grateful in our Ears; let us entreat Heaven to avert our Ruin, and the Destruction that threatens our Friends, Brethren and Countrymen, on the other side of the Atlantic.

For more about these documents, see July 6 and July 8.

Life, Fortune, Honor

What are you willing to give for your liberty? How much is it worth to you?

It’s easy enough to say you’d be willing to give your all, but how much are you giving now? And how much are you holding back, showing that you’re not willing to give it? That might be a good indicator of where your heart really lies.

A year before the Continental Congress declared independence, they published a declaration to justify why they were taking up arms against the British. Their choice to fight was not an easy one, but, they said, “We have counted the cost”. The closing words of the Declaration of Independence make clear what that cost would be: “And for the support of this Declaration,” they said, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

That was what they said they were willing to give — and some of them did indeed give it, showing that their words were not empty.

What about you? Would you sign?