Meigs Raid (Battle of Sag Harbor)

The Meigs Raid, also known as the Battle of Sag Harbor, was a military raid by American Continental Army forces, under the command of Connecticut Colonel Return Jonathan Meigs, on a British Loyalist foraging party at Sag Harbor, New York on May 24, 1777 during the American Revolution. Six Loyalists were killed and 90 captured while the Americans suffered no casualties. The raid was made in response to a successful British raid on Danbury, Connecticut in late April that was opposed by American forces in the Battle of Ridgefield.

Organized in New Haven, Connecticut by Brigadier General Samuel Holden Parsons, the expedition crossed Long Island Sound from Guilford on May 23, dragged whaleboats across the North Fork of Long Island, and raided Sag Harbor early the next morning, destroying boats and supplies. The battle marked the first American victory in the state of New York after New York City and Long Island had fallen in the British campaign for the city in 1776.

The “Old Burial Ground”, which adjoins the Whaler’s Church on Meeting House Hill, was a site of battle in the raid

The American Revolutionary War was a qualified success for the British in 1776. After being forced to abandon Boston, they captured New York City, but were unable to hold New Jersey when General George Washington surprised them at Trenton and Princeton. The British consolidated their hold on New York City and Long Island during the winter months of early 1777, while the Continental Army established a land blockade around the city in New Jersey, southern New York, and southwestern Connecticut.[3]

In the spring of 1777 Lieutenant General William Howe launched raiding expeditions against Continental Army and local militia storage depots near the city. A successful raid against Peekskill, New York in March prompted him to organize a more ambitious expedition to raid a depot in Danbury, Connecticut.[4][5] This expedition, led by the former royal governor of New York, William Tryon, successfully reached Danbury from a landing point in Fairfield, Connecticut on April 26, and destroyed provisions and supplies. The Connecticut militia had mobilized, and over the next two days skirmished with the British as they marched back to their ships, most notably on April 27 at Ridgefield. General Samuel Holden Parsons, leading Connecticut’s defenses, decided to organize an act of reprisal.[6]

An opportunity arose when they learned that a British foraging expedition had landed at Sag Harbor, Long Island. Sag Harbor had been occupied by British troops after the August 1776 Battle of Long Island, and they had established a strong defensive position on Meeting House Hill, with earthwork fortifications and palisades.[7] The town was well-situated for providing supplies to the Royal Navy, which used Gardiner’s Bay as an anchorage while patrolling the eastern end of Long Island Sound.[8] The forage expedition consisted of 12 smaller boats protected by a schooner mounting 12 guns; the small boats were manned by crews totaling about 40 men. Sag Harbor was at the time garrisoned by 70 men from the Loyalist battalion of Lieutenant Colonel Stephen DeLancey.[9] The detachment was under the command of Captain James Raymond.[10]

A 1794 map annotated to show the raid’s route

Parsons gave command of the expedition to Colonel Return Jonathan Meigs. According to Parsons’ report to General Washington, they assembled a force totaling 234 men at New Haven from several regiments, and rowed in 13 whaleboats from New Haven to Guilford on May 21. Rough seas and high winds prevented them from crossing for two days; when they finally left Guilford on the afternoon of May 23, they were accompanied on the crossing by two armed sloops and one that was unarmed. Only 170 made the crossing to the vicinity of Southold, New York, where they arrived around 6 pm. Meigs learned that most of the British forces in the area had been ordered to march to New York City, and that only the small force of Loyalists was left at Sag Harbor. He had his men portage 11 of the whaleboats across the North Fork to the bay, and launched those boats with 130 men to cross the bay to Sag Harbor. By midnight they had crossed the bay and landed about 4 miles from the harbor. Meigs formed his men up and marched to the harbor, arriving about 2 am.[1]

Colonel Return Jonathan Meigs

Meigs divided his force in two. One detachment stormed the earthworks, while the other went to the harbor, where they destroyed British boats and collected provisions.[7] The land attack was conducted in silence with fixed bayonets and only one shot was said to have been fired. The schooner opened fire on the attackers as they burned the boats, but sources are unclear if the schooner itself was taken and destroyed.[11] Twelve boats were destroyed, and the raiders took 53 prisoners at the earth works and another 37 at the wharf, suffering no casualties in the process. The prisoners were taken back to Connecticut.[2]

Long Island’s Loyalist communities organized their own response to the raid. Later that May, nine Loyalists crossed the sound and captured Connecticut militia general Gold Selleck Silliman at his home, and took him back to Long Island. Connecticut Patriots captured a judge on Long Island in November 1779, who they exchanged for General Silliman in May 1780.[12]

Parsons organized another expedition across Long Island Sound in August 1777. This one, against a Loyalist outpost at Setauket, was unsuccessful.[13] Colonel Meigs was rewarded by the Second Continental Congress with “an elegant sword”.[14] A stone commemorating the battle was placed on the site on May 23, 1902.[15]

Notes

1. Hall, pp. 97–98
2. Onderdonk, p. 65
3. Ward, pp. 203–324
4. Mather, pp. 225–226
5. Ward, p. 323
6. Mather, p. 226
7. Hedges, p. 189
8. Hedges, p. 190
9. Ward, pp. 323–324
10. Trumbull et al, p. 313
11. Reference is made in Parsons’ report (Hall, pp. 97–98) to the destruction of an “Armed Vessel” of 12 guns, the same number the schooner possessed.
12. Lossing, p. 852
13. Onderdonk, p. 66
14. Ward, p. 324
15. Underhill, Lois Beachy (May 5, 1997). “The Old Burying Ground”. Sag Harbor Express (Sag Harbor, N.Y.). http://web.archive.org/web/20070928195644/http://www.sagharboronline.com/history_files/hist01.htm “It is after midnight on May 23, 1777. The British Redcoats…”

References

• Hall, Charles S (1905). “Letters and Life of Samuel Holden Parsons,” Binghamton, NY: Otseningo Publishing Co. OCLC 2603857. http://books.google.com/books?id=llssAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA98#v=onepage&f=false.
• Hedges, Henry Parsons (1897). “A History of the Town of East-Hampton, N. Y.,” Sag Harbor, NY: J. H. Hunt. OCLC 3496058. http://books.google.com/books?id=woQ-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA189#v=onepage&f=false.
• Lossing, Benson John (1852). “The Pictorial Field-Book of the Revolution,” Volume 2. New York: Harper Brothers. OCLC 560599621. http://books.google.com/books?id=eBcXAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA852#v=onepage&f=false.
• Mather, Frederic (1913). “The Refugees of 1776 from Long Island to Connecticut,” Albany, NY: J. B. Lyon. OCLC 2613390. http://books.google.com/books?id=T5aAAAAAIAAJ&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false.
• Onderdonk, Henry (1849). “Revolutionary Incidents of Suffolk and Kings Counties,” Leavitt & Co. OCLC 2017113. http://books.google.com/books?id=G4RBAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0.
• Trumbull, Jonathan (1888). “The Trumbull Papers,” Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society. OCLC 2279792. http://books.google.com/books?id=fO9BAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA314#v=onepage&f=false.
• Ward, Christopher (1952). War of the Revolution. New York: Macmillan. OCLC 214962727

Brigadier General John Gibson, Secretary of the Indiana Territory

John Gibson was a veteran of the French and Indian War, Lord Dunmore’s War, the American Revolution, Tecumseh’s War, and the War of 1812. A delegate to the first Pennsylvania constitutional convention in 1790, and a merchant, he earned a reputation as a frontier leader and had good relations with many Native American in the region. At age sixty he was appointed the Secretary of the Indiana Territory where he was responsible for organization the territorial government. He served twice as acting governor of the territory, including a one year period during the War of 1812 in which he mobilized and led the territorial militia to relieve besieged Fort Harrison.

John Gibson was born in Lancaster, Pennsylvania on May 23, 1740, the son of George and Elizabeth de Vinez Gibson. Gibson’s father was born in Antrim, Ireland and came to Pennsylvania in 1730. The elder Gibson was a trader, who exchanged goods with the Conestoga who often met near his tavern in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.[1] John Gibson’s mother Elizabeth was born in France and left that country because she was a Huguenot.[2]

Most of Gibson’s early life was spent along the Allegheny frontier where he was a merchant trader. He held local office in several counties as a judge, clerk, and sheriff. Although there is no record of his schooling, he was reputed to be well educated for his times.[3]

In 1758, at age seventeen, he participated in the Forbes Expedition under General John Forbes against the French at Fort Duquesne as part of the French and Indian War.[3] He remained at Fort Pitt after the war to engage in trade with Native Americans. He was captured by Lenape during Pontiac’s Rebellion while trading in the west and was condemned to be burnt, but escaped death when he was adopted by an old Indian woman whose son had died in battle. He remained with the Lenape tribe for some time. Later Gibson was freed as a result of the Boquet Expedition.[4] After this Gibson returned to being an Indian trader. He built a house at Logstown which was described as the “only house there” by David McClure.[5] Gibson married a relative of Mingo leader Logan and also learned to speak the Mingo language.[6] Gibson’s wife and several other Mingo were murdered by a group of settlers in May 1774.[3][7] Gibson’s daughter survived this incident, and was put into his care and he saw to her education.[8] In 1774, he participated in Dunmore’s War and produced a written translation of Logan’s famous speech suing for peace: “I appeal to any white man to say if he ever entered Logan’s cabin hungry and he gave him not meat. . . . “[9]

In 1775 Gibson was made the Indian agent at Pittsburgh to represent the interests of Virginia, acting for John Connolly who in turn acted under Lord Dunmore. With war between the Colonists and England likely to start soon, Dunmore sent a letter to Connolly to contact White Eyes to convince him to join the British cause and fight the colonists. Connolly gave the letter to Gibson to take to White Eyes. However Gibson decided that the local committee of correspondence ought to see the letter, and with their receiving the letter processes were put in place that led to Connolly’s arrest on November 13, 1775 close to Hagerstown, Maryland.[10] Gibson was also appointed a magistrate for Fincastle County, Virginia which was at that time considered to include Pittsburgh by Connolly in 1875.[11]

On May 16, 1775 Gibson was elected the colonel over the 6th Virginia.[12]

In the early stages of the American Revolutionary War, Gibson was active in Indian negotiations. In early negotiations Netawatwees requested that traders be sent to his village for him and his fellow Lenape to sell furs to. He specifically requested that Gibson be included among these men, describing Gibson as a “good man”.[13] From October 1778 until January 1779 Gibson served as the agent to the tribes in what is today Ohio for the Continental Congress government.[14]

Gibson commanded a regiment during the battles in New York and stayed in the theater until after the retreat through the Jerseys. He was then reassigned to command the army on the western front and left in command of forces at Fort Laurens during the harsh winter of 1778–1779, during which the fort was subjected to a siege by British and native forces.[15] In the summer of 1779 Gibson was made the second in command to Daniel Brodhead. For a few months after Brodhead was removed in May 1781 Gibson was the commanding officer at Fort Pitt. Gibson had intended to send troops to support George Rogers Clark but the negative effects of Brodhead’s actions prevented Gibson from doing so.[16]

In August 1781 Brodhead returned to claim control at Fort Pitt. He arrested Gibson accusing him of having usurped his authority. George Washington sent orders to Brodhead to step down from his command, and so he released Gibson and let him take over command again. Civilian authorities in the area then arrested Brodhead. In November 1781 David Williamson brought in some Moravian Lenape captured in Salem, Schoenbrunn and Gnadenhutten, Ohio to Fort Pitt. It is unclear if Gibson or William Irvine was in command when these Lenape were released, but it seems that Gibson was at least blamed for this release. The problem was that after the release there were attacks on western Pennsylvania settlements. The fact that these were probably done by Half-King and his fellow Wyandotte and not by the released Lenape was not factored into account by those who felt to denounce Gibson for this occurrence.[17]

In January 1782 Irvine went to Philadelphia to meet with congress and left Gibson in charge. The enlisted men at Fort Pitt then threatened to mutiny, which may have contributed to the conditions that led to the Gnadenhutten Massacre, although it was only one of many factors involved in the situation.[18]

After the war Gibson returned to being a merchant but he went bankrupt, partly due to debts he had incurred in supporting the campaign of George Rogers Clark.

Gibson was a judge in Allegheny County from 1791-1800. He was also major-general and commanding officer of the militia for Allegheny County, and a member of Pennsylvania’s constitutional convention in 1790.[19][20] Gibson was also involved with the purchase of the area of the Erie Triangle from the Iroquois for the state of Pennsylvania.

U.S. President John Adams appointed Gibson to be secretary of the Indiana Territory in 1800, despite him being sixty years old. Gibson arrived in the territory in July of that year and took up his duties. For nearly a year he was the only government official in the territory and began organizing the government by appointing officers for the territorial militia. Governor William Henry Harrison did not arrive in the territory until January 1801 in which time Gibson served as acting-governor. One of his first acts as secretary was to conduct a census of the territory. It took him a full year of investigation to find that the population was slightly less than five thousand. After Harrison arrived in the territory, Gibson took on several more positions after being appointed justice of the peace, Knox County recorder, and a judge of the low court that tried misdemeanors and petty crimes. Gibson’s relationship with the local tribes proved invaluable to Harrison during the numerous treaty negotiations in the early part of his term. Gibson, who spoke several of the native languages, was the first to become aware of Tecumseh’s attempt to massacre the citizens of Vincennes in 1810 and was able to quickly and secretly gather together soldiers to prevent the situation from escalating.[20]

He became acting-governor again in the summer of 1811 while Harrison was out of the territory. The American Indian Confederacy led by Tecumseh began to make aggressive movements and attacked Fort Harrison. Gibson called up the territorial militia and the Indiana Rangers, and organized several regiments to go to its aid. He was also instrumental in negotiating treaties with the Lenape and other tribes and preventing them from entering the war against the United States. Gibson remained acting governor once war was officially declared while Harrison led the army against the British and their native allies in the War of 1812. His final act as acting-governor was to oversee the move of the territorial capitol from Vincennes to Corydon following the reorganization of the territory by Congress. He returned to his secretary’s position in May 1813 when Thomas Posey arrived in the territory to assume the governorship. Gibson continued in the office of secretary until Indiana achieved statehood in 1816.[21][22]

After completing his term in government, at age seventy-six Gibson and his wife Ann returned to private life, briefly remaining in Vincennes. He returned to live with his daughter and son-in-law, George Wallace, in Braddock’s Field near Pittsburg, where he died on April 10, 1822 at age eighty-two, having suffered two years from an “incurable cataract”.[23] He was buried at Allegheny Cemetery in Pittsburg.

Grave of John Gibson at Allegheny Cemetery in Pittsburg.

Gibson County, Indiana was named his honor.[22]

Notes

1. Charles W. Hanko. The Life of John Gibson: Soldier, Patriot, Statesman (Dayton Beach, Florida: College Publishing Company, 1955) p. 10
2. Hanko. Gibson. p. 11
3. Gugin, p. 28
4. Earl P. Olmstead. David Zeisberger: A Life Among the Indians. (Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1997) p. 394-395 note 20
5. Hanna. Wilderness Trail. p. 380
6. According to Gugin, Gibson’s wife was Logan’s sister. (Gugin, p. 28)
7. Woolen, p. 11
8. Charles Augustus Hanna. The Wilderness Trail (1911) Vol. 1, p. 381
9. Woollen, p. 12
10. Olstead. Zeisberger. p. 240
11. Hanko. Gibson. p. 29
12. Hanko. Gibson. p. 38
13. Hanko. Gibson. p. 39
14. Hanko. Gibson. p. 40
15. Old Westmorland. Edgar Wakefield Hassler. p. 84
16. David Curtiss Skaggs and Larry L. Nelson. The Sixty Years’ War for the Great Lakes, 1754-1814. (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2001) p. 196
17. Skaggs and Nelson. The Sixty Years’ War. p. 197
18. Skaggs and Nelson. The Sixty Years’ War. p. 198
19. Woollen, p. 13
20. Gugin, p. 29
21. Woollen, pp. 14–15
22. Gugin, p. 31
23. Woollen, p. 20

Bibliography

• Gugin, Linda C. & St. Clair, James E, ed. (2006). The Governors of Indiana. Indianapolis, Indiana: Indiana Historical Society Press. ISBN 0871951967.
• Woollen, William Wesley (1883). Biographical and Historical Sketches of Early Indiana. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hammond & Co. http://books.google.com/books?id=-hIVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PP17#v=onepage&q=&f=false

His Excellency Thomas Wharton, Junior, Esquire, President of the Supreme Executive Council of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Captain General and Commander-in-Chief in and over the same

Thomas Wharton Jr. was a Pennsylvania merchant and politician of the Revolutionary era. He served as the first President of Pennsylvania, an office equivalent to Governor, under a commonwealth constitution following the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain.

Thomas Wharton, Jr., portrait circa 1784, Philadelphia Museum of Art

Thomas Wharton was born in Chester County, Pennsylvania, in 1735. He was born into one of Philadelphia’s most prominent early Quaker families. He was known as “Junior” to distinguish him from a cousin of the same name.[1] He was the son of John, some time coroner of Chester county, Pennsylvania, whose father, Thomas, of Westmoreland, England, emigrated to Pennsylvania about 1683, served in the Philadelphia common council in 1713-’18, and was the founder of the Wharton family of Philadelphia.

Wharton in 1762 married Susannah Lloyd, the daughter of Thomas Lloyd and great-granddaughter of Thomas Lloyd, an early governor of Pennsylvania and a colleague of William Penn.[2] They were married by a pastor in Christ Church, an Anglican church, and were therefore disowned by the Quakers of the Philadelphia Monthly Meeting. Wharton was thereafter associated with the Anglican Church, but never formally converted.[1] The couple had five children before Susannah’s death ten years later. Wharton then married Elizabeth Fishbourne and with her had three more children. He owned a country home called “Twickenham” near Abington Meeting in Montgomery County.

The Wharton family was involved in various areas of business and public service, including shipbuilding for the Continental Navy. Members of the Wharton family served in the Continental Congress and the State Legislature, as Mayor of Philadelphia and on the City Council, in positions of military leadership, and in other offices.

Thomas became a merchant, was for a time a partner of Anthony Stocker, and was highly esteemed for his virtue and patriotism. On the passage of the stamp-act he took a resolute stand on the side of the opposition, and his name, with that of his grandfather and other members of the family, was among the first that were affixed to the non-importation resolutions and agreements of 1765, but he was not an early leader of the resistance movement.[1]

His rise to prominence in the Patriot cause followed Parliament’s passage of the Boston Port Act in 1774.[1] On 22 June, 1774, he was placed on a committee with Joseph Reed and John Nixon to request the speaker of the assembly to summon its members to meet on 1 August and consult on public affairs. He was a deputy to the convention that was called by patriotic citizens of Philadelphia, to meet on 15 July, 1774, and was one of the twenty-five citizens that formed the committee of safety in 1775. On 24 July 1776 he became president of that body. As such he was a member of the committee directing that a new constitution be drafted for the state.

On September 28, 1776 Pennsylvania adopted a new state constitution. This document created an Executive Council of twelve men. Although wealthy, upper class Pennsylvanians like John Dickinson and Robert Morris opposed this radically democratic constitution, Wharton supported it.[1] On a joint ballot of the Council and the General Assembly Wharton was elected the first President of the Council.

Thomas Wharton, and each of his successors in that office, may be referred to, quite properly, as President of Pennsylvania. However, the position is analogous to the modern office of Governor, and Presidents of Council are often listed with those who have held the latter title.

Wharton was elected March 5, 1777 and took office immediately, under the title His Excellency Thomas Wharton, Junior, Esquire, President of the Supreme Executive Council of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Captain General and Commander-in-Chief in and over the same. He held office until his death in 1778.

In September 1777, with British forces poised to take Philadelphia, the Executive Council evacuated to Lancaster, Pennsylvania. It was at this same time that the Continental Congress also evacuated to Lancaster and then to York, Pennsylvania. Wharton retreated to Lancaster along with other representatives of the State government. In the only election held while the Council was in Lancaster Wharton was reelected President on November 21, 1777. After the initial election of officers on March 5, 1777 annual leadership elections were held in the fall, following the popular elections in October.

Wharton as President had some difficult decisions to make. He found it necessary to banish to Virginia several of his acquaintances and friends, most of them Quakers, because of the possibility that they were siding with the British. Although this action was thought prudent by the revolutionary authorities, it was not based on much evidence and Wharton’s social connections suffered because of it.

On May 22, 1778,[1] with the Council still in Lancaster, Wharton died in that city at the age of 43. Wharton was given an elaborate funeral with full military honors, in accordance with his position as commander in chief of the State’s forces, and was buried within the walls of Evangelical Trinity Church in Lancaster.[3] At the time of his death, Thomas Wharton Jr. was survived by at least three sons.[4]

A Commonwealth of Pennsylvania historical marker at Trinity Church commemorates both Wharton and Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Mifflin, the first and last Governors and Presidents of Pennsylvania under the 1776 State Constitution. The marker was dedicated in 1975 and is located on Duke Street in Lancaster.[5] The text of the marker reads:

Holy Trinity Founded in 1730.

A session for an Indian treaty was held in the original church building in 1762.

The present edifice was dedicated in 1766.

Here are interred the remains of Thomas Wharton (1778) and Gov. Thomas Mifflin (1800).

References

1. Marc Egnal. “Wharton, Thomas, Jr.”; American National Biography Online, February 2000.
2. Chapter on Thomas Wharton in Patriot Improvers: Biographical Sketches of Members of the American Philosophical Society by Whitfield J. Bell 1997, DIANE ISBN 0-87169-226-0
3. Political Graveyard page for surname Wharton
4. Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, from its organization to the termination of the Revolution. [Mar. 4, 1777 - Dec. 20, 1790]. Harrisburg, Pub. by the State, 1852-53. Entries for 4–5 March 1777 (v. XI p. 173-4), 23 Sept 1777 (v. XI p. 312), 1 Oct 1777 (v. XI p. 313), 25 May 1778 (v. XI p. 499).
5. Pennsylvania State Historical Marker for Thomas Wharton

Sources

• Thomas Wharton Jr. at Find a Grave

Mary Campbell, abducted during the French and Indian War

Mary Campbell (later Mary Campbell Willford) was an American colonial settler, taken captive as a child by native Americans during the French and Indian War. Later rescued, she is believed to have been the first white child to travel to the Western Reserve.

Campbell was born in 1747 or 1748.[1] According to oral tradition among her descendants, her family identified themselves as Scotch-Irish.[2] Since members of this ethnic group came to America from the Ulster area of Ireland, Campbell would have been born either in Ireland or in America depending on whether her family immigrated before or after her birth.

On May 21, 1758,[1] at the age of ten, Campbell was abducted from a place in or near the town of Penn’s Creek, probably the town of that name situated in Cumberland (now Snyder) County, Pennsylvania. Her captors were a band of Lenape, a Native American tribe also known as the Delaware.[1] It is widely believed that during her captivity she stayed in the household of, or with the tribe of, a principal chief of the Lenape called Netawatwees, also known by his English name, Newcomer.[3][4] According to local tradition, this Native American group brought her to a cliff cavity now known as Mary Campbell Cave near the Cuyahoga River in present-day Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio.[5] After a reportedly brief residence in the cave, she is said to have moved to a nearby Lenape village,[5] which may have been along the southern bank of the Cuyahoga River not far from the cave, or else on the flat ground directly above the cave.

Several lines of family tradition, however, say that Campbell lived with the Lenape in a place called Newcomerstown which is further south in eastern Ohio. This tradition tends to confirm Campbell’s association with Netawatwees, since Newcomerstown was named after its founder Netawatwees (Newcomer). If, as this suggests, Mary’s association with the group headed by Netawatwees is accepted, then both the local tradition of Mary Campbell’s stay near Cuyahoga Falls as well as the family traditions which place her in Newcomerstown are probably correct. What is historically known of Netawatwees indicates that he established his people near Cuyahoga Falls from late in 1758 or early 1759. This would correspond with a period early in Mary Campbell’s captivity, since she was abducted in May 1758.[1] It is also known that he later moved with his group to eastern Ohio and there founded Newcomerstown.[6]

Some writers have suggested that Campbell may have been adopted by Netawatwees.[7][8] The adoption into an Indian family, of captives taken in raids, was common practice among the Native Americans of that time period, and Campbell most probably was adopted into a Lenape family according to this custom. Nevertheless, although it seems certain she was a member of the tribal group which followed and moved with Netawatwees, it cannot be definitely established that she was adopted into his own household.[citation needed]

Campbell’s return to her family in Pennsylvania in 1764 was a result of British military pressure on the Native Americans of southern Ohio by troops under Colonel Henry Bouquet.[citation needed] Over two days, August 5 and August 6, Bouquet’s forces prevailed against Native American irregulars in the Battle of Bushy Run, a key battle that turned the tide of Pontiac’s Rebellion. While armed conflict became rare after the battle, no formal peace had been made. Starting from Fort Niagara on August 6, 1764, Colonel John Bradstreet and 1,200 of his soldiers moved through northern Ohio on their way to Fort Detroit. Bradstreet concluded a peace treaty with a number of tribes on August 12, which would have prohibited an expedition by Bouquet to the south. General Thomas Gage rejected Bradstreet’s treaty on the grounds that the Colonel had exceeded his authority in making it.[citation needed]

On October 1, 1764, Bouquet held meetings with Shawnee and Delaware leaders at Fort Pitt. The Indians tried to convince Bouquet that their numbers were great, and that he should not move into their territory because his army could not survive. Apparently the Indians were bluffing, because within a day or two, they had agreed to give up their white captives to Bouquet and his forces. On October 3, Bouquet and 1,500 soldiers departed Fort Pitt, arriving at a place called Tuscarawas on October 13. The next day, Bouquet met with leaders of Native American groups including those of the Delaware. The meetings lasted until October 20, when Bouquet issued an ultimatum and demanded the return of captives. Captives were turned over to Bouquet’s forces at different times during and after these proceedings,[9] Mary Campbell was among those who returned.

Campbell’s name is included in a list of 60 former captives who were transferred by Captain Lewis Durry to Captain Charles Lewis for transportation to Fort Pitt.[3] The list was made out on November 15, 1764, at a “Camp at Muskingum”, presumably in present-day southeastern Ohio.[3] Campbell would have been 16 or 17 years of age at this time, having spent about six-and-a-half years with the Lenape. The captives arrived at Fort Pitt on November 28, 1764.[3]

Family tradition among some of Campbell’s descendants indicates that she was, at least initially, unhappy at being separated from the Lenape.[5][10][11] Although it is estimated that approximately half of the captives turned over to Bouquet attempted to return to their Native captors, a development which reportedly puzzled both the army and the communities to which the captives were being returned, it is not known whether Campbell was one of them.[12]

Pennsylvania Gazette, 11 October 1764

In October 1764, the Pennsylvania Gazette carried an advertisement placed by Mary Campbell’s family, which read in part:

…Mary Campbell, then in her 10th year, red haired, and much freckled. Her Father hearing that she is now at Albany, and being unable to go so far, begs that she may, by all good People, be helped on her way to him as he and her aged mother, are very desirous of seeing her.”[1]         ”

This is the only known contemporary physical description of Campbell. It is not known which of several places called Albany are referred to. Sources give the date of this advertisement as October 11, 1764. If that is accurate, it is possible that Mary Campbell was in Albany, Ohio at the time; alternatively, it could refer to one of several places called Albany in Pennsylvania.[citation needed] The advertisement definitely implies that Mary Campbell had been turned over to Bouquet’s forces before the date of its publication. A historical account of Bouquet’s expedition lends credence to such a scenario by saying that Bouquet’s November 15 report included persons returned from captivity up to that date.[9] It has been claimed that one of Mary’s brothers was with Bouquet’s forces when she was returned. If so this would explain how Mary Campbell’s father knew of her whereabouts upon placing the advertisement with the Pennsylvania Gazette.[citation needed]

Campbell married Joseph Willford in 1770 in Mt. Pleasant Township. Some sources place this in what was then York, but is now Adams County, Pennsylvania.[13] The same sources have Mary and Joseph Willford continuing in York/Adams County from 1770 until they moved to Washington (now Greene) County, Pennsylvania. But tax rolls from Lack Township, situated in the Tuscarora Valley, Cumberland (now Juniata) County strongly suggest that they lived in this township from 1766 until at least 1782.[14] A possible candidate for the place of their marriage is a town a few miles southeast of Mifflintown and adjacent to Lack Township which was later (from 1847) known as Mount Pleasant. Some time during or after 1782 they moved to Bald Ridge Farm, Dunkard Township,[13] in present-day Greene County, Pennsylvania.

Mary and Joseph Willford had seven children: five sons, Samuel, Daniel, William, Dougal, and Joseph, and two daughters, Elizabeth and Margaret.[10][11][13] Mary Wilford died in 1801, probably in Greene County, and was buried there.[10][11][13]

Mary Campbell is widely known of in Northeast Ohio and parts of Pennsylvania, and is spoken of as an example of courage and fortitude.[5][7][15] The story is also cited as evidence that popular stereotypes of Native American brutality are not justified.[5][15]

Most long-time residents of that area know the basics of her story, which is frequently told to children,[16] and the general facts of her experience are taught in local schools.[17] Mary Campbell’s local popularity has led to a number of books, including Song of Courage, Song of Freedom: The Story of the Child, Mary Campbell, Held Captive in Ohio by the Delaware Indians from 1759-1764 by Marilyn Seguin, and The Beaded Moccasins: The Story of Mary Campbell by Lynda Durrant. Both books are fictional.

Although there are some biographical facts about Campbell that are solidly documented, most of the details of her life, including incidents about her capture and adoption by the Lenape tribe, have come down to the present day through oral family traditions and written records of those traditions.[citation needed] Although the following contain examples of conflicting information some of which must obviously be incorrect, we may safely assume that some true information is preserved in the individual family traditions. A stemmatic analysis of this, and other, traditional material, by cataloging different lines of familial descent and their accompanying traditions could possibly bring to light or clarify many incidents in Mary Campbell’s life which are now unknown or not well understood by interested researchers.

• Some sources give Campbell’s birth year as 1750.[13]
• Various sources give her year of abduction as 1757 or 1759.[18]
• According to information from Minnie Myrtle Wiley, a great great granddaughter of Campbell, she was taken by Delaware Indians (i.e. the Lenape) from or near a stockade in Penn’s Creek, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania where she and others had come for safety.
• Some sources claim that Campbell was abducted in 1759 at the age of twelve years. If so, her birth would have been in 1747, and her repatriation would have occurred at around 17 years of age.[18]
• Many modern sources report that Campbell was abducted along with a person identified as Mrs. Stuart or Stewart. A Mary Stewart is listed in the Pennsylvania Gazette list of January 17, 1765, but is not present on Captain Lewis’ list.
• Some sources say Campbell was returned in 1765, even though Campbell’s return in 1764 is well documented by primary sources. In May, 1765, a second group of captives were turned over to Colonel Bouquet,[3] perhaps principally by the Shawnee. This group included an unrelated couple named “James and Mary Campbell”.[3] It is possible that these sources confuse this event for the earlier one that involved Mary Campbell. Some stories say Campbell was reunited with her family in 1765, so it could also be that the date of her reunion with her family is being confused with the date of her repatriation to British forces.
• According to Rebecca Xavier, members of the Willford family, and others, there is a strong family tradition amongst Campbell’s descendants that she was very well treated by the Lenape, that she was sad to be separated from them, and that the Lenape were sad to see her go.[citation needed]
• Campbell is said to have been turned over to Bouquet at one of several places, depending on the source. It is plausible that Campbell could have moved through several or all of these locations in the course of leaving her Lenape home on the Cuyahoga and returning to her family in Pennsylvania. The locations indicated as the site of her return to Bouquet include:
  • the confluence of the Tuscarawas River and White Woman’s River (now known as the Walhonding River) near present-day Coshocton, Ohio;
  • Chillicothe, Ohio;
  • Newcomerstown, Ohio;
  • the banks of the Muskingum River in Ohio (her presence there is supported by Captain Lewis’ list);
  • Fort Carlyle, Pennsylvania.

• Some stories indicate that Campbell was reunited with her family when they attended a return of prisoners between Native Americans and settlers on July 25, 1766. These sources sometimes state that Campbell recognized a lullaby that her mother was humming, and that thereby the “little girl” (as the sixteen- to eighteen-year-old woman is invariably called in such accounts) was reunited with her family. The earliest publication of this story is probably in Akron and Summit County History by Grismer, who identifies it only as a possibility. It seems certain the story does not reference Campbell.
• The Willford History contains an account that differs from the usual in several important respects. It gives her year of abduction as 1757 (and says it happened while she was tending cows with her brother William), was held in captivity for seven years near the Muskingum River, until Bouquet’s officers returned her to her parents at Fort Carlyle, Pennsylvania, in November or December 1764. This account also says that Campbell hoed corn on the Muskingum floodplain, using a hoe made from a deer scapula attached to a stick with tendon. There is also a family tradition that Mary’s brother William was also abducted but died in captivity.
• According to Eleanor Womer, Dugal Campbell (Mary’s brother) accompanied Colonel Bouquet to the Muskingum. He stood on a log and yelled out Mary Campbell’s name, and saw that a Native woman clapped her hand over a girl’s mouth in response. The girl was Mary Campbell, and that is how she was recovered. While this is uncertain, it is known that relatives of a number of known captives traveled with Bouquet in October 1764.
• In addition to brothers Dougal and William, Mary Campbell also had a brother Daniel. Daniel and William are said to have served in the Revolution; Daniel in the same outfit with Campbell’s husband, Joseph Willford. The William who served in the revolution is known from his pension record, and is documented to have been born in 1761, so cannot be the same William described in the Willford History.

Notes

• The originals of the Bouquet Papers are held in the British Museum; copies are available in the Canadian Archives in Ottawa, and the US Library of Congress. The papers record Colonel Bouquet’s actions in the area of Western Pennsylvania and Ohio, and is the source for Captain Lewis’ list. The same list as reproduced in a See family history.[19] This source also establishes the association between Netawatwees and Mary Campbell.
• Pennsylvania Gazette, LIST of CAPTIVES taken by the INDIANS, and delivered to Colonel BOUQUET, by the Mingoes, Delawares, Shawanese, Wyondots and Mohickons, at Tuscarawas and Muskingam, in November, 1764, published on January 17, 1765. Part of this notice is reproduced in some documentation for the Fincher family history.[20] Note that the Report to the Cuyahoga Falls Chapter, D.A.R., mentions the same notice as appearing in the Maryland Gazette of the same date.
• Report to the Cuyahoga Falls Chapter, D.A.R., June 1934, by Mrs. J. B. McPherson entitled “Mary Campbell – The First White Child on the Western Reserve”. This report is also available at the Mary Campbell site.[21]
• Pennsylvania Gazette, advertisement by Mary Campbell’s family, published October 11, 1764. This is the source adopted here for Campbell’s year of birth and date of abduction. The advertisement is included in a digital image of a photocopied sheet which shows part of a newspaper page. The photocopy from which the image was taken is of poor, but readable, quality. The name of the newspaper and the date have been penciled in at the bottom the photocopy. The October 11, 1764 date is apparently correct since, just above the advertisement, on the same page, is a report on the “last accounts from Pittsburgh” which relate that Colonel Bouquet with forces of his army had crossed the Ohio and awaited volunteers from Virginia to complete their numbers. This would agree with incidents which took place at the end of September and the beginning of October 1764.
• The Mary Campbell Memorial is a plaque laid by the Mary Campbell Society, Children of the American Revolution of Cuyahoga Falls, in 1934, outside Mary Campbell Cave.
• William Willford. Genealogy and History of the Willford Family in America. Canton Minnesota: 1916. This history contains recollections of William’s grandmother Mary Ann Willford, née Eniex or Enochs. She was the wife of Joseph Wilford Jr. who was one of Campbell’s sons. This work is one source of the 1750 birth date for Campbell.
• Information from the tax rolls of Lack Township, Cumberland (now Juniata) County, Pennsylvania document the presence of Joseph Willford, a William Campbell, a William Campbell Jr., a Daniel Campbell, and a Dougal Campbell. Some family traditions among descendants of Mary Campbell identify Mary’s father’s name as William and her two brothers as Daniel and William. Others also, or in place of Daniel or William Jr., identify Dougal Campbell as a brother of Mary Campbell. Joseph and Mary Willford named one of their sons as Dougal Campbell Willford (born 1777).
• Dougal Campbell also appears in Washington (now Greene) County, Pennsylvania in association with the Willfords during the period between 1788 and the end of the 18th century. That Lack Township coincides with the Tuscarora Valley is also significant since William Willford’s Genealogy and History of the Willford Family in America[13] as well as at least one other source identifies the Tuscarora Valley as the area where Joseph Willford settled in Cumberland County.

References

1. Pennsylvania Gazette, October 1764
2. Proceedings and Addresses of the Fourth Congress at Atlanta Ga. April 28 to May 1, 1892 (Nashville: The Scotch Irish Society of America, 1892), p. 344. The William Willford mentioned in the passage cited is author of Genealogy and History of the Willford Family in America.
3. Bouquet Papers, British Museum, pp. 317-318
4. Clinton A. Weslager, The Delaware Indians: a History (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1990) p. 243
5. Karl H. Grismer, Akron and Summit County History, Higginson Book Co, 1994. ASIN: B0006P5YLE
6. Clinton A. Weslager, The Delaware Indians: a History (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1972) p. 243.
7. Peter Peterson Cherry, The Portage Path, Western Reserve Co, 1911, ASIN: B00085IORI
8. Marilyn Seguin, Song of Courage, Song of Freedom (Boston: Braden Books, 1993).
9. “Colonel Henry Bouquet’s Ohio Expedition in 1764,” by Paul K. Adams, in An Illustrated History of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, ed. William Henry Engle, (Harrisburg, 1876), pp. 139-147
10. Adell Carr Smith’s research summary
11. Rebecca Xavier’s research summary
12. American Encounters: Natives and Newcomers From European Contact to Indian Removal, 1500-1850, Peter C. Moncall and James H. Merrell eds. (New York: Routledge, 2000), p. 329.
13. William Willford. Genealogy and History of the Willford Family in America. Canton, Minnesota: 1916
14. F. Ellis and A. N. Hungerford eds., History of that part of the Susquehanna and Juniata valleys, embraced in the counties of Mifflin, Juniata, Perry, Union and Snyder, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania… (Philadelphia: Everts, Peck & Richards, 1886), pp. 727-733, provided at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~milliken/alguss/lack.html; Pennsylvania Archives, Third Series, ed. William Henry Egle (Harrisburg: Wm. Stanley Ray, State Printer, 1897), pp. 112-114, 185-188, 321-324, 448-451, 593-597, 728-731
15. Report to the Cuyahoga Falls Chapter, D.A.R., June 1934, by Mrs. J. B. McPherson entitled “Mary Campbell – The First White Child on the Western Reserve”
16. Metroparks brochure, no author, dated 1978
17. Summit County Historical Society information sheet, ca. 1981 (no author)
18. The Mary Cambell Memorial, a plaque laid by the Mary Campbell Society, Children of the American Revolution of Cuyahoga Falls, in 1934
19. http://members.aol.com/hconor2/Brasel.htm
20. http://genforum.genealogy.com/fincher/messages/662.html
21. http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://www.geocities.com/marycampbellwillford/fallsdar.htm&date=2009-10-26+02:22:12

Other sources

• An Otterbein bibliography
• Peter Peterson Cherry, The Portage Path, Western Reserve Co, 1911. ASIN: B00085IORI
• The Legend of Mary Campbell, in the December 1985 edition of Our Town Akron, pages 2 through 4.
• John E Hopley, History of Crawford County and Representative Citizens, Whipporwill Publications, 1983. ASIN: B0006YBZZ4. See the biography of Lorenzo Dow Willford on pages 1229 to 1233.
• Allan W. Eckert, The Conquerors, Bantam Books, 1981, p. 768.
• (unknown author and date), Green Islands, Akron Metropolitan Park District. This is a brochure, which contains an article “Why Mary Campbell Cave?”
• A book called “History of the Delaware Indians.” This might refer to Richard C. Adams, A Brief History of the Delaware Indians, US Congress and Senate, 59th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Document Number 501, Serial Number 4916, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1906.
• John Gottlieb Ernestus Heckewelder and Paul A. W. Wallace, Thirty Thousand Miles with John Heckewelder, Wennawoods Pub (April, 2000), ISBN 1-889037-13-3

Major General Seth Pomeroy, Massachusetts Militia

Seth Pomeroy was an American gunsmith and soldier from Northampton, Massachusetts. His military service included the French and Indian War and the early stages of the American Revolution. He fought as a private soldier in the Battle of Bunker Hill, but was later appointed a major general in the Massachusetts militia.

Monument to Major General Seth Pomeroy

Seth was born on May 20, 1706, in Northampton, Massachusetts to Ebeneezer and Sarah (King) Pomeroy. His father was a prominent local citizen, and had been a Major in the militia. Seth became a mechanic and gunsmith, as well as joining the local militia in Hampshire County. He earned a reputation as one of the best gunsmiths in the colony.

Pomeroy married Mary Hunt (1705–1777) on December 14, 1732. They would have one son, Dr. Medad Pomeroy (1735–1819). Mary would survive her husband by only seven months.

When Massachusetts undertook an expedition against the French in Nova Scotia, Major Pomeroy answered Governor William Shirley’s call for volunteers. He was part of the expedition led by William Pepperrell that captured Fortress Louisbourg in Nova Scotia in 1745. He used his professional skills in support of Richard Gridley, the expedition’s chief engineering officer. He reconditioned the guns captured from an outlying position after the French had spiked them and supported 46 days of heavy bombardment.

Seth and Mary (Hunt) Pomeroy had more than one child. Children: Seth b.1733, Quartus b.1735, Medad b.1736, Lemuel b.1738, Martha b.1740, Mary b. 1742, Sarah b. 1744, A child b.1747, Asahel b.1749.

In 1755 Lieutenant Colonel Pomeroy was second in command of the regiment led by Colonel Ephraim Williams. They marched to New York to support a move to capture Crown Pont.

While on the march, they were ambushed by a force of 800 French and Canadian troops, supported by 600 Iroquois warriors, and led by Baron Dieskau at the Battle of Lake George. Of all the commanding officers, Pomeroy was the only one to survive the battle, and in lieu of Williams’ death assumed the rank of Colonel. Although suffering significant losses, they withdrew to the English camp at the south end of Lake George. There they built a hasty wall of wood and carts and made their stand, supported by cannon and additional forces under General William Johnson. The Indians and Canadians would not attack in the open. When Baron Dieskau was wounded, the entire French force withdrew for Fort Carillon (later called Fort Ticonderoga).

Dieskau was captured, and Johnson would build a more permanent Fort William Henry to protect the site.

Although a senior officer in the Massachusetts militia at the start of the war, Pomeroy had a limited role. He was, after all, nearly seventy years old. But when the Siege of Boston began in 1775, he was among the volunteers that went in support of it. On June 17 a British naval bombardment marked the start of the Battle of Bunker Hill. He borrowed a horse from General Artemas Ward and set out for Charlestown. When he reached the neck of the peninsula, he found troops piled up because the narrow strip was under fire from British warships. Giving the horse to a soldier to return, he shouldered his musket and marched through the barrage. He declined any command, but took a post at the rail fence, fighting with John Stark’s 1st New Hampshire Regiment.

The next week, the Continental Congress named him a brigadier general in the Continental Army. Since his health was not the best, when difficulties arose about seniority, he declined this commission and served instead as a major general in the Massachusetts militia.

When General George Washington asked for support in New Jersey the following year, Pomeroy marched with his militia unit. He didn’t complete the trip, but fell ill and died in Peekskill, New York. He is buried in St. Peter’s Churchyard there in an unmarked grave. The churchyard is now part of Hillside Cemetery.

Honoring Seth Pomeroy in Hillside Cemetery is an estimated 26-foot high monument, being a large square base, a column, and a ball on top. Inscribed in a wreath on one side is “General Seth Pomeroy. Born at Northhampton, Mass., May 20th 1706. Died near this spot Feb. 19th 1777. Inscribed on another side is a quote from him dated February 11, 1777, at Peekskill, perhaps referring to his facing his last days: “I go cheerfully, for I a sure the cause we are engaged in is just, and the call I have to it is clear, and the call of God.”

Base of monument

Plaque near graveyard entrance

Notes

• The Journals and Papers of Seth Pomeroy, edited by Louis DeForest. New Haven, Ct, 1926.
• The Taking of Louisburg 1745 by Samuel Adams Drake, Lee and Shepard Publishers Boston Mass. USA 1891 (reprinted by Kessinger Publishing ISBN 9780548622346)
• Seth Pomeroy: The Forgotten General, by David Correira. Early America Review, Summer/Fall 2011.

Battle of The Cedars

The Battle of The Cedars was a series of military confrontations early in the American Revolution during the Continental Army’s invasion of Quebec that had begun in September 1775. The skirmishes, which involved limited combat, occurred in May 1776 at and around The Cedars, 28 miles west of Montreal, Quebec. Continental Army units were opposed by a small number of British troops leading a larger force of Indians (primarily Iroquois), and militia.

Brigadier General Benedict Arnold, commanding the American military garrison at Montreal, had placed a detachment of his troops at The Cedars in April 1776, after receiving rumors of British and Indian military preparations to the west of Montreal. The garrison surrendered on May 19 after a confrontation with a combined force of British and Indian troops led by Captain George Forster. American reinforcements on their way to The Cedars were also captured after a brief skirmish on May 20. All of the captives were eventually released after negotiations between Forster and Arnold, who was bringing a sizable force into the area. The terms of the agreement required the Americans to release an equal number of British prisoners. However, the deal was repudiated by Congress, and no British prisoners were freed.

Colonel Timothy Bedel and Major Isaac Butterfield, leaders of the American force at The Cedars, were court-martialed and cashiered from the Continental Army for their roles in the affair. After distinguishing himself as a volunteer, Bedel was given a new commission in 1777. News of the affair included greatly inflated reports of casualties, and often included graphic but false accounts of atrocities committed by the Iroquois that made up the majority of the British forces.

A 1764 map showing part of the island of Montreal (L’Isle de Mont Real) with the town (Ville Marie) in the upper right. The Cedars (Les Cèdres) is in the map’s lower left corner.

The Cedars is located on the north shore of the Saint Lawrence River, about 28 miles from the center of modern Montreal, to the southwest of the western tip of the island of Montreal, from which it is separated by the Ottawa River. The nearby rapids in the Saint Lawrence required portage, making The Cedars a strategic landing point for anyone navigating the river to or from Montreal.[6] Crossing of the Ottawa River was made between Fort Anne and Quinze-Chênes,[7] now Vaudreuil.[8]

In September 1775, early in the American Revolution, a Continental Army under the direction first of Major General Philip Schuyler, and later of Brigadier General Richard Montgomery, invaded the British Province of Quebec. The city of Montreal was taken without a fight on November 13, following the Siege of Fort St. Jean. Montgomery left a garrison of troops under the command of Major General David Wooster in control of Montreal before leading the rest of the army to Quebec City. The occupation of Montreal was poorly managed, and relations between the Americans and the population, including those supportive of the Americans, deteriorated for a variety of reasons. One important factor that contributed to the poor relations was the American interdiction of trade with the Indian populations on the upper St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes, since the trade goods might be used to support British garrisons in those areas. The fur trade was economically important to the city, and its absence affected both supporters and opponents of the American cause.[9]

Following the American losses at the battle of Quebec at the end of 1775, Wooster eventually led reinforcements to Quebec. He arrived early in April 1776, and the military administration of Montreal passed temporarily to Colonel Moses Hazen before going to Brigadier General Benedict Arnold, who had been in command at Quebec. The American forces occupying the city numbered about 500, with additional forces at posts outside the city. Wooster had reported to General Schuyler as early as March 5 of rumored scheming between British troops and Indians to the west of the city.[10] In response to these alarming reports, as well as the unauthorized departures of two fur traders and Claude de Lorimier, a British Indian agent from Montreal, Hazen had sent 400 troops commanded by Colonel Timothy Bedel of Bedel’s Regiment to occupy a strategic position at The Cedars in early April.[11] Lieutenant Isaac Butterfield led an advance force that arrived at The Cedars on April 26 and began construction of a wooden stockade fort, fortifying it with two four-pound cannons. Bedel and the rest of the detachment arrived on May 6.[12]

Major General David Wooster

The Indian agent Lorimier traveled west to Oswegatchie, where a company of the 8th Regiment of Foot under the command of George Forster had occupied Fort de La Présentation.[13] Lorimier proposed recruiting a force of Indians to launch an attack on Continental forces at Montreal from the west. When Forster agreed, Lorimier went to Saint Regis, where he recruited 100 Mohawk men from Akwesasne.[14] Word of these activities led the American rebels to fortify The Cedars.[15]

At Fort Niagara in early May, Loyalist Captain John Butler held a conference with several hundred tribesmen, primarily from the Six Nations of the Iroquois, in which his goal was to break pledges of neutrality some of them had made in 1775. Butler, an experienced Indian agent, plied the natives with liquor and tales of combat; he convinced more than 50 Seneca, Cayuga, and Onondaga warriors to join the British cause, as well as some warriors from further west.[16] Historians are uncertain whether any of these recruits participated in the action at The Cedars, but it appears unlikely. Stanley (1973) is of the opinion that Indian participation was limited to those recruited by Lorimier, who went as far as Gananoque to recruit.[17] Lanctot (1967) and Smith do not identify any specific tribes participating in the action.[2][18][19]

James Stanley Goddard, one of the fur traders who left with Lorimier, traveled further west in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to raise an Indian force to oppose the Americans occupying Quebec. He reached Fort Michilimackinac in June, where the British commander, Captain Arent DePeyster, sent him recruiting among the Menominee and Winnebago tribes near Green Bay. DePeyster also sent out Joseph Ainsse, a local Indian interpreter, to recruit from tribes closer to the fort. None of the Indians recruited by these men reached Montreal until well after the Americans had left the city.[20]

Once forces began assembling at Oswegatchie, Lorimier made arrangements with a sympathetic priest near The Cedars for the provisioning of supplies for the troops. With the assistance of some men of the 8th Foot, he strategically hid several shallow-draft boats, known as bateaux, near a point where the Saint Lawrence River could be crossed.[14]

Forster left Oswegatchie on May 12 with about 40 regular troops, 10 British and French-speaking Canadian militia, and 160 Iroquois. On May 14, they picked up 44 more Iroquois at Saint Francis, and camped at the western end of Saint Francis Lake on May 16.[21] On May 17, Forster received scouting reports about the troop strength at The Cedars. The Indians were concerned about the number of troops, but news that the Americans were in retreat from the city of Quebec emboldened them to act.[22]

On May 15, Colonel Bedel left The Cedars, leaving Lieutenant Butterfield in charge of the fort. Bedel later claimed that the reason for his departure was to meet with the friendly Caughnawaga Indians. In his court martial, the judges concluded this claim was suspect.[23] He returned to Montreal and reported that a force of 150 British troops of the 8th Foot and about 500 Iroquois commanded by Captain Forster was approaching. On this news, Colonel John Paterson sent Major Henry Sherburne with 140 men from his regiment toward The Cedars.[24] General Arnold, who was meeting with the retreating Continental Army command at Sorel at the time, returned to Montreal when the news reached him and set about organizing a larger relief force.[25]

Forster’s force landed near the American-occupied fort on May 18, and sent in a demand for surrender. Butterfield countered with a request to withdraw under arms, which Forster refused. The parties exchanged fire. During the course of the exchange, Forster received word that Sherburne had crossed the Ottawa River from the island of Montreal to Quinze-Chênes, but, believing The Cedars to have fallen already, had retreated back across the river. This news caused the besiegers to redouble their efforts the next day. Additional help arrived for the British in the form of about 40 Canadiens under Jean-Baptiste Testard de Montigny; Forster sent them to harass Sherburne. Word then came to Forster that Sherburne had resumed his advance; Butterfield, unaware of this, surrendered the fort.[22][26] The terms of capitulation included a guarantee of the personal safety of the captured men. The Iroquois plundered the fort’s stores, and denied some of the captives small pouches of sometimes valuable personal items.[27]

Sherburne reached Fort Anne, across the Ottawa River from Quinze-Chênes, on May 17. A scout he sent across the river the next day was captured by Lorimier. The scout was allowed to notify Sherburne of his capture; in his message he included a claim that 500 Indians had surrounded the fort at The Cedars. Consequently, Sherburne decided to delay crossing the river, and sent word back to Montreal requesting further assistance.[8]

Sherburne decided to advance on May 20. Some of his men were apparently suffering from the aftereffects of smallpox, so these were left behind. Sherburne landed about 100 of his men at Quinze-Chênes, about 10 miles from The Cedars. When word of this crossing reached Forster, he ordered Lorimier to take 100 Indians and stop Sherburne. Lorimier was at first only able to immediately raise 40 warriors, but was joined on the way by another 40. Sherburne, not realizing that Butterfield had already surrendered, marched his troops right at Lorimier’s advancing force. They fought for about 40 minutes before Sherburne, believing he was being attacked by a much larger force, surrendered.[27] The Iroquois claimed these captives as war spoils, since they were not part of the fort’s garrison, and prepared to kill some of them in retaliation for their own losses. Only the intervention of Forster, who paid a ransom, prevented this; it did not prevent the Iroquois from stripping the prisoners of all but the clothes on their backs.[4]

Following his successes, Forster moved his forces, including all of the prisoners, up to Quinze-Chênes, where more Loyalist militia had assembled. Leaving some of the prisoners there, he advanced on May 23 to Fort Senneville, a fortified works located on the southwest tip of Montreal island that was owned by Montigny.[4] In the meantime, General Arnold gathered most of the few remaining forces in Montreal, and sent requests to the outposts around the city for additional troops. By May 24, he was entrenched at Lachine, south of the city, and his force had reached 450 men. Forster began to advance on Lachine, but decided to retreat back to Quinze-Chênes when his scouts notified him of Arnold’s position. He also received intelligence from Montreal that Arnold’s force was going to be massively reinforced—the reported number of reinforcements was 1,500 to 2,000 men, more than Arnold had available in the area.[28][29]

Once his scouts reported Forster’s retreat, Arnold gave chase. He reached Fort Senneville (which he burned) on May 26, just as Forster’s men were landing on the far shore at Quinze-Chênes.[30][31] Arnold decided to send a group of Caughnawagas, who were friendly to the Americans, with a demand that Forster release his prisoners and a threat that he would destroy area Indian villages if any of the prisoners were harmed. Forster countered that he would permit his Indians to kill the prisoners if Arnold attacked.[31] Arnold attempted to cross the Ottawa River with a number of his men in bateaux, but Forster used the four-pounders captured at The Cedars to drive them back.[31]

Brigadier General Benedict Arnold

Arnold called a war council so the Americans could consider their options. He wanted to mount a surprise attack the next morning; Hazen, who had acquired significant experience fighting Indians in the French and Indian War, argued against the idea. The disagreement between the two men was severe enough that it nearly provoked Arnold to file charges of insubordination against Hazen. The council decided not to act, voting Arnold’s proposed attack down.[32] Early in the morning of May 27, a boat crossed the river carrying Major Sherburne and Forster’s deputy, Lieutenant Parke. Forster, whose forces were somewhat reduced as some of the Indians had returned to their homes, had negotiated a prisoner exchange with Sherburne and Butterfield. After further negotiations, both Arnold and Forster agreed to terms. The American prisoners were returned to Arnold at Fort Anne on May 30, after being delayed for two days by high winds on the river.[33][34]

The Americans never held up their side of the prisoner exchange. Formally repudiating the agreement over the protests of George Washington, the Congress accused Forster of mistreating American prisoners by turning them over to the Indians. In a breach of etiquette, the letter containing the repudiation was delivered to Lieutenant General John Burgoyne, instead of the British commander-in-chief and governor of the province, Guy Carleton.[33] The Congressional action may have been tainted by overly lurid accounts of the action—Charles Carroll, part of a Congressional delegation that was in Montreal at the time, reported that “a hundred or more [American troops] were barbarously murdered by savages.”[35] Arnold’s report of the incident included otherwise unsubstantiated allegations that two prisoners were killed by Forster’s Indians.[32] Some histories of the action (for example, the 1882 history by Jones) include accounts of significant atrocities committed by the Indians, but little supporting evidence has been found. The Congressional repudiation complicated an attempted prisoner exchange in 1781 involving Burgoyne and Henry Laurens, a Congressman from South Carolina whom the British were holding in the Tower of London; Laurens was eventually freed in exchange for a promise to help negotiate Lord Cornwallis’s release.[36][37]

Arnold initially blamed Bedel for the defeat. He removed both Bedel and Butterfield from command and sent them to Sorel for court-martial. Due to the army’s retreat, the two men were not tried until August 1, 1776 at Fort Ticonderoga. Both were convicted and cashiered from the army.[38] Bedel continued to volunteer his services, and following Burgoyne’s surrender at Saratoga in October 1777, he was given a new commission by Congress.[39][40]

The site of some of the skirmishes was designated a National Historic Site of Canada in 1928.[41]

Notes

1. The conventional record of this battle, based mostly on American reports, is 500 Indians and 100 non-Indians (sometimes all characterized as British troops). Kingsford (1893), p. 59, lists these numbers, and, on preceding pages, describes in detail how they are justified.
2. Lanctot (1967), p. 141
3. None of the principal sources describing this action (Smith, Stanley, Kingsford, Lanctot) give any indication that anyone was killed or wounded in the action at The Cedars.
4. Kingsford (1893), p. 51
5. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 373
6. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 365
7. Quinze-Chênes (“Fifteen oaks” in English) was the name of the place at the time. The place was later also known as Quinze Chiens (“fifteen dogs”) or Vaudreuil.
8. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 372
9. These events are recounted in great detail in e.g. Smith (1907), Vol. 1, Lanctot (1967), and Stanley (1973).
10. Wooster (1885), pp. 122–123
11. Lanctot (1967), p. 141, establishes the date, but incorrectly assumes Arnold issued the order. Arnold was still at Quebec City (as was Wooster) on April 2. Arnold confirmed the order when he arrived in Montreal later in April (Smith Vol 2, p. 365).
12. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 366
13. Leighton (2000)
14. Kingsford (1893), pp. 63–64
15. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 363
16. Glatthaar (2007), pp. 112–113
17. Stanley (1973), p. 119
18. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 367
19. Early histories of this action—e.g. Stone (1838) (p. 153) and Beers (1883) (p. 93)—claim that Joseph Brant was among the Indian leaders participating in this action. This assertion is largely based on the behavior of one of the warriors and Arnold’s memoirs; Smith (Vol. 2, p. 596) documents that Brant went to England in November 1775, and did not return to New York until June 1776. Barbara Graymont’s recent biography of Brant (Graymont (2000)) does not mention the event at all.
20. Barnett (2003), p. 27
21. Kingsford (1893), p. 46
22. Kingsford (1893), pp. 47–48
23. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 593
24. Jones (1882), p. 55
25. Martin (1997), p. 210
26. Angus (1955), p. 195
27. Kingsford (1893), pp. 49–50
28. Martin (1997), p. 211
29. Kingsford (1893), p. 52
30. Kingsford (1893), p. 54
31. Martin (1997), p. 212
32. Kingsford (1893), p. 55
33. Kingsford (1893), p. 56
34. Martin (1997), p. 214
35. Kingsford (1893), p. 60
36. Cobbett (1814), pp. 860–862
37. Brant (2007), pp. 182–185
38. Jones (1882), pp. 56–57
39. Smith (1907), Vol. 2, p. 471
40. Metcalf (1915), p. 499
41. “Battle of the Cedars”. Directory of Designations of National Historic Significance of Canada. Parks Canada.

References

• Angus, Alexander David (1955). Old Quebec, in the days before our day (2nd ed.). Montreal: Louis Carrier. OCLC 1296490.
• Barnett, LeRoy; Rosentreter, Roger (2003). Michigan’s Early Military Forces: A Roster and History of Troops Activated Prior to the American Civil War. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. ISBN 978-0-8143-3081-4. OCLC 50899172.
• Beers, J.H. (1883). The History of the County of Brant, Ontario. Toronto: Warner, Beers, & Co. OCLC 35790361.
• Brant, Irving (2007). James Madison the Nationalist 1780–1787. Indianapolis: Read Books. ISBN 978-1-4067-2221-5. OCLC 3390344.
• Cobbett, William; Wright, John; Hansard, Thomas Curson (1814). The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803. Volume 22 (1781–1782). London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme & Brown. OCLC 28837253.
• Glatthaar, Joseph T.; Martin, James Kirby Martin (2007). Forgotten Allies: The Oneida Indians and the American Revolution. New York: Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-8090-4600-3. OCLC 144227352.
• Graymont, Barbara (2000). “Biography of Joseph Brant”. Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online. Archived from the original on 14 February 2009. Retrieved 2009-01-22.
• Jones, Charles Henry (1882). History of the Campaign for the Conquest of Canada in 1776: From the Death of Montgomery to the Retreat of the British Army Under Sir Guy Carleton. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates. OCLC 2110167.
• Kingsford, William (1893). The History of Canada, Volume 6. Toronto: Roswell & Hutchinson. OCLC 3676642. Of the sources included here, Kingsford provides a lengthy and somewhat detailed account of the British view of the action.
• Lanctot, Gustave; Cameron, Margaret M. [translator] (1967). Canada and the American Revolution 1774–1783. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. OCLC 2468989.
• Leighton, Douglas (2000). “Biography of Claude-Nicolas-Guillaume de Lorimier”. Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online.
• Martin, James Kirby (1997). Benedict Arnold: Revolutionary War Hero. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 978-0-8147-5646-1. OCLC 48841329.
• Metcalf, Henry Harrison, et al. (1915). The Granite State Monthly. Volume 47. Manchester, NH: Granite Monthly Co. OCLC 2447262.
• Smith, Justin H (1907). Our Struggle for the Fourteenth Colony, Volumes 1 and 2. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons. OCLC 259236.
• Stanley, George (1973). Canada Invaded 1775–1776. Toronto: Hakkert. ISBN 978-0-88866-578-2. OCLC 4807930.
• Stone, William Leete (1838). Life of Joseph Brant-Thayendanegea. New York: Alexander V. Blake. OCLC 3182176.
• Wooster, David; Osborn, Elbert (1885). Genealogy of the Woosters in America. San Francisco: M. Weiss. OCLC 666535. (contains transcripts of General Wooster’s letters while in command at Montreal)

Charles Willing, two time Mayor of Philadelphia

Charles Willing (May 18, 1710, Bristol, England – November 30, 1754, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) was a successful Philadelphia merchant, trader and politician; twice he served as Mayor of Philadelphia, from 1748 to 1749 and again in 1754.

Portrait of Charles Willing by John Wollaston

His wife’s grandfather, Edward Shippen, and his eldest son, Thomas Willing, also served as mayors of Philadelphia. Thomas was also a Delegate to the Continental Congress from Pennsylvania.

Willing had eleven children. Daughter Mary Willing Byrd, born September 24, 1740, married William Byrd.[1]

Daughter Elizabeth (February 10, 1742 – January 15, 1830) married Samuel Powel, a mayor of Philadelphia.[1]

Robert Morris (financier) apprenticed at the firm of Willing & Co., and later became a partner with Thomas in the renamed firm of Willing Morris & Co.[2]

He is buried at Christ Church Burial Ground in Philadelphia.

References

1. Charles Penrose Keith (1997), The Provincial Councilors of Pennsylvania: Who Held Office Between 1733 and 1776, Genealogical Publishing, ISBN 9780806315294, http://books.google.com/?id=6Wi0h3sFrbMC&pg=PA89&dq=%22Charles+Willing%221710
2. Rappleye, Charles. Robert Morris: Financier of the American Revolution (2010) ISBN 978-1416570912