USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Acton > An address delivered at Acton, July 21, 1835, being the first centennial anniversary of the organization of the town : with an appendix > Part 4
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
Just before the publication of Mr. Shattuck's book, there appeared, in a Concord newspaper, a well-written anonymous article, on the same subject. It was also printed in a pamphlet, and I am indebted to some one for a copy of it, by mail. From its having, at its head, " The History of the Fight at Concord,"-" The History of the Bat- tle at Lexington, by Elias Phinney, Esq.," - and the " Centennial Address at Acton," the author may be supposed to have had them par- ticularly in view. With the exception of Mr. Phinney's book, they are not, however, expressly alluded to. The apparent object was to prove that the operations at Concord, though perhaps dictated by good sense, more than by military skill or science, were in strict conformity with the established rules of warfare. The writer is understood to be a na- tive, though not, for some years past, an inhabitant of Concord.
The author of the foregoing Address, was aware that, in treating of the events of the 19th of April, 1775, he must either depart from his- torical truth, or place himself in collision with many mnuch respected, and long esteemed friends. He could not hesitate which to choose. And it seemed especially due to the memory of Captain Davis, that
4
26
such an occasion should not pass, without redeeming his character from the representation complained of, by stating the testimony of the surviving members of his company.
Let it be understood that none other than the purest intentions are imputed to Dr. Ripley. That gentleman is too well and too exten- sively known, to be suspected of wilful misrepresentation. It was nat- ural that he should give credence to the traditions of his own people ; it was as natural that such a story should have been originated by some one at the time; and it was not of a nature to have induced those, whose characters for courage might seem to depend on its propa- gation, to be very solicitous to disseminate the truth.
There was one fact, which could not be concealed or denied. Capt. Davis led his company in front. He had never claimed that place before. Capt. Brown, and Capt. Miles commanded older companies of minute-men, and were on the ground long before Capt. Davis ar- rived ; and it was the friends and the property of their men that were in danger. Some explanation must have been given, at the time. The inquiry must have been often made, and many, doubtless, gave the true answer. But, in the lapse of half a century, while a new generation was gradually taking the place of the actors in the scene, the explana- tions, most honorary to their memories, were alone retained ; so that, in 1827, it came to be published to the world that the commanders of the Concord minute-men, on the 19th of April, 1775, were so indiffer- ent to their rights, that, without remonstrance at the time, or complaint afterwards, they permitted a junior officer, from Acton, to usurp their place on the " right," unasking and unasked, and lead them to the de- fence of their " own village !"
In the Introduction to the History of the Fight at Concord, is the following passage :-
" We very much regret that accurate records of the events and transactions of the 19th of April, 1775, at Concord, were not made at the time, and carefully preserved. This might have prevented those errors and misrepresentations of which we now complain. Some min- utes indeed were made in after years-some facts were noted, and many are remembered by living witnesses." And, on the same page, it is added. " The blood of our patriotic fathers, and the voice of our beloved country, seem imperiously to demand of us a fair, unvarnish- ed statement of facts, respecting the fight at Concord. And this shall be our endeavor, without evasion or false coloring. It may be added that the nations of the earth are interested in the American Revolu- tion, and they have a right to know, from us, the time, place, and cir- cumstances of the actual commencement of a war, of such vast conse- quences. It is our aim to give them correct information."
All will heartily join in regretting the deficiency of evidence, and in applauding the resolution to give facts only, without varnish or coloring. But how far facts only have been given,-on what authority they are based,-what facts have been suppressed, and in what instances a little varnish has been used, may not be entirely certain.
How far the style or the matter of the book is to be imputed to the gentleman, whose name only appears on the title-page, it is difficult to say. But as the names, the number, and the characters of the " other citizens" are kept out of sight, it seems reasonable to impute
27
to one or more of them whatever is exceptionable, and to award the remainder to the individual, whose name, age and character are known to the public.
A disposition to collect together traditionary tales, and publish them as established facts, without knowing the evidence, on which they rest, is among the greatest faults of the historian. The book may be made larger, and may be read with more interest ; but the fountains of his- torical truth are irretrievably corrupted.
The public have now before thein three recent publications-two of them professed histories-each giving a different account of the man- ner in which Capt. Davis obtained the front of the battalion, at the Concord Fight; and neither of the writers can maintain his own state- ment, without repudiating not only the other two, but also the affida- vits of two survivors of the company, who followed Capt. Davis to the scene of action.
First came the History of the Fight at Concord, in which it is stat- ed, as matter of history, (page 15,) that after the companies had form- ed, on the high land at the northwest of the north bridge, and while they were in that position, Capt. Davis arrived, and brought on his company ;- that he passed by the other companies, and took the right of the whole, which placed him nearest the bridge, and in front, when they marched to meet the enemy.
If the word " right" was printed in italics inadvertently, and without intending to make an impression that Capt. Davis thus assumed a posi- tion above his superiors in rank, without knowing that in wheeling for the march it would bring his company in front, it was unfortunate that the same type was preserved, in the second edition, printed in 1832.
Next appeared the anonymous writer, before mentioned. In his pub- lication, (page 5,) it is asserted, without qualification, that " Col. Bar- rett advanced to the high bank of the river, opposite the North Bridge, where a consultation of officers was had, and the battalion was form- ed. Major Buttrick ordered the Adjutant to bring forward the battal- ion to the road. When there, he, accompanied by Col. Robinson, put himself at its head. The men had been previously cautioned, by Col. Barrett, as they passed him, in leaving the field, ' not to fire unless fired upon.' After the battalion had thus reached the road, Capt. Da- vis and Company from Acton appeared advancing, and passed in front ; the battalion closed up in rear of him, and the march continued with- out a moment's delay ; Major Buttrick with Col. Robinson, taking post in front of Capt. Davis, leading the column as now formed."
And at last comes Mr. Shattuck, (page 111,) who gives us the ac- count as follows : -
" Joseph Hosmer, acting as adjutant, formed the soldiers as they ar- rived singly, or in squads, on the field westerly of Col. Jonas Buttrick's present residence ; the minute-companies on the right, and the militia on the left, facing the town. He then, observing an unusual smoke arising from the centre of the town, went to the officers, and citizens in consultation on the high ground near by, and inquired, earnestly, " Will you let them burn the town down ?" They then, with those exciting scenes before them, deliberately, with noble patriotism and firmness, " resolved to march into the middle of the town, to defend their
28
homes, or die in the attempt ;" at the same time, they resolved not to fire unless fired upon. " They acted upon principle, and in the fear of God."
The author here cites his authority, in a note, and professes to quote from " The History of the Fight at Concord, by the Rev. Dr. Ripley," omitting " with other citizens of Concord." To have made the quota- tion complete, however, he should have omitted the sentence between the two quotations, which is his own, and inserted instead-" They re- solved also that they would DO NO VIOLENCE unless violently opposed ; that not a gun should be fired by an American unless fired upon by the British." If Mr. Shattuck was one of the " other citizens," and so was quoting himself, he perhaps felt at liberty thus to qualify the reso- lution ; and it might well occur to him, that, if the enemy had neither opposed their march, nor given them a shot, but had contented them- selves with continuing the destruction of the military stores, and burn- ing down their " homes," it would not have been easy to " defend" them, without doing some violence, and perhaps firing some guns.
But to return to his narration.
" Col. Barrett immediately gave orders to march, by wheeling from the right. Major Buttrick requested Col. Robinson to accompany him, and led them in double file to the scene of action. When they came to the road leading from Capt. Brown's to the bridge, a part of the Acton minute-company, under Captain Davis, passed by, in front, marched a short distance toward the bridge, and halted. Being in files of two abreast, the Concord minute-company, under Captain Brown, being before at the head, marched up the north side, till they came equally in front. The precise position, however, of each com- pany cannot, now, be fully ascertained." The paragraph closes with a description of the road-supplying that part of the story which was unfortunately missing.
None of these gentlemen state the evidence, on which they make these extraordinary and contradictory statements. If there is any evi- dence that Capt. Davis took the right, on the parade ground, as affirm- ed in the first publication, let us have it. If it be true, too, that he arrived by the back road, which passed on the north and east sides of the hill, so as to pass in front of the battalion, as they reached that road, and that the march was continued, in that order, without a mo- ment's delay, let us have the evidence. And, if it be true also, that the company approached by the main road, on the west and south sides of the hill, and passed, in front of the battalion, at the junction of the two roads ; and, advancing a short distance toward the bridge, halted, and that Capt. Davis there stood, like a well-disciplined off-ox, waiting for Major Buttrick to drive up the near one on "the north side,"- let us have the evidence of that too.
In the mean time, the reader is desired to examine the depositions of Mr. Smith, Mr. Thorp, and Mr. Handley, and determine for him- self, what to believe. There are three others of the company living in Acton, viz. Benjamin Hayward, Joseph Chaffin, and Moses Woods. They all joined in the pursuit, in the afternoon, but were not present at the fight ; except perhaps Deacon Hayward, whose decayed facul- ties prevented any attempt to obtain his testimony. Mr. Chaffin and Mr. Woods, especially the latter, are also infirm, both in body and
29
mind, and give but little, that can be relied on, as to what took place, after their arrival. The writer has conversed with these two, but not with Deacon Hayward.
It will be perceived that the depositions of Mr. Smith and Mr. Thorp both state, that Major Buttrick gave orders to fire, as soon as he per- ceived that Blanchard was wounded by the volley ; that Davis and Hosmer were not killed by the volley, but by the return fire of the ene- my. It was on this authority that it was stated, in the Address, that no guns were fired after Davis fell; and that all which was done in the forenoon, was done before that event. In their depositions, taken sub- sequently, the witnesses both say they may be mistaken, as to this fact, as there was very little time between the volley and the return fire. It is believed, however, that they were not mistaken ; first, for the very good reason, that it is hardly possible that the volley should have done the whole execution, and the return fire should be without any effect. And this is still more incredible, if it is to be believed that the firing lasted " a minute or two," or " a few minutes," as alleged, in the two histories, before quoted. There is no pretence, however, for believing this. There is no fact, about which the deponents are more sure, than that the British retreated, in haste, immediately after returning the fire. They surely know whether they had time to fire but once, and whether they fired a second time, or not.
But further ; any one who will read, impartially, and with attention, the depositions, published by Mr. Shattuck, (pages 347 and 348,) will come to the conclusion, that none of the Americans were killed by the volley. They were all taken at Lexington, by a Committee of the Provincial Congress, on the 23d of April, 1775, and were made the foundation of a manifesto, or address, which the Congress published, to place the conduct of the provincials, at Concord, and Lexington, in the most justifiable point of view. It is true, that the Congress pro- fessed to consider it clearly proved, by the depositions, and they so published the fact, that two of the Americans were killed at the bridge, before they fired on the British. (See Hist. of the Fight, page 39.) But, it is believed, the reader will feel at liberty to examine the proceed- ings of the Congress, and that he will come to a different conclusion.
The deponents were thirty in number. Col. James Barrett testified that two of his men were killed, and several others wounded, before his detachment returned the fire; and he is confirmed by the deposi- tions of Bradbury Robinson, Samuel Spring, and Thaddeus Bancroft, all of Concord, and James Adams of Lincoln ; and these are all of the thirty, who would so testify.
Capt. Nathan Barrett ; Lieuts. Jonathan Farrar, Joseph Butler, and Francis Wheeler ; Ensign John Barrett, and eleven privates, all of Concord, sixteen in the whole, give a particular account of the fight, and only say, as to the fact in question, " when we had got near the bridge, they fired on our men, first three guns, one after the other, and then a considerable number more, upon which, and not before, we fired upon the regulars, and they retreated ;" not saying whether any were killed, or not.
John Hoar, and seven others, of Lincoln, testified, in precisely the same manner, in a separate deposition.
30
The conclusion that none of the twenty-four, above named, would confirm Col. Barrett's testimony is the more irresistible, because two of the sixteen were selected, and gave their additional deposition, at the same time and place, in the following most remarkable language. The whole deposition is given.
" We, Joseph Butler and Ephraim Melvin do testify and declare, that when the regular troops fired upon our people, at the north bridge, in Concord, as related in the foregoing depositions, they SHOT one, and we believe, two of our people, before we fired a single gun at them ;" saying nothing about the wounded, as mentioned by Col. Barrett, and the four who support him.
Timothy Minot, Jr., of Concord, testified that he was a spectator, and that " they fired one gun, then two or three more, before the men that were stationed on the westerly part of said bridge fired upon them."
It does not appear, generally, what were the relative opportunities of these several witnesses for personal observation. But it is told us in the History of the Fight, (p. 17,) that " Col. Barrett continued on horse- back in the rear, giving directions to the armed men collecting and mo- mently increasing in number ;" and yet, with all these depositions be- fore them, the Congress rely on his oath and that of four others, per- haps equally ignorant how the fact was ; and OMIT to take the testimo- ny of the two Captains nearest to Capt. Davis, namely Captain Brown, and Captain Miles ; and also that of Major Buttrick, who was at Capt. Davis's side, and gave the order to fire ; and that of Col. Rob- inson, who walked by his side; ONE of whom, at least, must KNOW whether Capt. Davis fell before, or after the order was given. Would not the testimony of these two last have proved more than that of Lt. Butler and Mr. Melvin ?
The reader is desired to keep in mind, that the object of the Con- gress, in taking these depositions, was to obtain evidence, on which to publish, on their official responsibility, all that could be substantiated, to justify the Americans, at Lexington and Concord, in firing on the king's troops. It was a great point, to prove that Americans were killed, at Concord, before they fired. And let it be asked, whether the official declaration was supported by such testimony as would have been obtained, if that declaration had been true ?
Whatever may be thought of Col. Barrett's deposition, it is but jus- tice to him to say that he was twenty-one years older than Major But- trick ; and, at the age of sixty-five, he may be excused for remaining on horseback in the rear ; and, if such was the fact, for not joining in the pursuit, in the afternoon.
But even supposing the Acton witnesses to be mistaken, as to the exact time when Capt. Davis was killed, it does not affect the charac- ter of the transactions which followed. On this supposition, it would only be necessary to vary the language of the address, by saying that noth- ing was done, by the officers in command, after Davis fell, except that " on seeing this, as quickly as possible, Major Buttrick leaped from the ground, and, partly turning to his men, exclaimed, " Fire, fellow-sol- diers, for God's sake, Fire." (See Hist. of the Fight, page 18.) Sup- pose this to be the language of command, and not of terror and dis- may, it was surely impossible to do less. The enemy were within
31
" ten or fifteen rods," and had fired, and killed Davis and Hosmer. Their number was probably about one fourth the number of the Amer- icans. The enemy consisted of one hundred at most. And though Mr. Shattuck estimates the Americans at two hundred and fifty or three hundred, both the History of the Fight, and the pamphlet before mentioned, assert that they consisted of about four hundred and fifty.
It would be strange indeed, if such a force, under such circum- stances, had had no orders to fire. The order was given and obeyed. The fire was returned, and the enemy immediately retreated toward the village. But what became of the man, who had resolved " to march into the middle of the town for its defence, or die in the attempt? " Was he among those, who " rushed over the bridge ;" or was he with the " part, which returned to the high ground, conveying and taking care of the dead ?" Mr. Smith and Mr. Thorp say, they neither saw or heard of him afterwards, during the day. And, although both Mr. Shattuck, and the " other citizens of Concord " give a very particular account of all the subsequent transactions of the day, and name many individuals, who distinguished themselves, in the afternoon, Major Buttrick is not once mentioned or alluded to; and yet, by some means or other, his " situation gained him distinguished celebrity and honor," and a fear seems to be expressed, that all others may have been in some danger of being eclipsed by his fame. (See Hist. of the Fight, page 18.)
It is unpleasant, thus to deal with the military character of a respect- able and worthy man, who has long since been numbered with the dead. The necessity of it has grown out of an injudicious attempt, on the part of the living, to magnify a skirmish- a fight, as it was, at the time, and has, ever since, been called, into a regularly conducted bat- tle ; and to make it appear, in history, that the Americans who assem- bled in the morning, without any experience, or knowledge of the art of warfare, conducted the battle with great skill, courage, and intrepid- ity. Not satisfied with claiming for their town, the honor of its being the place, where the first British blood was spilt, and where the first resistance was made, they must have it also, that most of what was ac- tually done was planned and executed by officers belonging to the town of Concord. But the particular matter of complaint is, that, in attempt- ing to show this, they have endeavored to increase their number of laurels, by taking from the brow of another. That other is dead also ; and whether he belonged to. Acton, or not, is of no importance, com- pared with the duty of doing justice to his character.
The authors of the History of the Fight, content themselves with the old name, and confine it to the transactions at the bridge. For, at page 20, they say, " After the fight, the British hastily collected their scattered parties, and commenced their retreat about 12 o'clock." Mr. Shattuck, however, calls it the " Battle of Concord ;" and, as if aware of the necessity, he calls to his aid, as a motto to the chapter which bears that name, the following veritable passage from an article in a Boston newspaper of May, 1775, entitled, " The Rural Heroes ; or, the Battle of Concord." The author of the article doubtless had Mr. Shattuck in his prophetic eye.
" Some future historian will relate with pleasure, and the latest pos-
32
terity will read with wonder and admiration, how three hundred in- trepid rural sons of freedom, drove before them more than five times their number of regular well-appointed troops, and forced them to take shelter behind their own bulwarks."
As Mr. Shattuck states the British forces at Concord at eight hun- dred, and the reinforcement, which met them at Lexington, at eleven hundred, (which is in accordance with other historians,) it is true that more than five times three hundred were forced to take shelter be- hind their own bulwarks ; but the assertion that they were forced to do so, by three hundred men, is too ridiculous to be called false. To be candid, however, and making just and proper allowance for the age of the paper, the news must be admitted to be very remarkable.
The firing at the bridge took place before* ten o'clock, and the Brit- ish retreated from the village " nearly at 12 o'clock." But, in order to connect the whole day together, as one continued engagement, and give the reader the idea that it was all the " Battle of Concord," the firing is stated to have taken place " between ten and eleven o'clock," and the British to have left " a little before twelve." The interval be- ing thus made as short as possible, it is endeavored to be filled up, by a pretence never before set up, not even in the History of the Fight, that " they had followed the retreating party between the bridge and the village, and fired single-handed, from the high ground, or from be- hind such shelter as came in their way, and thus began a mode of war- fare, which cost many a one his life." This new link in the chain not seeming quite long enough to connect the engagement at the bridge with that at Merriam's corner, Mr. Shattuck, in his next sentence, says that the British retreated from the village, and, " on arriving at Merriam's corner, they were attacked by the provincials, who had pro- ceeded across the great fields, in conjunction with a company from Reading." It is not forgotten, that, in the History of the Fight, no such attack is pretended. On the contrary, the engagement at Merriam's corner is represented as taking place after the arrival, not only of the Reading company, but of Col. Thompson " with a body of militia from Billerica and its vicinity," and of a company from East-Sudbury ; and, as to the provincials, who " had proceeded" &c., they are only said to have overtaken the enemy, as they passed the road from Bed- ford, (which is above Merriam's corner.) There are attempts to pro- duce the same impression in other parts of the book. See the note at page 110.
* The wife of Amos Handley, Jr., of Acton, has, in her possession, a book containing records of births, deaths and marriages, in Concord, fiom 1688 to 1709. At that time, it appears to have been disused as a regular book of records ; and it afterwards came into the possession of Capt. David Brown, the commander of one of the Concord minute-companies. It contains a record of his own birth, and that of eight other children of his father, whose name was Ephaim; also the record of the births of his own children, being twelve in number, the youngest in 1776.
The following is one page copied entire : -
" June 13, 1768. My honored mother, Hannah Brown, departed this life, being in the 70th year of her age. Written by David Brown."
" April 19, 1775. The squirmish was at Concord north bridge ; Capt. Davis, of Acton, killed, and one Hosmer, of Acton, between nine and ten of the clock in the forenoon, and it lasted till dusk, at which time the enemy got down to Charlestown."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.