History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II, Part 53

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898,
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1286

USA > New York > Westchester County > History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II > Part 53

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).

From the honr I conversed with General Washington's officer, and pernscd these papers, I have regretted the injustice of which I had been guilty, without any consciousness that I was iujurions.

Were I to take the fall of the tree, or I should rather say, its destrnc- tion, for the subject of another Ode, how must I speak of the fall of An- dre, convinced, as I now am, that it was the inevitable consequence of those rash hazards to which he put his safety in the zeal of being useful to the English canse ? Must I couslder that the tree as Anpernaturally destroyed in token of the anger of Ileaven against those who doomed the ever dear victim who was the first seized beneath its honghs ? That would bo to persist in sentiments which I have long known were erro- neons, uud unjust to the character of one of the wisest and best of men : the father niv preserver of his country, her rescuer from oppression, the source of her independence and rising prosperity. * * * *

V11. REMARKS IN "THE LONDON DAILY NEWS. "

[Quoted hy Major Biddle, in the Notes to his paper on The Case of Major Andre. ]

The social qualities and the letters of Andre, although they are always bronght forward in his favor, do not ertenuate his crime, as they show that, whatever hls moral principles may havo been, he had the education of an English gentleman. If anything, his memory has been treated with too great clemency. If monuments are to be erected in Westminster Abbey to men of such lax morality, it is time for honesty to hide its head.

V111. REMARKS IN "THE CRITIC AND LITERARY JOURNAL." LONDON,

AUGUST, 15, 1857.

[Qnoted by Major .Biddle, in lils notes to hls paper ou The Capture of Major .Indre.]

The Historical Society at Philadelphia, has Iately been occupied by the consideration of a question of some interest to ns, as Englishmen- numely, the excention of Major Andre as a spy during the great Amuerl- cun War of Independence.

In the last volume of his History of England, Lord Mahon brought

1 The Earl was defending lilmself, In this letter, from the strictures of General Harry Loe, concerning the execution of Colonel Hayne of South Carolina.

3 There Is a grave doubt of the correctursa of this story, so far as Gen- cral Washington is said to have participated in the transaction.

221

GREENBURGH.

against the memory of Washington a very grave charge, in connection with this melancholy event, terming it "the greatest blot" upon the career of Washington. *

* * * We are not, of course, * surprised that these results are altogether favorable to the American hero, but we must in justice adiuit, that we think that the evidence produced by Major Biddle would be sufficient to bring an English jury to the same way of thinking. There can be no doubt that Andre, "the amiable Spy," as Charles Lamb called him, was engaged, at the time of his capture, in a manner which subjected him to death upon the gallows, by the international rules of wurfare, as practiced betirecn all civilized nations, HIis enterprise, if successful, would have been fatal to the American cause ; and he attempted to accomplish it by fraud and treachery. He had been in communication with the arch.traitor Arnold, and bore upon his dis- guised person the documents with which that Judas had supplied him, and which would have sealed the fate of the Americaus. Finally, he was caught within the American lines, an enemy in disguise, spying into their w akness, and endeavoring to compass their destruction. These facts being prored, we do not see how any one can doubt for a moment, not only that he had JustLY incurred the penalty of being a spy, but that, vader the circum- stances, it was impossible for Washington to overlook the crime. * *

* * * We have always considered that his life was sacri ficed to save that of a knave. If every one had their due the traitor Arnold would have been given up, and then the Americans would have let Andre go free. As it was, however, Washington had no alternative. The prisoner was regularly tried before a proper tribunal, and received the fate which he had incurred. Lord Mahon owes to the memory of the great American patriot the reparation of an apology, or else he owes to his own fame as a historian, a refutation of the facts upon which the Americans rely.

IX. REMARKS OF JOHN HOWARD HINTON, THE HISTORIAN.

[From History and Topography of the United States, second edition, Lon-

don, 1834, i. 306, note.]

The General officers who reported his case lamented the necessity they were under to advise that as a spy he should be hung ; and the heart of General Washington was wrung with anguish when he signed his death warrant. But the fatal wound that would have been inflicted on the country, had Arnold's treason succeeded, made the sacrifice necessary for the public safety.

X. E. P. COKE, OF THE XLVTII REGT. FOOT. [Quoted by Major Biddle, in The Case of Major Andre.]

I believe that the Americans, generally, sympathised in his fate ; and that great efforts were made by Washington to capture Arnold, aud thus save Andre. Though it must be allowed that he suffered according to the rules of civilized warfare, yet, still, I am one of those who think, con- sidering all the circumstances of the case, that Andre might have been well spared ; and such an act of mercy would have added another ray to the lustre of Washington's name.

X1. REMARKS OF " THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE."

[From a critic on Lord Mahon's History of England. in Vol. XLIII. New Series, 5-7. Edit. London, Jannary, 1855.]

Andre's case was a most unfortunate oue, but we cannot think that the Court of Inquiry was legally wrong in its adjudication, not that Washington's fame will suffer for having carried out the sentence. A spy is defined by writers on National Law as one who find means to ob- tain a knowledge of the enemy's affairs, and then gives intelligence thereof to his employers. He generally carries out his purpose through the treachery of some other person. Whether or not he is invited by that person to make his inquiries, or whether that person be a General or a civilian, matters not. A military man found within the enemy's lines in disguise, and with proofs upon his person that he has employed treachery in order to obtain information, may be treated-and this is the doctrine of those authorities to whom Lord Mahou alludes-as a spy. (pp. 6, 7.) *

* * *

But it is thought that Washington should have interfered to give Andre the death of a soldier, and not that of a felon. Even that is far from clear. Audre was either a spy or lie was a prisoner at war. Only in the former case could his life be taken. Any deviation from the usual mode of punishment inflicted upon a spy might have been thought to iutimate a douht as to the propriety of his sentence. They who are most shocked with the punishment as inflicted, would, in case Washing- ton had altered the punishment, have inferred that he entertafued doubts as to whether Andre was liable to be treated as a spy, aud conse-

quently whether he ought to have been punished at all. The moment Andre parted with his uniform he became, legally speaking, a spy, an l amenable to death in that character. Upon this point jurists, wc beliere, are now agreed. Whether mercy should have been extended to him was # question of public policy. Washington no doubt considered the ques- tion solely with a view to what was best for the interests of America at the period of Arnold's defection, aud we believe that future ages will con- firm the propriety of his decision.

To these opinions from British sources may be added, as representing the common idea of the American people, the summing up of the case as given by our illustrious poet and publicist, the late William Cullen Bryant, in his " History of the United States." In the fourth volume of that great work he gives his deliberate and judicial conviction in regard to Andre's character, conduct and execution in the 1 following terms :

" André, after his capture, wrote at once to Washington, and an- nounced his true uame and condition. 'It is to vindicate my fame,' lie said, 'that I speak, and not to solicit security.' Nevertheless, the letter was meant as a defence and a solicitation-an anticipation of a probable indictment aud a possible verdict. As yet there had been no accusation ; he was hinuself the first to put a construction upon the facts of the case. He had been betrayed, he said, 'into the vile condition of an enemy in disguise within your posts.' 'I was involuntarily an impostor.' This his standing before the court of public opinion, for that time, and for all time to come, was fixed by himself as an enemy in disguise-in a vile position - as an impostor. Was it true that this was his misfortune rather than a fault ? that he was the victim of treachery, betrayed in spite of himself into a false position ? The case is a remarkable instance of the value of the first word.

" The court-martial decided that as a spy he deserved to suffer an igno- minious death. The falsehood that he was betrayed against his will into that nnhappy position had no weight with the court. Every step he had taken was takeu, as we have shown, of huis owu free will. He left the Vulture with alacrity, against the advice of his friends; he made uo effort to return to the ship that night, but weut willingly to Smith's house with Arnold to conclude the arrangements for the nefarious business that had brought them together, aud for the successful accomplishment of which he was to be made a Brigadier-General. That circumstances in- tervened which prevented his return to the ship the next day was a cou- tingency of which he took the risk when he left her ; he accepted a dis- guise ; he hid upon his persou the documents which would enable bis commander to strike a terrible, if not a fatal blow at the enemy ; all his acts were the acts of a spy ; he assumed the responsibility they inevitably involved against the judgment of his friends, against the positive orders of his General, against even his owu better sense of prudence when he was free to judge with cooluess.

" Nevertheless, for a hundred years, that first statement of his-that he had been betrayed into a false position-has been accepted by multi- tudes of people as true, and in spite of its sophistry and falsehood has spread a deceptive light over the whole transaction. He was, indeed, the oue victim of Arnold's abortive treachery to his country ; hut this was not treachery to him ; his betrayal was self-betrayal. . . . That he was a gentlemau, a man of culture and of many accomplishments, of an agreeable person and captivating manners, and that he talked much of his high sense of. houor, should uot, as it did not with his judges, cover up in the least the true character of the conduct that has made hiu famous rather than infamous. The sympathy that regrets the fate of one with many admirable qualities degenerates into mawkish senti- mentality when it remembers only those qualities and forgets the crime which the possession of such qualities does not palliate, and ought to have prevented. llis associates and superiors in the British army had no other plea to offer on his behalf than that he acted under a flag of trnce. lIe acknowledged this was not true, and rested on the defence that he was treacherously dealt with. One plea was as false as the other. Had the great crime in which he was an accessory succeeded, the execrations which the world has always visited upon his principal would no doubt have fallen upon him in equal measure.

It is well-known that on January 13, 1817, the Hon. Benjamin Tallinadge, of Connecticut, a member of the United States House of Representatives, de-

222

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

livered before that body, a speech upon a bill to al- low an additional pen-ion to John Panlding, in which he made an ill-advised and unjust attack upon the integrity and patriotism of the three eaptors of Major Andre. Paulding was in needy circumstances, and an application had been inade to Congress in his behalf. While the résumé of the debate in the ensu- ing extract from Niles' Weekly Register, published at the time, will afford a general idea of Colonel Tall- madge's charges, it will also show that his statements were received with ineredulity and surprise, and were promptly rejected on the floor of the Honse. This is the résumé :

Monday, Jan. 13 .- Mr. Chappel made a report unfavorable to the peti- tion of John Paulding (one of the citizens who captured the British Adjutant-general Andre, during the late revolutionary war), who prays for an increase of the pension allowed to him by the government in con- sequence of that service.

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

Mr. Wright moved to reverse the report of the committee, and to de- clare that the prayer of the petitioner ought to be granted.

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

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

This statement was roceived with surprise and incredulity, as to Major Andro's correctness, by gentlemen on the other side of this question. It was very extraordinary, it was said, that at a day so much neurer the transaction than at the present, there had existed no doubt on the sub- ject, and C'ougress as a mark of public gratitude for their honorable conduct on this important occasion, settled on these persous ponsions for life. The testimony was strongly stated by one of the gentlemen (Geu. Smith) to Major Andre's high character and honor, it was impossible, it was said, that tho character and conduct of tho men should have been as this day represented, yet so differently depicted. Tho statement of Major Andre, subject as it must have boen to bo discolored by misappre- hensions of the charneter and motives of Americans, among whom patriotism pervades every rank In Ilfe, It was urged, ought to have no weight, indeed It ought not to have been mentioned In competition with facts on record and established by full investigation, during the

lifetime of General Washington, who certainly knew all the circuin- stances of the transaction.

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

A motion was made by Mr. Forsyth (and lost) to postpone the re- port to give further time to examine the correctness of the extra- ordinary view of the subject, which had been presented by Mr. Tall- madge.

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

The question on tho reversing the report of the committee was de- cided in the negative, Ayes, 53 ; Noes, 8) or 90.

Mr. Little, having madean nusuccessful motion to postpone the further consideration of the report, in the hope that a full examination would be made of the question to-day as to the merits of these mien, whom history described as pure and incorruptible patriots, and whom he fully believed to have been 80-

The report was agree to.

It is worthy of notice that Colonel Tallmadge based his charges " on the authority of the declarations of Major Andre, made while in the eustody of Colonel Tallmadge." The best, if not the only, exense for Colonel Tallmadge's singular attitnde is, that having had the charge of Major Andre after his capture, and having been bronghit into elose relations with him, he was not only tonched with sympathy for his misfor- tunes, but was led to confide too implicitly in his rep- resentations, in spite of the formidable facts in Andre's own letters and life. He had listened to the story of An- dre who naturally would have anything but love for the inflexible men who stopped him, and who refused every indncement to let him go, until his account of them as mere marauders in search of plunder made its impression upon Colonel Tallmadge's mind and per- manently colored his opinions. So that Colonel Tall- madge's attack was at bottom only Major Andre's at- tack npon the integrity and patriotie devotion of his eaptors. It was, however, only a passing eloud, which the winds soon blew out of sight, leaving the heavens as clear as before.

In answer to this attack, Isaac Van Wart, one of - the three eaptors, made his sworn statement on Jan- uary 28, 1817, to which his neighbors added their own strong indorsement of his character and life. The sworn statement and the added testimony are as fol- lows :

Isaac Van Wart, of the town of Mount Pleasant, in the county of Westchester, being duly sworn, doth depose and say, that he is one of tho three persons who arrested Major Andre, during the American Revolutionary War, and conducted him to tho American camp. That he, this Deponent, together with David Williams and John Paul- diug, had secreted themselves at the side of the highway, for the pur- pose of detecting any persons coming from, or having nnmwful inter- course with tho enemy, being between the two urmies, a service not uncommon in thoso times. That this Deponeut and his companions were armed with munskets, and, upon seeing Major Andre approuch the place where they were concealed, they arose and presented their muus- kets at him und required him to stop, which he did. lle then asked them whether they belonged ta his party ? and then they asked him which was his party ? to which he replied " The lower party ;" upon which they, deeming u little stratagem, under such circumstances, 101 ouly justitiabile, but necessary, gave him to understand that they were of his party ; upon which he joyfully declared himself to be a British uf

223

GREENBURGH.

ficer, and told them that he had been out upon very particular business. Having ascortained thus much, this Deponent and his companions unde- ceived him as to their characters, declaring themselves Americans and that he must consider himself their prisoner. Upon this, with seeming unconcorn, he said he had a pass frou General Arnold, which he exhibited, and then iusisted on their permitting him to proceed. But they told him that as he had confessed himself to be a British of- hver, they deemed it to be their duty to convey him to the American camp ; aud then took him into a wood, a short distance from the highway, in order to guard against being surprisod by parties of the enemy, who were frequently recouuoitering in that neighborhood. That, when they had him in the wood, they proceeded to search him for the purpose of ascertaining who and what he was, and found iuside of his stockings and boots, next to his bare feet, papers that satisfied them that he was a spy. Major Andre now showed them his gold watch, and remarked that it was evidence of his being a gentleman, aud also promised to make them any reward they might uame if they would hut perwit him to proceed, which they refused. Ho then told them that if they doubted the fulfillment of his promise, they might conceal him in some secret place and keep him there until they could send to New York and re- coive their reward. And this Deponent expressly declares, that every offer urade by Major Audre to them was promptly ,and resolutely re- fused. And for himself he solemnly declares that he had not, and he does most sincerely beliove that Paulding and Williams had not, any intention of pluudering their prisoner; nor did they con- fer with each other, or even hesitate whether they should accept his promises, but on tho contrary they were, in the opinion of this Depon- ent, governed, like himself, by a deep interest in the canse of the country and a strong sense of duty. Aud this Deponent further says, that he nover visited tho British camp, nor does be believe or suspect that either Pankling or Williams ever did, except that Panlding was once, before Andre's capture, and once afterwards, made a prisoner by tho British, as this Deponent has been informed and belioves. And this Doponent, for himself, expressly denies that he ever held any unlawful traffic or any intercourse whatever with the enemy ; and, appealing sol- emuly to that Omniscient Being, at whose tribunal he must soon ap- pear, be doth expressly declaro that all accusations charging him there- with are utterly untruo.

ISAAC VAN WART.

Sworn before me, this 28th day of January, 1817.

JACOB RADCLIFF, Mayor.

We, tho subscribers, inhabitants of the county of Westchester, do certify that, during the Revolutionary War, we were well acquainted with Isaac Van Wart, David Williams and John Paulding, who arrested Major Andre ; and that at no time during the Revolutionary War was any suspicion ever entertainod by their neighbors or acquaintances that they or either of them held any undne intercourse with the euemy. On tho contrary, they were universally esteemed, aud taken to be ar- dontand faithful in the cause of the country. We further certify that the said Paulding and Williams are not now residents among us ; but that Isaac Van Wart is a respectable froeholler of the town of Mount Pleasant ; that we are well acquainted with him ; and we do not hesitate to declare our belief that there is not au individual in the county of Westchester, acquainted with Isaac Van Wart, who would not luesitato to describo him as a man of sober, moral, industrious and re- ligious life ; as a man whose integrity is as unimpeachable as his verac- ity is nudoubted. Iu these respects no man in the county of West- chester is his superior.

JONATHAN G. TOMPKINS, aged 81 years. JACOR PURDY, aged 77 years. JOHN OnELL, aged 60 years. JOHN BOYCE, aged 72 years. J. REQUA, aged 57 years. WILLIAM PAULDING, aged 81 years. JOHN REQUA, aged 54 years. ARCHER READ, aged 64 years.

GEORGE COMB, aged 72 years. GILBERT DEAN, aged 70 years. JONATHAN ODELL, aged 87 years. CORNELIUS VANTASSEL, aged 71 years. THOMAS BOYCE, aged 71 years. TUNIS LYNT, aged 71 years. JACOBUS DYCKMAN, aged 68 years. WILLIAM HAMMOND. JOHN ROMER.

A little over three months later, on May 6, 1817, a similar statement was made and sworn to by Jolin Paulding, another of the captors, of which the fol- lowing is a copy :

John Paulding, of the County of Westchester, one of tho persons who took Major Andre, being duly sworn, saith, that he was three times dur- ing the revolutionary war a prisoner, with the enemy :- the first time he was taken at the White Plains, when under the command of Captain Requa, and carried to New York, aud confiued in tho Sugar House : tho second timo he was taken near Tarry Town, when under the command of Lientenaut Peacock, and confined in the North Dutch Church in New York: that both these times he escaped ; and the last of them only four days before the capture of Andre: that the last time he was taken, he was wounded, aud lay in the hospital in New York, and was discharged on the arrival of the news of peace there : that ho and his companions, Van Wart and Williams, among other articles which they took from Major Andre, were his watch, horse, saddle and bridle, and which they retained as prize : that they delivered over Andre, with the papers fonud on him, to Colonel Jameson, who counuanded on the lines: that shortly thereafter they wore summoned to appear as witnesses at the head-quar- ters of General Washington, at Tappan : that they were at Tappau some days, and examined as witnesses before the court martial on the trial of Smith, who brought Andre ashore from on board the sloop of war: that while there, Colonol William S. Smith redeemed tho watch from them for thirty guineas ; which, and the money receivod for the horse, saddlo and bridle, they divided equally among themselves and four other per- sons, who belonged to their party, hnt when Andro was takeu, were about half a mile off, keeping a lookout on a hill: that Andre had no gold or silver money with him, but only sowie contineutal bills, to the amount of abont eighty dollars: that the medals giveu to him, and Van Wart, and Williams, by Congress, were presented to them by General Washington, when the army was encamped at Verplauck's Point, aud that they on tho occasion dined at his table: that Williams removed some years ago from Westchester County to the northern part of the State, but where, particularly, the deponent does not know. Aud the depouent, referring to tho affidavit of Van Wart, taken on the 28th of January last, and which he bas read, says that the same is in substance true.

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.

History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II, Part 53

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898, Publication date: 1886 Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co. Number of Pages: 1286

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898,
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1286