USA > New York > Organization of the Revolutionary movement in New York State, 1775-77 > Part 6
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 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18
1. Smith, Memoirs, V, 11 February 1776, NYPL; Tryon to Germain, 6 April 1776 , NYCD, VIII, 674.
2. Jour, Prov. Cong., I, 156. Tryon praised the obstructionist activities of the Coldens. Tryon to Dartmouth, 6 December 1775, NYCD, VIII, 646.
When the Congress reconvened. it disapproved the impressment
resolution. McDougall dissented. Jour. Prov, Cong., 1, 184.
1
67
Congress "confiscate their estates and banish them from the country." Since the colonel wrote from Montreal two days after its capture, his subsequent vehemence may be understood; "Such miscreants ought not to breathe the same air with men resolved to be free. From their machinations in & out of Congress have arisen the hardships we have endured and are further to undergo." 1
If the Committee of Safety heard these grumblings, it gave no sign.
Three days after the rebuff to McDougall, on the Queens affair, September 28, the Committee had an urgent message from the commissioners detailed to construct fortifications along the mid-Hudson. Information had reached them that Tryon and a party had landed at Haverstraw where they questioned closely one of the commissioners about the fort and its strength. The commissioners expected the governor to put in an appearance up-river and asked for a guard. When the Committee answered the letter, it ignored both the news of 2 Tryon's movements and the request for troops.
The next day the officers of the city's militia petitioned the Committee to revise the training regulations so that the companies would train once a week and the battalions once a month. The present routine of once a. month, they complained, lacked efficacy. 3
The Committee did not reply;
the Journal tersely records, "Read and filed." Both moderate McDongall and radical Hugh Hughes complained of the militia situation. The former told Jay that "men of rank and consideration refuse to
1. Ritzoma to McDougall, 19 November 1775, McDougall Papers, NYHS.
2. Force, op. cit., 4th Ser., III, 914-15, 919-20.
3. Jour. Prov. Cong., I, 159-60.
68
accept of commissione as field officers of the militia; so that these commissions havo gone a beging for six or seven weeks." Hughes described the lack of drilling among the militia on the ground that the officers without their commissions could not compel them to turn out. "These circumstances, " he added, "have a very bad effect, as they encourage the Tories, who exult at it, and discourage the timid Whigs." Congress finally issued the commissions just before its collapse. 1
When Congress reassembled in early October, it sat hardly a week before ill-tidings reached it. Washington warned that no prospect of conciliation existad and that all the evidence indicated the British would prosecute the war with the utmost vigor. The next day the Congress examined Captain Lawrence, a recently arrived ship's master who had sailed from London August 2 and who brought news that more than sustained Washington's interpretation. Informed
sources in London said that the ministry planned to hire 16,000 Hassians and Hanoverians for the American campaign and that they intended to increase the army in America to 30,000 over the winter. Within twenty-four hours the delegates listened to three letters from London, dated July 31 and August 7 which concurred in the fact that the government had determined to recover New York, control the Hudson 2 and open direct communication with Canada. . Scarcely had the members
1. McDougall to Jay, 30 October 1775, Jay Papers, CUL; Hughes to Samuel and John Adams, 17 October 1775, Samuel Adams Papers, NYPL: Jour. Prov. Cong., I, 192.
2. Ibid., I, 170-71, 172-73.
1
69
digested this intelligence when Tryon demanded that Congress guarantee his safety. Dissatisfied with the subsequent assurances, the governor 1
shifted his quarters October 19 to one of the vessels in the harbor .. iryon's flight seemed to denote the imminence of bombardment and the seizure of three vessels in the lower harbor, and their escort to Boston by the British sloop Viper tended to confirm it.
2 Many congressmen now found it urgent to attend to their personal affairs and Congress, lacking a quorum October 28 and 29, adjourned to November 2.
When Congress reconvened on November 2, it heard more grim reports. Dispatches from the Continental Congress contained inter- rogations of captured British officers who had secretly recruited in New York. The bait offered to enlisteos included a promise of 200 acres of forfeited lands in settled areas of the province, a promise authorized by Lord Dartmouth. 3 That afternoon the Congress listened to a letter from Washington which contained an eye-witness account of the burning of Falmouth by the British. Furthermore, the British commander reportedly told the inhabitants he had orders to burn all towns between Boston and Halifax and he expected that his 4 compatriots had put New York to the torch.
1. Becker, on_cit., p. 225.
2. Riv, Gaz., 26 October 1775.
3. Jour, Prov. Cong., I, 188-90; Captain M, Maclean to Major John Small, 13 Decomber 1775, Force, op. cit., 4th Ser., IV, 312-13.
4. Jour, Prov. Cong., I, 191.
70
Two actions of the Congress tell of the impact of this discor- certing news, On November 2 the provincial body rejected a recnest of the Continental Congress to appropriate the shirts, blankets and sheets in the King's stores. Although some persons had carted ther to the provincial commissary's house without congressional authority, the New Yorkers declared that they had ordered them returned because they feared retaliation by the warships. The next day Congress
disposed of another delicate matter relating to Westchester. whigs of Rye and Mamaroneck writing to New York in alerm, had charged the Tories with plotting to seize a number of leading committeemen and to put them aboard a British tender for transport to Boston. Although
Congress had provided by its r-solutions of September 1 for the arrest, trial and imprisonment of dangerous opponents by the district and county committees or the Congress itself, it turned its beck now on its former directive and voted to instruct the Westchester County Committee to investigate the affair. If the plot were real, then the committee would furnish protection to those threatened. Congress recommended that any culprits taken be handed over to the civil magistrates for prosecution. This last proposition proved too much for not only Isaac Sears, but also for John Thomas, Jr. and Dr. Robert Graham of Westchester and Melancton Smith of Dutchess, all of whom dissented from it. 1 By November 4 so many representatives had left that the Congress ceased functioning without formal adjournment.
1. Ibid., I, 190, 192-94.
71
XcDougall complained to Schuyler that this hasty dissolution endangered the colony, since Congress had not established a Committee of Safety. 1
Tory comment not only accurately report-d this vacillation, but also revealed one of its sources. V. P. Ashfield, a Tory merchant, noting the influence of property on the political situation, Advised Isaac Wilkins that "those of prosperity are afraid of their estates, and are coming about fast. They say they have gone too 2 far." Jacob "walton, another Tory, spoke of the leaders "growing very timid," and added significantly, "but now they have raised the devil amongst them they do not know how to lay him." 3
The Second Provincial Congress which assembled in December was just as timid as its predecessor. Hughes wrote Sam Adams that " the people [are] constrained, disappointed and discouraged here by 4 the timidity or treachery of their leaders." A writer in the Hoy York Journal berated the cowardly, the do-nothings, and called for 5 "activity, vigilance and resolution." The hesitancy of some Whigs led them to urge Holt not to reprint Faine's Common Sense. In
1. McDougall to Schuyler, 14 November 1775, McDougall Papers, FYHS and Schuyler Papers, NYPL.
2. Ashfield to Wilkins, 4 November 1775, Cal, H. O. Papers, p. 482. See also the similar comments of John Cruger to Henry Cruger, 1 November 1775 and Harris Cruger to Henry Cruger, 3 November 1775, ibid., pp. 479, 481.
3. Partially quoted in Becker, op. cit., p. 226, n.205; Cal. H. O. Papers, p. 478.
4. Hughes to Adams, 19 December 1775, same to same, 8 January 1776, Samuel Adams Papers, NYPL.
5. "The Monitor", no. 7, N.Y.J., 21 December 1775.
72
describing this incident Hughes wrote:
Another anecdote I must trouble you with, is, that Col. McDougall waited on Mir. Holt and desired that he would not reprint 'Common Sense' ; the people's minds not being prepared for such a change &c. Somebody else, I forg-t who, waited. on him for the same purpose. The contrary is so much the case, that the people are constantly treading on their leaders , heels, and, in a hundred cases, have taken the lead of them. But his patrons don't approve of it, and he must beat time with
them. Phil [ Livingston] says it was written by some Tory &c. However, let them say and do what they please, the people are determined to read and think for themselves. It is certain, there never was any thing published here within these thirty years, or since I have been in this place, that has been more universally approved and admired."
None of these events came as a response to an upsurge of Tory sentiment among the people, but rather illustrated the working of the powerful emotion of self-preservation.
At first glance the polling for the Second Provincial Congress and the laggardness of the deputies in assembling for Congress's opening seem to lend credence to the idea of a royalist reaction, but 2 a closer scrutiny will disclose the fallacy of this view. One author pointed out that the people went to the polls in only nine of the fourteen counties; and that, of the nine, in Orange only one precinct voted, and that in Tryon a newly chosen deputy resigned and 3 his successor did not appear until February. In Orange factionalism may have complicated the situation. Although two precincts had
1. Hughes to Samuel and John Adams, 4 February 1776[?], Samuel Adams Papers, NYPL. John Anderson, publisher of a new gazetts, the Constitutional Gazette, reprinted Common Sense in pamphlet form.
2. Becker, op. cit., pp. 229-38.
3. Ibid.
73
voted on November 7, Goshen precinct complained that the county committee, "through some unhappy mistake," had failed to notify the people of the election. Goshen hastened to rectify the omission, leaving Orange Town as the only precinct in which no balloting had taken place. The two precincts of Orange Town and Haverstraw had a joint precinct committee, but the latter chose delegates November 7, while the former did not. The freeholders and tenants held several meetings in Orange Town prior to election day, but on the vital day, due to "some misapprehension" as the precinct chairman said, no polling occurred. Two days later, November 9, Chairman Thomas Outwater, entreated Congress to set aside another day for the precinct to vote, but that body did not read the letter until December 1, so that the delay did not wholly lie with the township. When Orange Town cast its ballots December 7, completing the precinct voting, 1 the whole county, therefore, had taken part in the electoral process. The whigs seem to have organized the election in Tryon as well az in New York and Albany. The county committee notified each district of the impending election, but confined the vote to free- 2 holders. Although the electors chose two deputies, one, Isaac Paris, resigned shortly after to assume the chairmanship of the county committee. On November 25 the county committee selected William Wills to replace Paris and dispatched him immediately to New
1. Jour, Prov, Conc., I, 213, 214, 225; 11, 95; Force, op. cit., 4th Ser., III, 1762, IV, 385, 399, 402.
2. The First Provincial Congress hed extended the suffrage to tenants having realty assessed at L80. Becker, op. cit., p. 227.
74
York. 3 Wille's failure to arrive in the city became the subject of correspondence between the Congress and county committee. The latter expressed its astonishment at Wills's dereliction, mentioning that it h'd information that Wills had departed as instructed. Furthermore, the committee did not know what had happened to him. 1
The delinquent delegate appeared at the Congress two months later. Whatever reason caused the delay, the promptness with which the committee held the election and the alacrity with which they picked Paris's successor refute the idea of any cooling toward the revolu- tionary cause. It may be that this incident illustrates the diffi- culties inherent in operating a revolutionary organization in the isolated rural areas of the province.
Of the five counties (Richmond, Queens, Cumberland, Charlotte 2 and Gloucester) in which the people supposedly did not elect deputies, the situation in the latter three compounded communication difficulties, factionalism and the Vermont controversy between New York and New Hampshire. Through some miscarriage of the correspondence the
1. Frey, op. cit., pp. 89-90; Jour, Prov . Cong., I, 212, 213, 293. II, 142; Force, op. cit., 4th Ser., IV, 400.
2. Becker, op. cit., pp. 234, 236-37 treats this occurrence in confusing fashion. The delegates in New York dispatched the letter of December 1, which posed the drastic consequences of a congressional collapse, to three counties (Tryon, Cumberland and Charlotte), not to six. Although the letter writers could not have known it, their warning was unnecessary. As the material on the preceding and subsequent pages shows, the people of these counties did not deliberately drag their feet. It was not the letter that produced the delegates from these three counties as Becker contends. Furthermore, the arrival of Dr. John Williams from Charlotte on 13 February 1776 reduced the number of unrepresented counties to two, Gloucester and Queens, not three. Jour, Prov, Cong., I, 199, 297,
75
Cumberland committee did not receive the Congress's notice of election, nor did it hear of it from its delegate in New York. The first intimation of it came through the New York Journal of October 19 which printed the text of the resolution. Some of the committeemen desired to hold the election on the newspaper's authority, but most wished to have official word from Congress. When they wrote Congress for advice, they affirmed the steadfastness of the county: "the people in general among us, want to choose new members; and are always ready to adhere strictly to the resolves of ... Congress. ..... Since Congress had already adjourned, Cumberland waited in vain for a reply. Finally, the committee, acting on its authority, appointed two delegates to Congrass.
Similar delays occurred in Charlotte and Gloucester. Despite the friction with Yankee settlers over land rights, Charlotte in an election on January 25, 1776 choce two representatives for the Provincial Congress. 2 Although Gloucester had established district and county committees by July, 1775 and had chosen a deputy to the First Congress, the fear of an attack from Canada deterred congressman Bayley from attending. Undeterrel by the uncertainty of communication
1. Writing to Congress at the beginning of February, 1776, the committee declared that the people were "heartily disposed" to American liberty. Force, 20, cit., 4th Ser., IV, 426n .; Jour, Prov. Cong., I, 331, II, 99. Factionalism reared its head in matters relating to the organization of the militia and the choice of militia officers. Force, op. cit., 4th Ser., IV, 309; Cal. Hist, Msg., I, 195-98, 204.
2. Jour Prov, Cong., I, 297. On the land dispute and factionalism see Duer to Peter V. B. Livingston, 2 June 1775, ibid., 1, 71-72 and Judge R. R. Livingston to R. R. Livingston, Jr., 18 May 1775, Unpublished Corr. R. R. Livingston, no. 44.
On the complicated political split in these counties, see Chilton Williamson, Vermont in Quandary, 1763-1825, chapters IV, V.
L
76
with New York, the county committee took the initiative in circulating the Continental Association which everyone signed. Furthermore, Bayley complained in October that notwithstanding the silence from Congress, the people had commenced the organization of their militia, using the form suggested by the Continental Congress. Under the illusion that the First Congress was still sitting, Bayley promised to attend that winter, "if health permit." In view of this isolation, it is not surprising that the county seems not to have held an -lection for the Second Congress; probably the people did not hear of it until late in the spring. The wonder is that the county created an effective Whig organization. 1
Kings County may, or may not, have held an election. Eight days after the opening of the Second Congress, the members present. lacking a quorum, wrote a letter to the "members chosen to represent Kings County," pressing them to attend. The next day, November 23, a Kings deputy appeared, but when the Congress commenced deliberations December 6, only one Kings member attended. Although the house read and formally recorded all election certificates, they did not mention Kings County. Moreover, even though Orange could claim only one delegate from Goshen precinct, the house seated him, but with the provision that he have no vote until his county had a quorum. The meticulous action in relation to Orange renders the silence on Kings even more puzzling. When a second Kinga representative arrived in the city on December 8, the county cast its vote in the first formal 4
1. John Taplin to P. V. B. Livingston, 15 July 1775, Jacob Bayley to Provincial Congress, 20 October 1775, Jour, Prov. Cong., I, 95, 11, 96.
2
77
division entered in the Journal, but the official record does not refer to the seating of the delegation nor to receipt of its election certificate. . The reference of Congress's letter of November 22 does seem to indicate that the county did have an election, but there is no explanation for the omission in the Journal. Possibly it was the result of clerical oversight. For example, although William Smith's Memoirs contain a brief summary of Thomas Smith's account of Congress's proceedings of the afternoon of December 13, 1775, the 1 Journal does not record Thomas Smith as present.
Of the fourteen counties, then, only two (Richmond and Queens) refused to choose deputies, and since they had always been strong- holds of Tory sentiment, their refusal did not represent any shift ix political loyalty. No doubt the equivocation of the Congress in regard to the Tories during the preceding months had fatally affected the weak Whig organization in both counties. Nevertheless, the action of two Tory counties cannot be construed as evidence of a general loyalist reaction. McDougall's explanation of the Congress"s predicament .largely confirms the foregoing:
This [ bare quorum] is oving to the tardiness of the Deputies of the New Counties [ Tryon, Charlotte, Cumberland, Gloucester], who are not come down. And to the machinations of the Tories, who have so wrought on the Fears and Jealousies of the Counties of Richmond and Queens, that the Former has not chosen any deputies; and the Latter has Voted against any being Sent, ...
1. Ibid., I, 198, 199, 205-206, 207-208.
2. McDougall to Schuyler, 7 December 1775, McDougall Papers, NYHS. McDougall's reference to machinations and fears may not have been imaginary. A letter to the New York Journal early in the year had
78
Those who see evidence of a rising loyalist tids also point to the circumstances surrounding the complicated Tory stratagem of having the Provincial Congress approve a meeting of the assembly. The irresolution of the Whigs in the fall of 1775 cost them the political initiative and exposed them to the possibility of a major political defeat. Perspicacious William Smith evolved a two-pronged maneuver which ostensibly aimed at conciliatory negotiations with Britain, but which substantially sought to break the continental union and to re-establish the government's control over New York. The first step envisaged instructions by the Provincial Congress to the New York representatives at the Continental Congress to move now conciliatory proposals, In preparing these proposals for presentation to the Provincial Congress, Smith sought to attract enough moderato and conservative votes to secure the adoption of the recommendations by the New Yorkers, but to ensure either their rejection by the Continental Congress or New York's freedom of action. The result of approval or disapproval by the "grand Congresa" would be a meeting of the New York provincial assembly to debate Lord North's motion of
described the tactics used by the Tories to prevent the forzation of a Whig committee in Jamaica. The Tories circulated a statement to which they solicited signatures, opposing the election of the committee. "A Lover of Liberty" charged that the Tories told people the proposed committee would be authorized to break open their houses in search of tea; that the committee would break their molasses jugs; that if they did not sign the statement, they would be ad judged enemies to the king and might be hanged. N.Y.J., 9 February 1775.
Even after the crushing defeat of the Queens Whigs in the election of November, 1775, printer John Holt still insisted that the Tories did not number one-third of the Queens population; that those who voted for them were "dependant upon, or under the influence" of their social superiors. Ibid., 28 December 1775.
79
February 20. Smith cannily incorporated a provision which he had suggested previously in June to the First Provincial Congress for its abortive attempt to have the Continental Congress initiate negotiations. 1
Smith's previous suggestion had centered on the formation of
a permanent continental congress to apportion the colonies' shares of funds requisitioned by Great Britain. Elaborating on this idea now, he prop.sed that Britain consider such monies as a gift; that Parliament account for their expenditure for national defense; and that Parliament also report on the expenditure of the funds arising
from the regulation of commerce. While the colonies sustained the costs of civil government, no official of the province might receive "any other pension or provision." Smith recommended as immediate steps that the Continental Congress urge that all the colonial assemblies convene to petition the crown and parliament, and avoid "as much as possible everything that tends to irritate or offend in asserting the essential Rights and Privileges of His Majesty's American Subjects:" and that it declare what parts of the parliamentary
1. Dorothy R. Dillon, The New York Triumvirate: A Study of the Legal and Political Careers of William Livingston, John Morin Scott, William Smith, Jr., pp. 139-40. The June instructions to the York delegates included: repeal of the obnoxious legislation; limitation of colonial assemblies to three years; Parliament's surrender of its right to interfere in colonial religious affairs; complete internal colonial autonomy subject to the crown's veto; all duties raised by regulation of trade to be paid to the colonies; all funds to be raised for defenso to be voted by a continental congress. The deputies from New York never presented the plan. Becker, op. cit., pp. 214-15; Sabine, op.
cit., pp. 224-25, 228b.
Smith formally described his purpose to Tryon after these events had occurred: "I confess that I flattered myself with hopes that this Province might have been induced by Your advice to set an example to the rest, for a return from their wanderings in that wide field of discontent opened by the Continental Congress in 1774." NYCD, VIII, 653.
-
80
resolution of February 20 it would accept. 1
Once the disputants resolved the question of taxation, Congress would rescind the Continental Association and Parliament would pass a general act of "oblivion and indemnity. " The colonists would express their readiness " to place an intire confidence in parliament" for the redress of their other grievances. The last provision of the plan revealed Smith's major intent, for it reserved to each colony the "liberty to pursue any "measure ... that may facilitate the designed Reconciliation not inconsistent with the Plan of Contract to be concerted and recommended to them by the Continental Congress." Since the sole power and authority pf the Congress would consist of matters of taxation, New York would have a free hand to make her own peace with 2 the ministry.
If the Continental Congress defeated a New York motion on conciliation, Smith might plausibly appeal to the Whigs to agree to a meeting of the provincial assembly. The assembly would consider
1. Since the Continental Congress had rebuffed Lord North's proposition in July and had learned in November of the king'n refusal to receive their Olive Branch petition, it was highly improbable that they would consider another petition. Inasmuch as Smith's ideas represented a retreat from Congress'u statement of July 31, the likelihood of a cordial reception for them was extremely remote. Edmund C. Burnett, The Continental Congress, pp. 95-97; Worthington C. Ford and Gaillard Hunt, eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, II, 224-27 (baro- efter cited as J .C.C.).
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.