A defence of the revolutionary history of the state of North Carolina : from the aspersions of Mr. Jefferson

Front matter

.-to-ft

•^^0^

DEFENCE

Introduction

On the 20th of May, 1775, the people of the county of Mecklenburg in North Carolina, in convention assembled, declared themselves free and independent. They in the most solemn and unanimous form abjured all allegiance to the British king, and instituted a system of government independent of the authority of the Royal Governor. These remarkable proceedings are not recorded by any of our early historians, and have lived only by memory and tradition among the people of North Carolina. I own, that it is surprising so important an event should have escaped the vigilance of so many writers. The people of North Carolina too were content that the matter should sleep nearly half a century, and even then, that it should be produced on the perishable pages of a newspaper. On the 30th of April, 1819, the worthy editor of the " Raleigh Register " introduced the subject to the notice of his readers, acknowledging in an editorial article, that it was not generally known to the world, but declaring that he had it from most unquestionable authority, and that he published it that it might go down to posterity. This article was extensively copied in the papers of the Union, and a copy of the " Essex Register " of Salem, Massachusetts, being sent by the late John Adams to Mr. 1

Jefferson, provoked the following letter, which, as 1 am about to make it the subject of a critical examination, I shall here insert at length.

"to JOHN ADAMS.

« Monticello, July 9, 1819.

" Dear Sir,

" I am in debt to you for your letters of May the 21st, " 27th, and June the 22d. The first, delivered me by " Mr. Greenwood, gave me the gratification of his ac- " quaintance ; and a gratification it always is, to be made " acquainted with gendemen of candor, worth, and infor- '^ mation, as 1 found Mr. Greenwood to be. That on the " subject of Mr. Samuel Adams Wells, shall not be " forgotten in time and place, when it can be used to his " advantage.

" But what has attracted my peculiar notice, is the " paper from Mecklenburg county, of North Carolina, " published in the ^ Essex Register, ' which you were so " kind as to enclose in your last, of June the 22d. And " you seem to think it genuine. I believe it spurious. " I deem it to be a very unjustifiable quiz, like that of the " volcano, so minutely related to us as having broken out " in North Carolina, some half dozen years ago, in that " part of the country, and perhaps in that very county of " Mecklenburg, for I do not remember its precise locality. " If this paper be really taken from the ' Raleigh Register,' " as quoted, 1 wonder it should have escaped Ritchie, " who culls what is good from every paper, as the bee " from every flower j and the ' National Intelligencer,' too, ^' which is edited by a North-Carolinian : and that the

" fire should blaze out all at once in Essex, one thousand " miles from where the spark is said to have fallen. But " if really taken from the * Raleigh Register,' who is the " narrator, and is the name subscribed real, or is it as " fictitious as the paper itself? It appeals, too, to an origi- " nal book, which is burnt, to Mr. Alexander, who is " dead, to a joint letter from Caswell, Hughes, and " Hooper, all dead, to a copy sent to the dead Caswell, " and another sent to Doctor Williamson, now probably " dead, whose memory did not recollect, in the history he " has written of North Carolina, this gigantic step of its " county of Mecklenburg. Horry, too, is silent in his " history of Marion, whose scene of action was the coun- " try bordering on Mecklenburg. Ramsay, Marshall, " Jones, Gerardin, Wirt, historians of the adjacent States " all silent. When Mr. Henry's resolutions, far short of " independence, flew like lightning through every paper, " and kindled both sides of the Atlantic, this flaming de- " claration of the same date, of the independence of Meck- " lenburg county, of North Carolina, absolving it from the " British allegiance, and abjuring all political connexion " with that nation, although sent to Congress, too, is never " heard of. It is not known even a twelvemonth after, " when a similar proposition is first made in that body. " Armed with this bold example, would not you have ad- " dressed our timid brethren in peals of thunder, on their " tardy fears .'* Would not every advocate of indepen- " dence have rung the glories of Mecklenburg county, in " North Carolina, in the ears of the doubting Dickinson " and others, who hung so heavily on us ? Yet the example of independent Mecklenburg county, in North *' Carolina, was never once quoted. The paper speaks,

" too, of the continued exertions of their delegation (Cas- " well, Hooper, Hughes,) ' in the cause of liberty and " independence.' Now you remember as well as I do, " that we had not a greater tory in Congress than Hooper ; " that Hughes was very wavering, sometimes firm, some- " times feeble, according as the day was clear or cloudy ; " that Caswell, indeed, was a good whig, and kept these *' gendemen to the notch, while he was present ; but that " he left us soon, and their line of conduct became then " uncertain until Penn came, who fixed Hughes, and the " vote of the State. I must not be understood as suggest- " ing any doubtfulness in the State of North Carolina. " No State was more fixed or forward. Nor do I affirm, " positively, that this paper is a fabrication : because the " proof of a negative can only be presumptive. But I " shall believe it such until positive and solemn proof of its "authenticity shall be produced. And if the name of " McKnitt be real, and not a part of the fabrication, it " needs a vindication by the production of such proof. " For the present, I must be an unbeliever in the apocry- " phal gospel.

" I am glad to learn that Mr. Ticknor has safely re- " turned to his friends ; but should have been much more " pleased had he accepted the Professorship in our Uni- " versity, which we should have offered him in form. " Mr. Bowditch, too, refuses us ; so fascinating is the " vinculum of the dulce naiale solum. Our wish is to pro- " cure natives, where they can be found, like these gen- " tlemen, of the first order of acquirement in their re- " spective lines ; but preferring foreigners of the first " order to natives of the second, we shall certainly have " to go, for several of our Professors, to countries more " advanced in science than we are.

" I set out within three or four days for my other home, " the distance of which, and its cross mails, are great " impediments to epistolary communications. I shall " remain there about two months ; and there, here, and " every where, I am and shall always be, affectionately " and respectfully yours.

" Th : Jefferson."

It will be observed that Mr. Jefferson doubts not only - the truth of the Mecklenburg Declaration, but the sincerity of the publication in the " Essex Register," purporting to be an extract from the Raleigh paper. He thinks it a most unjustifiable quiz, and compares it to the volcano which once broke out in the papers of North Carolina. He thinks it absolutely false, because it escaped the dim observation of his friend Mr. Ritchie, whose curiosity in the history of North Carolina was never before heard of or even suspected. His only interest in the State is to be found on the subscription-list of the " Enquirer," a paper which is but seldom adorned with any thing relating to North Carolina, except the report of political meetings, in which Virginia and her sons are lauded. If the "Raleigh Register" had published an article in favor of any of the various principles of the Virginia school of politics, it would have been found on the front column of the next " Enquirer," with some word of hurra for the old North State. But every thing appertaining to the dignity of the good old North State is carefully kept out of sight, and every political movement contrary to the decree of the Richmond Junto, is hinted at as Federalism, Monarchy, or Treason. For my own part, I am willing, thus publicly, to lament the dominant 1* influence of the Virginia Republican parly over the state of North Carolina. I do look upon it as the most fatal stroke ever aimed at the dignity and honor of my own country, and I would willingly lay the first stone of a Chinese wall to divide for ever the physical and intellectual resources of the two states.

Mr. Jefferson in his letter admits, that, if this Mecklenburg declaration of independence is true, it is entitled to far greater applause than the celebrated resolutions of Mr. Henry, " which flew like lightning through every paper, and kindled both sides of the Atlantic." " Would not *' every advocate of independence," he exclaims, " have " sung the glories of Mecklenburg county, in the ears of " the doubting Dickinson and others, who hung so heavily " on us ! " I rejoice, that he gave this public and most explicit testimony, as to its importance, and shall claim for the heroes of the 20ih of May, 1775, the high rank which they deserve on the page of American history.

But the most astonishing part of this letter is its gross abuse of the character of William Hooper, one of the Signers of the National Declaration of Independence from North Carolina. I cannot account for it in any way. I have corresponded with every living contemporary of Mr. Hooper, and invited a true opinion as to his character, and in every instance have received in the most unqualified terms the most favorable notices of his political standing. 1 have myself questioned every old man and old woman from Cape Hatteras to the Blue Ridge, and have never heard a single word which would support the shameful calumny of ^' rank toryism."

During the session of the General Assembly of North Carolina, in 1830 and 1831, this letter of Mr. Jefferson attracted the notice of that body, and the Governor was authorized to publish a pamphlet in defence of the State. This paper appeared during the year 1831, and contained numerous depositions of living men, as to the truth of the Mecklenburg Declaration. Personal testimony, however, is always weak, as the memory of man is fallible ; and although a citizen of North Carolina, acquainted with the high character of the deponents, may be entirely satisfied with such testimony, yet a distant historian will demand some contemporary record, as the best evidence in the case. The State of North Carolina, then, and Thomas Jefferson are at issue as to the truth of the asseverations contained in this letter. I shall go into the investigation of the merits of this controversy with no other view than the defence of the State by the ascertainment and exhibition of truth, and shall feel myself at liberty to animadvert with the most perfect freedom where animadversion is necessary. Disposed as I am to yield all due applause to Mr. Jefferson for whatever services he may have rendered to his country, I shall nevertheless studiously avoid any of that idolatrous homage to his name, without which I am aware my orthodoxy will he disputed.

If, therefore, in the course of my research, I shall find deliberate error in his opinion, I shall not hesitate to cry aloud and spare not, — for the matters touched on in his letter are grave and important, and upon the truth of them the honor of the State is at stake. ! am perfectly prepared for the consequences of this course, and anticipate, without the slightest apprehension, all those epithets which it is usual to apply to every writer who assails the character of the dead. I esteem the reputation of Mr. Hooper, however, as sacred as the most slavish v^-orshipper of Mr.

Jefferson can esteem that of his master, and am not willing that North Carolina should submit to insult from any quarter, whether consecrated by the solemnities of the tomb or the idolatry of the people. I yield no faith whatever to the contents of the four volumes of his writings. Private and political scandal, truth, religion, infidelity, federalism, republicanism, and Jacobinism, are all conglomerated there, — as if the Sage of Monticello had devoted the whole evening of his life to the collection and endorsement of principles of every kind, from the purest tenet of religion to the most disgusting absurdity of the basest and most abandoned profligacy. And yet, dispute one word of the four volumes of this political Koran, or doubt, for a moment, the immaculate purity of the character of its author, and you have not only all the rabble of the celestial empire, but all the great Images of the Prophet, who have gone or are going into power, on the strength of his name, roaring out Aristocracy, Federalism, Nullification, or any other unpopular word, suited to sustain them in their places. It may be confidently asserted, that the whole range of history does not exhibit an instance of baser subserviency, not only of many, as individuals, but of the nation at large, — than the overpowering influence of the mere name of Jefferson. Such is its amazing power, that no party of the present day aspires to popular favor through any other channel, and National Republican, as well as Jackson, Bucktail, and Anti-bucktail, all piously claim for their priesthood the purest legitimacy of descent. The people have placed him upon the throne of public opinion, and the statue of Washington is burnt, broken, and scattered into fragments. It is time to have done with this delusion. The lives of the eminent and patriotic, whose biographies have not been written, should be studied and examined with an especial view to correct the errors, conspicuous from one end to the other of " the writings of Jefferson." If the pen of their calumniator is to perform this task, and his works go down to posterity as truth, the patriots of our revolution will be ranked by posterity, not as American statesmen, but as traitors to their country. The names of Washington, Hamilton, Richard Henry Lee, Marshall, Story, Henry Lee, Bayard, and a host of others, comprising the talents civil and military of the whole Union, are the companions of William Hooper in the almost universal calumny of his pen.

This letter, then, assails the character of North Carolina, by grossly abusing the reputation and fame of one of her most distinguished and beloved sons, and by doubting in a sneering and contemptuous manner, one of the most honorable events in her history. The disclaimer of '^any doubtfulness in the State of North Carolina," instead of softening the asperity of the charges, imparts a deeper malignity and stamps its charitableness with duplicity. If William Hooper was a tory, and North Carolina commissioned him to sign, on her behalf, the national Declaration of Independence, the State and the Delegate were alike sinful. If the staunch whigs, Caswell and Penn, permitted their associate to play the double part of a tory in Congress and a whig at home, they, too, must share the load of iniquity, and be condemned, notwithstanding the approbation of Mr. Jefferson. The indiscriminate publication of Mr. Jefferson's writings has been deprecated by many of his friends, and even his most devoted servants are cautious in subscribing to so voluminous a creed. In private moments devoted to the interchange of confidential opinions, few politicians have ventured to support the propriety of their publication, or the truth of their contents. On two occasions already the veracity of their author has been successfully questioned. The friend"^ of Bayard, and the descendant of General Lee, have each controverted the truth of his statements, and while the Journals of the Senate of the United States will serve as an imperishable monument of the innocence of the one, a volume distinguished for its ingenuity and severity will support the abused reputation of the other. Ambitious of a similar distinction, and possessing ample materials for such a task, I shall endeavour, in this volume, to vindicate the character of my native State from the sly insinuations and malignant aspersion of his " philosophic pen." The labor is simple and easy, — the reward, the gratification of my own feelings in contributing an humble mite to uphold the dignity of North Carolina and the fame of many of her v/orthiest sons. In the performance of the duty thus assumed, prudence would induce me to lament the position of the parties. Throughout one of the most violent party wars, that ever agitated our country, North Carolina firmly supported those political principles, the success of which lifted Mr. Jefferson above the heads of his associates, and made his posthumous slanders respectable. By his superior dexterity as a party leader, he contrived to command the servitude of many of my fellow citizens,

* In the spring of 1830, Mr. Clayton, of Delaware, called upon Mr. Livingston and General Smith, to say whether the charge of Mr. Jefferson against Bayard was true, they having been cited by their great master, as authority. Both gentlemen stoutly denied any knowledge of the circumstance.

INTRODUCTION. n

who were independent of every other power but the influence of his name, which gave them popularity and preferment. I may lament the wide difference of opinion which exists between such of my fellow citizens and myself, but I owe no respect to the idol whom they worshipped, nor do I reverence his decrees.

My volume will be divided into three parts. The first will comprise a compendious history of the Revolution in North Carolina to the period of the national Declaration of Independence. The second will be found to contain the most indisputable evidence of the truth of the Mecklenburg Declaration, as well as of the authenticity of the resolves now denominated the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence. The third and last chapter will be devoted to the defence of the character of William Hooper. He is denounced by Mr. Jefferson as the rankest tory in the Congress of Seventy-six. I shall contradict this naked assertion by a short sketch of his political character, and illustrate his patriotism by an exhibition of many of his private letters, written during the term of his service in the continental Congress.

The reader who shall follow me through my undertaking will acknowledge the inutility of Mr. Jefferson's disclaimer, that there was no doubtfulness in North Carolina. The history of the State is unknown. The great events of her annals are buried amidst the musty papers of her ancient families, and are not celebrated by the " historians of the adjacent States," because they were ignorant or careless of their existence. The object of many of the writers on American history, like that of Gerardin and Wirt, was to exalt some particular character, by assuming for their heroes the laurels which should have been awarded to the

J 2 INTRODUCTION.

merit of their contemporaries. Who ( ould have expected the biographer of Patrick Henry, and the disciple of Mr. Jefferson, while composing a work with a view of establishing the Virginian origin of our national independence, to have introduced his readers to such an event as that of the Mecklenburg Declaration, or the resolution of the provincial Congress of North Carolina, adopted on the 12th of April, 1776, instructing the delegates of the State in the continental Congress to declare " Independency." The knowledge of these facts would have rendered the work of Mr. Wirt ridiculous, and that of Gerardin what it is, — a silly and contemptible libel upon the character of history. The letter of Mr. Jefferson reposes especial confidence in the circumstance, that no mention of the Mecklenburg declaration is made by Ramsay, Marshall, Jones, Gerardin, or Wirt, — " historians of die adjacent States." Who is or was Gerardin .f^ — "A man of letters," undoubtedly, as he wrote the History of Virginia, before he had lived in the country long enough to learn the fallibility of Mr. Jefferson's testimony, and who gathered all he did write from the oracle of Monticello. A French emigrant who traversed the State of Virginia, as a pedagogue, and who wrote his history for the low purpose of flattering the vanity, and apologizing for the cowardice, of one of her most distinguished sons.

What confidence is to be placed in the statements of such a man ? Are historical facts involved in the annals of another people to be doubted, because they are not noticed in the productions of an author, who depended upon another even for the plan of his operations, and who was grossly ignorant even of the [)eople whose history he had the impudence to write } Gerardin may have been good authority on the language or ^^ frivolous amusements " of France, but 1 shall presume to question his pages on American history, whenever they are contradicted by any other authority. Ignorant as he was of the early settlement and traditions of the country, he was unfit for the task he assumed, in the execution of which he lost the respectable and independent character of an instructor, to become the hireling scribbler of Mr. Jefferson. His whole work is but the echo of his patron, and was no doubt composed to cover the conspicuous sins of Governor Jefferson. The object of Mr. Wirt, who derived his materials from Mr. Jefferson, was to concentrate in Virginia, through the instrumentality of his subject and his patron, the glory of conceiving and establishing the independence of the country. Both of these historians of the adjacent state were indebted to Mr. Jefferson for manuscript materials, and issued their volumes under the sanction of his name. Gerardin's work is especially recommended as containing a faithful history of his administration as governor of Virginia, and the subsequent publication of his " Writings " inconteslably establishes a most intimate agency even in the composition of the " Life of Patrick Henry." ^

The letter of Mr. Jefferson suggests against the Mecklenburg Declaration, that the memory of Dr. Williamson did not recollect, in the history he had written of North Carolina, this gigantic step of its county of Mecklenburg. Observing the tenor of this remark, I do not hesitate to say, that the pages of Williamson were never perused by the Sage of Monticello, for any other purpose than the ascertainment of the fact which he has stated. But if he had ever,

* See Writings of Jefferson, Vol. I. p. 95.

at any period of his life, perused, even in the most negligent manner, the pages of that author, I must charge him with the grossest hypocrisy. The work of Williamson is superior only to that of Gerardin, and absolutely inferior to every other production on American history. The Doctor never intended to write the history of North Carolina, from the earliest periods to the administration of Mr. Jefferson, or any other President, but left it at the suppression of the Regulation, in 1771. The work is finished off with a dissertation on the fevers which prevailed in the State, during the residence of the author ; and a mere notice of the administration of Governor Martin, the last of the Royal governors, with an allusion in general terms to the causes which drove him out of the state, — is the only sketch of the revolution to be found in the two volumes of Williamson. Would any reader of history consult such a book to prove or condemn the truth of an event which took place four years after the date of its conclusion f The Mecklenburg Declaration was made on the 20th of May, 1775, and Williamson, concluding the details of his history at a period four years earlier, if he recollected, did not think it prudent to anticipate it, in a narrative, the composition of which he intended to bring down to the year 1790. Ill health fortunately prevented the continuation of a work, which reflected no lustre either on the author or the subject.

The circumstance of Ramsay and Marshall composing laborious treatises on the history of the Revolution, and not recording this " gigantic step of the county of Mecklenburg," is no evidence that the step was never taken, but only that the fact was not recorded in any of the histories of the day. I am perfectly convinced that neither of these distinguished writers was ever satisfied of the truth of the fact ; but in North Carolina, we all know that Williamson was in the possession of a copy of the proceedings of the people of Mecklenburg, for many years before he died. Had he continued his work, the Mecklenburg Declaration would undoubtedly have occupied its proper place in the annals of the state, and have been as well known as any other event recorded by his pen. Nor is the truth of the Mecklenburg Declaration to be questioned on the ground of the silence of contemporary authors. Many of the proudest events of our history are but the visions of pride or prejudice, if this principle is to be adopted. Upon it each and every event of the revolutionary history of North Carolina must be condemned as apocryphal. The native historians of the United States, whenever they have touched upon the history of that state, have either drawn from the records of the adjacent states, or the pages of Tarleton's "Campaigns," v/hich enumeration affords a fair estimate of their materials. If any fact of American history is true, it is, that on the 1 2th of April, 1 776, the Congress of North Carolina " empowered their delegates to declare independency," and yet Horry, in his life of Marion, is silent, Ramsay, Marshall, Jones, Gerardin, and Wirt, historians of the adjacent states, all are likewise silent. Nor did even the memory of Doctor Williamson in the history, he wrote of North Carolina, recollect this gigantic step of the state. The reasons, upon which Mr. Jefferson doubts the Mecklenburg Declaration, are shallow, and the language, with which he chooses to express his suspicions, are indicative of a jealous and malignant spirit.

A national declaration of independence was first recommended by the Provincial Congress of North Carolina, and yet the state pride or ignorance of the historians of he adjacent states has attributed this high honor to Virginia. Prudence should have induced Mr. Wirt, before he bad assumed for his hero and his patron yll the merit of inducing a national declaration, to examine other sources of information than the manuscript furnished by Mr. Jefferson. It is the duty, and the most sacred duty, of the historian to preserve the integrity of history. His sins, though they may be concealed for the present by the influence of great names, will be exposed by the revolution of time. The papers in the State department of North Carolina would have taught the panegyrist of Virginia the weakness of her claims to the honor of conceiving the independence of the country, and have afforded hitn an opportunity of exhibiting an instance of the truth and candor of history. In the archives of the state and the desks of ancient families are now buried the story of the rise and progress of the state of North Carolina. Ignorance and wickedness may misrepresent with impunity the character of her history, if efforts are not made to break away the darkness which surrounds it ; and such are the inducements to this publication.

Part I

A HISTORY OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOSIAH MARTIN, THE LAST OF THE ROYAL GOVERNORS, AND THE DOWNFALL OF THE ROYAL GOVERNMENT IN NORTH CAROLINA.

Chapter I

In the course of the First Part of this volume, I shall invite the attention of the reader to many events, which are not to be found in the works of any of the " historians of the adjacent states," but which depend for their truth upon the more substantial evidence of contemporary authority. I shall be obliged frequently to refer to private papers, which I have been permitted to examine by the courtesy of friends, and hope that my effort to vindicate our common country will be a sufficient apology for the free and copious extracts, which I shall take the liberty to introduce.

From the 3rd of April, 1765, to the 1st of July, 1771, North Carolina was governed by William Tryon. During the whole term of his administration the public mind was successively agitated by the passage of the Stamp Act and the ravages of a civil war, known in the annals of the state under the name of the Regulation. In the course of that extraordinary rebellion, the public ear was 2* accustomed to the sound of war, and the military genius of the people encouraged and exercised. It prepared the young and ambitious for more important events, and was the school, in which many of those of whom I shall write, acquired the elements of a military education. Whilst public opinion was thus forming, Josiah Martin arrived in New Berne, and on the llih of August, 1771, assumed the government of the province. It is from this period, that I shall commence a history of the Revolution in North Carolina, which I shall bring down to the 4th of July, 1776. The rise of the Revolution, the most instructive portion of our history, will be sketched, and the progress of the war detailed to a day illustrious as the birthday of our national independence.