Narrative of events which occured in Baltimore town during the Revolutionary War. To which are appended, various documents and letters, the greater part of which have never been heretofore published

Preface

The following narrative was read before the Historical Society of Maryland, at their sitting in January, 1847. It has been compiled principally from documents which had been in the possession of my father, the late Robert Purviance, from the date of the events to w^hich they refer. His family knew nothing of their existence until two years ago, when in a general search for papers in the custom house, they were found amid a vast collection of old documents, which had been the accumulation of more than half of a century. As they treated of events which -had occurred in Baltimore during the Revolutionary war, of which few memorials had been preserved, I thought I would collect from them such as might be considered worthy of preserving, and present them, which I now do, in a publication, to the community, of whose early patriotism they bear so honorable a testimonial.

ROBERT PURVIANCE.

Baltimore, January 15t7i, 1849.

A NARRATIVE OF EVENTS, &c.

Chapter I

Mr. Hume has remarked that ** the curiosity entertained by all civilized nations, of enquiring into the exploits and adventures of their ancestors, commonly excites a regret that the history of remote ages should always be so much involved in obscurity, uncertainty and contradiction." In the indulgence of this natural curiosity, the American people have no regrets to experience, that their history is involved in obscurity, uncertainty and contradiction. The records which have been preserved of the planting of the different colonies, which were afterwards united as a great whole, and are now known as the United States, bear testimony to the pure and upright sentiments which directed the colonists in the building up of these great communities. Whether right or wrong in the crown of England undertaking to appropriate to itself the great wastes of a large portion of the North American continent, and allotting to such persons as might solicit of it, such of the vacant lands as they might require, is not now a question ; for the principle seems to have been established from the earliest ages of civilization, that terri- 2 torles, either inhabited by savages, or destitute of any kind of population, belonged of right to the first discoverer ; and that if he followed up his discovery by an actual occupation, his claim was good to it against all the world. That this principle, which has contributed to the civilization of the world, cannot be vindicated on the ground of natural right, will be admitted, when we reflect on the manner in which the great Creator has permitted the human race to be scattered over the earth. When man came from the hand of his Maker, he was endowed with all the powers requisite to fit him for the purpose for which he was created. To him was given dominion over the fowls of the air, and the fish of the sea : — " to subdue the earth," to "increase and multiply." As the race of man increased, it became necessary for them to extend the dominion they had at first occupied, in order to satisfy their increasing wants. A larger portion of the earth became necessarily occupied, and with the steadiness of the advancing wave, this increase of dominion continued. In the course of time, the tide of emi^ation reached the shores of Western America, and this vast continent became the dwelling-place of the descendants of those who began this emigration. Man seems early to have lost the knowledge of his Creator, but the impression that he is the creature of a superior power, has never been completely eradicated from his mind. If he had forgotten that the power to subdue the earth was an attribute which emanated from God, he has always felt that he had such a power, and he has not failed to exercise it. When this continent was first discovered, such a race of men as we have

Ca. I.] A NARRATIVE OF EVENTS, &c. 3

spoken of, were found to be in possession of it. As society advanced in civilization, to preserve such an intercourse between its parts, as would promote the great purposes for which it was created, it became necessary to establish such principles as would best secure this end. These principles, as established by the consent of the civilized portion of mankind, are what are now known by the familiar name of the laws of nations. They suppose a general civilization among nations, and provide for the intercourse of each with the other, upon principles adapted to such a state. Where, however, a people exist who are not yet formed into nations, but are still of so wandering a character, that the principles which bind those who are civilized, do not govern them in their intercourse with each other, they treat these wandering people in their intercourse with them, as mere tenants at will of the soil they occupy, and assume a right of dispossessing them, whenever they think the cause of civilization demands that its advocates should possess the nomadic land. After the discovery of America by Columbus, many of the nations of Europe became awakened by the success of his daring enterprise, and they, in their turn, fitted out ships to traverse the unfrequented seas, under the hope, that new discoveries would give to them, also, a rich harvest of glory. These new expeditions resulted in a discovery of the whole continent of North and South America, ; of a passage to India, and all Eastern Asia, by the Cape of Good Hope.

These discoveries opened to Europe the fairest field of enterprise which had ever invited the industry and the skill of man. Heretofore, Europe, in the pursuit of maritime commerce, had been confined to the seas which wash her shores on the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. Her commerce with India was by land and the Mediterranean sea; and the expense with which such a trade would be necessarily burthened, would greatly diminish the benefits which otherwise must have attended its prosecution. After the discovery of the Eastern parts of America, England commenced her settlements in various parts of that portion of the continent. The charters granted to different persons for the purpose of making these settlements, were as various in the rights bestowed, as the views of the different applicants who succeeded in obtaining them. The colony which was planted in Massachusetts sprung from the persecutions experienced in England by the puritans, a class of people who had been distinguished by their opposition to the religious principles of the government. They sought an asylum where they thought they would be enabled to worship their Creator according to the dictates of their conscience, and not in conformity to the prescribed rules of the monarch. That asylum they found on Plymouth rock, and from this small spot of the earth, arose the colony of Massachusetts, the great leader in the war of our revolution. In the course of time, other colonies were planted, so that in the great war of 1754, which England waged against France, they numbered thirteen; and having obtained a population so numerous as to give them a mighty weight in the scale of power, they were called upon by the mother country to aid in destroying the power of France on this continent. That aid was furnished, and the history of their exertions reveals the illustrious fact> that to these, Great

Britain was mainly indebted for her exclusive dominion of all the territory which France had hitherto occupied. One would have thought, that the recollection of such services could never be obHterated from the mind of any recipient of the favor, be that recipient either an Empire, or an individual sovereign. The colony o Maryland, which had been planted by Lord Baltimore, in virtue of a grant made to him by Charles the Firsts had, at the time when this French war broke out, so far advanced in prosperity, that her population had reached to one hundred and fifty thousand persons, and her trade, with such parts of the world as her dependent character allowed her to have, was very extensive. And it is remarkable, that, so completely had the crown deprived itself of the power of taxation over the colony, that *• it was covenanted on the part of the kmg, that neither he nor his successors should ever impose customs, taxes, quotas, or contributions whatsoever upon the people, their property, or their merchantable commodities laden within the province." In the war which began in 1754, Maryland does not appear to have heartily entered. She seems to have paid but little attention to the requirements of the crown, so far as they embraced supplies of men and money. Shielding herself, probably, under the broad prohibition which denied to the crown the right of imposing taxes, customs, quotas, &c., she thought she would consult her own convenience, as to the interest she ought to feel in carrying on a war for the aggrandizement of the crown itself. After the capture of Col. Washington, at the little meadows, the frontier settlements of Virginia and Maryland became endangered by the progress of the French 2* arms. Maryland saw, in the disasters which had befallen those who had preceded her in their efforts to stay the French power, that her own situation was becoming critical, and with an energy, which in times of trial, she has been accustomed to exert, now entered into the contest. Her exertions were unabated until the capture of Fort du Quesne by Gen. Forbes, which put an end to the French power on the Ohio. From this period until the conclusion of the war, she does not appear to have taken any particular part in it. On the subject of taxation, to which it would be necessary to resort to give effectual aid, differences arose between the two houses of the legislature, and not being able to compose them by the ordinary methods of concession, they existed until the peace of 1763, when they naturally ceased.

This peace had scarcely dawned before the parliament of Gl^reat Britain had conceived the idea, that the burthens of the war ought not to be confined to those who reaped all its benefits, but that those who had given their blood and treasure, as aids, and who had no voice in saying, either that war was necessary at the time it occurred, or that a time for peace had now come, must divide them with her. The first intimation given by her that this participation of burthens would be required at the hands of her colonies, was in her celebrated stamp tax act. In Maryland, this act met with a resistance as bold and determined, as in any other colony ,of America. Among those of her sons who distiniguished themselves in resisting this great encroachment, as well on the natural, as the colonial rights of the province, was Daniel Dulaney, Esq., a gentleman well known In the early history of Baltimore. In a pamphlet entitled, " Considerations on the propriety of imposing taxes in the British colonies, for the purpose of raising a revenue, by act of Parliament," with a force of reasoning that defied ingenuity to discover the slightest fallacy, he sustained the cause of America. This pamphlet of Mr. Dulaney was as much admired in England, by those who had resisted the enactment of the law in its passage through the British Parliament, as it was by those in this country who felt its irresistible power. It was indeed a subject of sincere regret to those who w^ere accustomed to admire Mr. Dulaney in the zenith of his glory, that any circumstance should have subsequently occurred, to have prevented him from uniting with his friends, in all the questions which were connected with the differences with England. On the great one, the declaration of Independence, the aid of Mr. Dulaney was not given. The stamp act, in consequence of this determined opposition by the colonies, was repealed in the year 1766, but was followed by other obnoxious enactments, which appear to have been adopted, as much to try the experiment of taxation among an unwilling people, as from any desire to raise a revenue. The people determined that they would not permit themselves to be made the subjects of such galvanic experiments, and with a voice, that even the roaring of the mighty waters which separate England from America, could not drown, they proclaimed to England, that no British taxation should find a resting place in the colonies.

To such a height did these vexatious enactments reach, that in the year 1768, an association was formed in

Boston, by the merchants and traders of that town, for the purpose of opposing- them by such restrictive measures as could not but be felt by the manufacturing interest of England, and through it, by the Government. In the month of August of that year, a letter was addressed by the merchants and traders of Boston to Messrs. Samuel and Robert Purviance of Baltimore, stating that they had been ** sensibly affected with the late acts of Parliament, imposing duties on sundry articles of commerce, with the express view of raising a revenue out of America, and with the embarrassments and restrictions the trade at present labors under, are fully convinced of the necessity of exerting themselves without any further delay, in a firm but peaceable manner of obtaining relief." In conformity to the determination thus expressed, they adopted several resolutions, all looking to the suspension of the greater part of trade, for one year, say from Jan. 1, 1769, to 1 Jan. 1770, which they had been accustomed to have with Great Britain. Certain articles, however, were excluded from the operation of these resolutions, in consequence of the necessity of their use, and their inability at that time to supply them from their own resources. They invite a co-operation with them on the part of the merchants of Baltimore, " especially when they consider, that upon their concurrence, their speedy concurrence, greatly depends the success of the measures entered into by the merchants of Boston." This letter was signed by Thomas Gushing, John Hancock, John Rowe, John Erving, Jr., Edward Payne, \Vm.

Phillips, and John Barrett ; many of the names of which have subsequently brightened the pages of their country's history. I regret that I have failed in my researches of the many valuable documents of which I am in possession, to find among them the notice to which it was so eminently entitled, and which doubtless it received, as well from those to whom it was immediately addressed, as from those to whose confiding patriotism it appealed. I regret it the more, for the letter itself was the first communication ever made by the people of Boston, to the people of Baltimore, on the subject of the grievances to which they were primarily subject by the tyranny of British legislation. At this time, there was no paper published in Baltimore, and for any important communication, coming from any of the colonies, which was to be made public, the vehicle of Green's Maryland Gazette at Annapolis, or the Pennsylvania Gazette at Philadelphia, was made use of. In looking over the latter of these for the year 1770, I find, there was an account published of a town meeting held in Baltimore, in the month of June of that year, complaining of the inhabitants of Newport in Rhode Island, having violated " the non-importation agreement," which agreement, as appears from the proceedings of another meeting, held in October, 1770, had been entered into by the people of Baltimore in May 1769, according to the resolutions of Boston, as noticed above. As far as I can learn from these published town meetings, the people of Baltimore entered into the agreement, and for more than one year, with good faith, complied with all the requirements of the resolutions.

But they found that other towns which had given the same pledge as they had, had so far departed from it, that a further observance of it on their part, while it but little benefitted the common cause, wad working most injuriously upon them. Philadelphia, it appears, as well as Newport, had given cause of dissatisfaction to Baltimore, and of course, from her proximity to Baltimore, any trade she carried on, and which was denied to Baltimore, could not but be injurious to the latter. She therefore signified, in a town meeting held on the 24th Oct. 1770, " that they were determined to depart from the non-importation agreement, and import every kind of goods from Great Britain, such only excepted on which duties are, or hereafter may be imposed by the Parliament of Great Britain." A meeting was held at Annapolis on this subject, the 25th Oct. 1770, by some of the counties of other parts of the State, to which were deputed, by the Baltimore people, a committee to explain to them what were their new views and intentions, in consequence of the failure of other towns to adhere to their engagements. The delegates at this meeting, not feeling the inconveniencies to which Baltimore was subject by these defalcations, entered into resolutions to adhere to the original agreement, and denounced, not in the most courteous terms, "the merchants and traders of Baltimore," for endeavoring " to destroy that union and good faith so necessary at this, and at all times, for the safety and constitutional rights of these colonies." These denunciations were replied to in a well written article, published in the Pennsylvania Gazette. The writer shews, that those who opposed them, had but very little interest in the trade which they seemed desirous should wither under the blighting influence of defalcation ; and at the same time he shews, what would be the steady adherence on the part of the " mer-

Ch. L] a narrative of EVEiNTS, &c. n

chants and traders of Baltimore," if they could be assured of a faithful observance of the commorn compact. In consequence of the passage by the British Parlia* ment of the Boston port bill,— a bill intended to shut out the people of Boston from a commercial intercourse with every part of the world,— the people of Boston assembled in town meeting at Fanueil Hall, on the 13th day of May, 1774, and voted, - that if the other colomes would come into a joint resolution to stop all importations from Great Britain, and every part of the West Indies, till the act blocking up the harbor be repealed, the same will prove the salvation of North America and her liberties." This resolve was transmitted to the people of Baltimore, in a letter written by Mr. Samuel Adams, to Mr. Wm. Lux of Baltimore. Mr. Adams, in his peculiarly energetic manner, said, " The people receive this edict with indignation. It is expected by their enemies, and feared by some of their friends, that this town singly will not be able to support the cause under so severe a trial. As the very being of every colony, considered as a free people, depends upon the event, a thought so dishonorable to our brethren cannot be entertained, as that this town will now be left to struggle alone." This resolve was not received direct from Boston until the 4th of June. A copy of it, however, had been sent by express to Baltimore, by the people of Philadelphia, and received here on the 23d of May. It was accompanied by an account of the action taken on it in Philadelphia. A meeting was called of - the freeholders and gentlemen of Baltimore county," on the 27th of May, by several gentlemen, who had met together on the reception of these papers from Philadelphia, for the purpose of calHng the aforesaid meeting. These gentlemen were Robert Alexander, Robert Christie, Sen., Isaac Van Bibber, Thomas Harrison, John Boyd, Samuel Purviance, Jr., Andrew Buchanan, Wm. Buchanan, John Moale, Wm. Smith, Wm. Lux, John Smith. That meeting was held at the court house of Baltimore county, on Tuesday, May 31st, 1774. Capt. Charles Ridgely acted as chairman. There were eight resolutions adopted. The three first were dissented from by very inferior minorities ; the remaining five were unanimously adopted. The first resolution expresses it as the duty of every colony in America, to unite in the most effectual means to obtain a repeal of the late act of Parliament for blocking up the harbor of Boston. Three dissentients.

The second concurred in the sentiment expressed by the Boston resolve, that if the colonies came into a joint resolution to stop importations from, and exportsto Great Britain and the West Indies, the same would be the means of preserving North America and her liberties." Three dissentients.

The 3rd, the inhabitants of the county will join in an association to stop the intercourse at given days. Nine dissentients.

The 4th provides for the appointment of delegates to attend a general congress of deputies, from each county in the State, to be held at Annapolis, and delegates to attend a general congress from the other colonies. Unanimously assented to.

The 5th provides for breaking off all trade and dealing with that colony, province or town, which refuses to

Ch. L] a narrative of EVEiNTS, &c. 13

come into similar resolutions. Unanimously assented to.

The 6tli appoints Capt. Charles Rldgely, Charles Ridgely, son of John, Walter ToUey, Jr., Thos. Cockey Dye, Wm. Lux, Robert Alexander, Samuel Purviance, Jr., John Moale, Andrew Buchanan, and George Risteau, as a committee to attend a general meeting at Annapolis, and that the same gentlemen, together with John Smith, Thos. Harrison, Wm. Buchanan, Benj. Nicholson, Thomas Sollers, Wm. Smith, James GIttings, Richard Moale, Jonathan Plowman and Wm. Spear, be a committee of correspondence, to receive and answer all letters, and on any emergency to call a general meeting, and that any six of the number have power to act. Unanimously assented to.

The 7th requires a publication of their proceedings to be made, " to evince to all the world the sense they entertain of the invasion of their constitutional rights and liberties." Unanimously assented to.

The 8th — a vote of thanks.

That all these resolves did not meet with the unanimity which was expected at the time, may be accounted for from this fact, that as some of them looked to a complete prohibition of all intercourse with Great Britain and her West India possessions, It was a ruinous interference with the most profitable branch of trade at that time carried on from Baltimore ; and as the cause which had given rise to the suggestion of the prohibition, viz., the Boston port bill, being considered local in Its character, it did not require such a sacrifice to be made to have it repealed. But the great majority took a more enlarged view of the subject. They view- 3 ed the bill as an encroachment upon American rights, and although in its immediate effects not reaching them, yet the day might come when the example of acquiescence in it, would be an encouragement to the British Parliament to enforce all the restrictions it then meditated imposing on the colonies. The majority reasoned correctly, and their constituents ratified their deed.

The gentlemen who had called the meeting of the 27th May, in consequence of the communication which had been received from Philadelphia on the 23d, considering the great importance of the subject of which it treated, felt that no time ought to be lost in making communications to other parts respecting it ; for, from the many obstacles which prevented the rapid circulation of intelligence in those days, it would be a considerable time before they could hear any thing of these stirring events, unless a communication was hastened on from Baltimore. Accordingly, they addressed a letter to the people of Annapolis, and other parts of Maryland ; Alexandria, Norfolk and Portsmouth, and Charleston. The general purport of these communications may be seen in the following letter to the people of Alexandria.

Baltimore, 2ijlh May, 1774.

On Tuesday last, we received by express from Philadelphia, a letter from the committee of correspondence at that place, enclosing a copy of the vote of the town of Boston ; a letter from said town to the gentlemen of Philadelphia, advising their present unhappy situation, and requesting their brotherly advice on so interesting an occasion ; copies of which vote and letter, the reply thereto, and the resolves entered into at Philadelphia, we now take the liberty of communicating to you, not doubting your readiness to take a friendly part in a matter so interesting to every American.

On receipt of these papers, we immediately convened the principal inhabitants of this place, in order to collect in some measure, their sense of the matter. The result was, that we appointed a committee, (of which you have the names annexed) to correspond with tlie committees of any neighboring colonies who may consult us on this or any other public occasion, and particularly, to promote a general correspondence of sentiments with our brethren through this province, in such measures as may, on mature consideration, be the most advisable to take on this alarming occasion. It has been proposed to convene the principal gentlemen of our country at large, in order to promote an application for calling the assembly of the province ; but that we have postponed for the present, until we have the advice of our friends in Annapolis on the matter.

We hope and expect that the gentlemen of your province who distinguished themselves as the foremost in asserting the cause of American liberty, and opposing the scheme of parliamentary taxation, will now exert themselves with spirit and boldness in the cause of Boston, now violently attacked for defending the common cause of America ; and we doubt not, that the gentlemen of your town in particular, will heartily concur in whatever measures may best serve tlie general good.

We are, with much respect, Gentlemen,

Your most humble servants.

In behalf of the committee,

SAMUEL PURVIANCE, Jr.,

Chairmaji.

The committee of correspondence for Baltimore town: Andrew Buchanan, Wm. Lux,

Robert Alexander, Thomas Harrison,

Wm. Smith, Robert Christie, Sr.

John Smith, Dr. John Boyd,

John Moale, Isaac Van Bibber,

Wm. Buchanan, Samuel Purviance, Jr.,

To tlie Gentlemen of Alexandria.

Immediately after the letter which was sent to Annapolis reached there, a meeting of the inhabitants was called in conformity to the desire expressed by the Baltimore committee ; and the resolutions which they adopted, were in harmony with those which had emanated from Baltimore. An impression had got abroad that Baltimore was lukewarm in the cause, and it seemed to have thrown a gloom over the countenances of all; but when the resolutions which were adopted here were known, this gloom was dispelled, and confidence took the place of distrust. Mr. Alexander, one of the committee of correspondence, was the bearer of the resolutions to the people of Annapolis. In communicating to the committee the account of his reception at Annapolis, and the effect produced there by his mission, he says, *' Baltimore town, considered in a commercial view, is with great justness, esteemed the place of most consequence in the province, and coinciding in sentiments with the metropolis, may have a happy effect on the whole." The gentlemen appointed as a committe for Annapolis were, Messrs. John Hall, Charles Carroll, Thomas Johnson, Jr., Wm. Paca, Matthias Hammond and Samuel Chase. They were " required to join with those who shall be appointed for Baltimore town and other parts of this province, to constitute one general committee ; and that the gentlemen appointed for this city immediately correspond with Baltimore town, and other parts of this province, to effect such associations as will best secure American liberty." On the 26th May, this committee, in furtherance of the honorable commission with which they were entrusted, made the following communication.

Annapolis, May 26t7i., 1774.

To Messrs. S-amuel Purviance, Jr., Wm. Buchanan, Andrew Buchanan, and the other gentlemen who comfosc the committee of correspojidence in Baltimore town.

We feel the most sensible pleasure in the receipt qf your letter, by the hands of Mr. Alexander. Nothing can be plainer than that the suffering of Boston is in the general cause of America, and that union and mutual confidence is the basis on which our common liberties can only be supported. We enclose you a copy of a letter wrote to Virginia, and of the resolutions past yesterday in our town meeting. It appears to us that much depends on the determinations of Virginia, which we shall 3*

IS A xNARRATlVE OF EVENTS &c.

anxiously expect. Unanimity in the Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina, which may reasonably be expected, bids fair for success. We cheerfully accept your invitation to a free intercourse, and shall most gladly harmonize with you in all possibl»*measures, for the general good. We are, gentlemen,

With the utmost sincerity and respect. Your most obedient servants, J. HALL,

CHARLES CARROLL, THOMAS JOHNSON, Jr..

Wm. PACA, SAMUEL CHASE.

Mr. Hammond, absent.

In any struggle which Maryland might think proper to embark in opposition to the legislation of the British Parliament, it was all important for her that Virginia should be closely united with her in the opposition. Their geographical position in the colonies ; their identity of interests from the common use of the Chesapeake Bay ; and their kindred agriculture; all seemed to require that there should be an united action between them on the great question at that time pending. Virginia herself thought in this manner at that time, for on the very next day after this letter was dated, " the late members of the house of burgesses assembled at the Raleigh tavern in Williamsburg." The reason why this place and that manner was selected by the burgesses, for bringing their opinions before the people of Virginia, respecting the town of Boston, and the acts of the British Parliament, was, they had been deprived by tlie sudden interposition of the executive part of the government, from their giving their countrymen " the advice they wished to convey to them in ^ legislative capacity." They, however, were not to be intimidated by the arbitrary exercise of sovereign power. Their opinions had as much weight attached to them when uttered in a tavern, as if they had proceeded from the carpeted halls of legislation. The object of the meeting at the Raleigh tavern, was to form an association ** in support of the constitutional liberties of America against the late oppressive act of the British Parliament, respecting the town of Boston, which, in the end, must affect all the colonies." A copy of this association, with a letter, dated the 31st May, 1774, from the committee of correspondence for Virginia, was sent to the committee of correspondence for Maryland at Annapolis, and by them transmitted to the committee of correspondence of Baltimore. The gentlemen who signed this communication were, Peyton Randolph, moderator ; Robert C. Nicholas, Edmond Pendleton, Wm. Harwood, Richard Adams, Thomas Whitling, Henry Lee, Lemuel Riddick, Thomas Jefferson, Mann Page, Jr., Charles Carter (Lanc'r.) James Mercer, R. Wormley Carter, George Washington,