Papers of John Adams, volume 5

From Samuel Cooper, 29 May 1777 Cooper, Samuel JA From Samuel Cooper, 29 May 1777 Cooper, Samuel Adams, John

From Samuel Cooper

My dear Sir Boston 29th. May. 1777

I wish, with you, that N. England may not fail to furnish their Quota of the Continental Army even to a single man;1 but am afraid we shall not be able to accomplish it soon. Some Towns have already rais'd and sent forward their full Proportion. This has done much more, besides Manning the State Vessels and Privateers: but others are yet greatly deficient; and yet all Circum-212stances consider'd, I rather wonder that so much, than no more has been done, by the whole. Manly has been gone more than a Week accompanied with McNeal, and two private Ships of War, besides others of smaller Force, making a Fleet of 10 or 12. I took much Pains for this Accommodation and Junction. The General Court encourag'd it by their Votes of Indemnification &c. to the Owners: and we ev'ry Moment expect some good News. I hope you have done great Service by the Navy Board. The Nomination for this State pleases me. We hear our Army in the Jerseys is now strong en'o to advance nearer the Enemy.2 I hope the Campain on our Part will be more than defensive. Assailants have commonly more Spirit and more Success than Defendants. The burning the Stores of St. Johns, and the late Action at Long Island conducted by Meigs bode well.3

Yesterday was our Election of Councillors: a large Number of the Representatives, perhaps 20 or 30 from Hampshire Berkshire &c. would not vote, being for a single Assembly. I hope this Sentiment will not prevail. They could chuse no more than thirteen by nine o'Clock; and then adjourn'd to this Morning. Cushing is not in, but may perhaps be chosen.4

I enclose you a Letter from Salem on Behalf I suppose of unhappy Tory condemn'd to be shot by a Court martial. He is Grandson of Col. Pickman.5 His Family and Their Friends are much distress'd. I am told the Case is referr'd to Congress, and that Genl. Heath has most impartially stated it. You will be able to judge from that whether Mercy may be shown to this Criminal and his anxious Friends without Injury to the Publick: It is said by some He is insane. But I am not particularly acquainted with Facts and Circumstances. One Thing I throughly know, that I am with the warmest Attachment Your Obedt. humbl. Servt.

RC (Adams Papers).

Cooper's language parallels that in JA's letter of 6 May to Joseph Palmer (above), which Cooper may have seen.

Probably a reference to Gen. Adam Stephen's skirmish on 10 May at Piscataway, in which he claimed great success only to have Washington upbraid him for his exaggerations (Washington, Writings, ed. Fitzpatrick, 8:47, 53). A glowing account of the American “success” appeared in the Independent Chronicle for 29 May.

The Boston Gazette for 19 May, under a Hartford dateline of 12 May, quoted a letter from Fishkill: “Seven Stores of the enemy are consumed by fire at St. John's, in which were the rigging for their vessels.” The action at Sag Harbor under command of Lt. Col. Return Jonathan Meigs on 24 May brought the destruction of twelve British ships and the capture of ninety prisoners. The Independent Chronicle for 29 May quoted a letter to Gov. 213Trumbull from Gen. Parsons, who had ordered the expedition, describing the destruction of the ships and supplies. Meigs was later given a sword by the congress for his exploit (Washington, Writings, ed. Fitzpatrick, 8:139–140, 143; JCC , 8:579–580).

Thomas Cushing was elected at large (Independent Chronicle, 5 June).

On 5 May, Peter Pickman Frye of Capt. Samuel King's company in Col. Thomas Marshall's 10th militia regiment was found guilty of desertion with intent to join the enemy. An appeal of relatives and friends apparently secured a stay of execution until the congress could consider the case. A letter, presumably enclosed with Cooper's, from the Salem Committee of Correspondence, Inspection, and Safety, signed by Richard Derby Jr., chairman, stated that Frye was “a Person, whom they think, from their knowledge of him, is not possessed of a common share of understanding: and that he is really incapable of committing a Crime, maliciously and with design, deserving so severe a Punishment.” The Board of War, reporting on the case on 20 June, authorized Gen. Heath to grant a pardon if he found that Frye was truly incompetent and only for that reason, “and by no means on account of friends or connexions, who should never be considered when public justice demands vicious men to suffer.” Frye's grandfather was Col. Benjamin Pickman, prominent Salem merchant (Boston Gazette, 12 May; Heitman, Register Continental Army , p. 333, 381; PCC, No. 42, III, f. 25; JCC , 8:483–484; James Duncan Phillips, Salem in the Eighteenth Century, Boston, 1937, p. 244–245). Frye was pardoned in early September (Independent Chronicle, 18 Sept.).

To Nathanael Greene, 2 June 1777 JA Greene, Nathanael To Nathanael Greene, 2 June 1777 Adams, John Greene, Nathanael

To Nathanael Greene

Dear Sir Phyladelphia June 2d. 1777

Yours of 28 Ultimo is before me. It is certain that Religion and Morality, have no less obligation upon Armies, than upon Cities and contribute no less to the Happiness of Soldiers than of Citizens. There is one Principle of Religion, which has contributed vastly to the Excellence of Armies, who had very little else of Religion or Morality, the Principle I mean is the Sacred obligation of Oaths, which among both Romans and Britons, who seem to have placed the whole of Religion and Morality in the punctual observance of them, have done Wonders. It is this alone which prevents Desertions from your Enemies. I think our Chaplains ought to make the Solemn Nature and the Sacred obligation of Oaths the favourite Subject of their Sermons to the Soldiery. Odd as it may seem I cannot help considering a Serious sense of the Solemnity of an Oath as the Corner Stone of Discipline, and that it might be made to contribute more, to the order of the Army, than any or all of the Instruments of Punishment.1

The Information you received, that General Schuyler, was about to be created President, and to hold his Command in the Army, was a Mistake. No Gentleman, would have been willing for that, as I know. I am pretty sure at least that a vast Majority, would have detested the Thought. G. Schuyler is reserved for another Fate. What that will be Time must discover.2

214

It is, in my humble opinion, utterly improper, that, this Gentleman should hold a Seat in Congress, and a Command in the Army, and I took the first opportunity to express my Opinion of the Inconsistency and Danger of it. I think his Constituents much to blame for the late Choice of him. I shall think him much to blame if he does not immediately resign his seat. If he does not, I ~~will certainly~~ hope Some Gentleman bring in a Motion, to destroy the Precedent, by obliging him to quit his Seat or his Command. What the success of such a Motion will be, I know not—but I ~~will certainly discharge my Duty to myself and my Constituents and Posterity.~~ believe Such a Motion will be made.

I agree entirely in your sentiments concerning the Danger of entrusting So many important Commands, to foreigners. Mr. Deane I fear has exceeded his Powers. Mr. DuCoudray, shall never have my Consent, to be at the Head of the Artillery, and I believe he will have few Advocates, for placing him, there. I hope, none.

Pray what is your opinion of General Conway. He acquired a good Reputation here.

It gives me great Joy, Sir, to find by your Letter, that you begin to feel your Army to be respectable. We are anxious to hear from Peeks Kill what Numbers are collected there.

LbC (Adams Papers); the usual notation “Sent” is lacking. The editors' study of over one hundred Letterbook copies, beginning with the first, that of 26 May 1776, and continuing through May 1777, has shown that about 90 percent are marked “Sent,” or in two instances marked “not sent,” and that only eleven have no indication at all. Even letters to JA's wife and young children are marked “Sent.” Of the eleven unmarked letters, we know that three were in fact posted, either because they were acknowledged or a recipient's copy was known to CFA. For the rest, there was no acknowledgment, even though some of the correspondents were careful about mentioning letters received, or the letters were incomplete or failed to name recipients. Several of these unmarked letters which are not known to have been received, like the one under consideration here, contained derogatory comments about prominent persons or were indiscreet in other ways. The editors believe that in such cases the probability is strong that they were not sent. The frank remarks about Gen. Schuyler in the letter above may have given JA second thoughts about the wisdom of sending it. Since so far as the editors know, Greene did not again draft a letter to JA until 28 Jan. 1782, there is no evidence that the letter of 2 June was received.

See Joseph Ward's suggestion about oaths in his letter to JA of 19 May (above).

In accordance with a Board of War recommendation, the congress on 22 May ordered Gen. Schuyler to take command of the Northern Department ( JCC , 7:364; 8:375).