Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO MAJOR-GENERAL PUTNAM. - The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778)

Return to Title Page for The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Subject Area: War and Peace
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

TO MAJOR-GENERAL PUTNAM. - George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778) [1890]

Edition used:

The Writings of George Washington, collected and edited by Worthington Chauncey Ford (New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890). Vol. VI (1777-1778).

Part of: The Writings of George Washington, 14 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


TO MAJOR-GENERAL PUTNAM.

Dear Sir,

Your favor of the 16th I received yesterday morning, and was much obliged by the interesting contents.2 The defeat of General Burgoyne is a most important event, and such as must afford the highest satisfaction to every well-affected American breast. Should Providence be pleased to crown our arms in the course of the campaign with one more fortunate stroke, I think we shall have no great cause for anxiety respecting the future designs of Britain. I trust all will be well in His good time. The obvious intention of Sir Henry Clinton was to relieve General Burgoyne, and being disappointed in that by his surrender, I presume he will make an expeditious return. I am happy to find you at the head of so respectable a force, and flatter myself, if he should land with a view to action, though I do not expect it, you will give us a happy account of him. I believe, from the bravery of the garrison of Fort Montgomery, he purchased victory at no inconsiderable expense. General Campbell was certainly killed. This they mention in their own printed account, but call him colo. of the fifty-second regiment. He was a general on the American establishment, so declared in one of the orderly books, which fell into our hands.1

I have but little to add respecting the situation of affairs here. They remain much as they were, when I wrote you last. To remove the obstructions in the river seems to be a capital object with the enemy. Their attempts hitherto have not succeeded, and I hope they will not. I am extremely sorry for the death of Mrs. Putnam, and sympathize with you upon the occasion. Remembering that all must die, and that she had lived to an honorable age, I hope you will bear the misfortune with that fortitude and complacency of mind, that become a man and a Christian. I am, dear Sir, with great esteem, yours, &c.1

[2 ]After the British had captured Fort Montgomery, and the other posts on the Hudson, General Putnam retreated from Peekskill, and established his head-quarters at Fishkill beyond the Highlands. He wrote to General Washington from Fishkill: “Last Monday General Parsons, with about two thousand troops, marched down and took possession of Peekskill, and the passes in the Highlands. He has taken a number of cattle, horses, and sheep, which were collected by the enemy. They had burnt the buildings and barracks at the Continental Village, and several dwelling-houses and other buildings at Peekskill. They have demolished Forts Montgomery and Constitution, and are repairing Fort Clinton. Yesterday about forty sail passed up the river crowded with troops, and are at anchor above Poughkeepsie, the wind not favoring. We were on our march after them when I met the agreeable intelligence of the surrender of General Burgoyne and his army as prisoners of war, a copy of which is enclosed. I thereupon most sincerely congratulate your Excellency. I have halted my troops, and am now considering what ought to be my movement; I have sent to Governor Clinton for his opinion, and ordered General Parsons to spare no pains to find out the situation and strength of the garrison at Kingsbridge, in order to direct my future operations most advantageously. I have about six thousand troops, who are chiefly militia. I understand that General Campbell was killed at Fort Montgomery, and several field-officers and others of inferior rank. The two Continental frigates and the row-galley were burnt, to prevent their falling into the hands of the enemy, for which I am very sorry, as one of them I believe might have been saved.”—MS. Letter, October 16th.

[1 ]There is probably an error here, in regard to the identity of the persons. Sir Henry Clinton, in his official return of the killed and wounded, gives the name of “Lieutenant-Colonel Campbell of the fifty-second regiment.” There was a General Campbell in the British army at that time; but General Dickinson, in a letter dated November 18th, states that he was then on Staten Island. Whence it would follow that he could not have been the same person that was killed at Fort Montgomery.—Sparks

[1 ]“The fogginess of the morning is so very great that I think it probable that the enemy will attempt a surprise upon Fort Mifflin at such a time, or at night, if they mean it at all. To prevent this, I would recommend it to you to keep boats rowing guard as near the shore of Province Island as they possibly can with safety. . . . The enemy last night evacuated Germantown and fell down to Philadelphia. Our army will advance towards them in the morning, and as we shall be near them, I hope we shall prevent them from detaching any considerable force to reduce Fort Mifflin. I recommended it to Col. Smith to endeavor by all means to keep the breaches in the banks of Province Island open, as I am certain it will incommode them vastly in carrying on their works.”—Washington to Commodore Hazelwood, 19 October, 1777.

There was a little friction between Colonel Smith and Commodore Hazelwood, which Washington undertook to smooth over. “I was extremely sorry to find from the Commodore’s letter which made a part of yours that you and he were not in the strictest harmony. This circumstance I confess, gives me great uneasiness, as I well know that a good agreement between the navy and garrison is of the last importance, and that a want of co-operation and every possible mutual aid may involve the most unhappy consequences. Persuaded of this, and recollecting the train of misfortunes that has been brought on in many instances by a difference of the like nature, I requested Baron d’Arendt in my instructions to him that to maintain a good understanding between him and the Commodore should be a great object of his care and attention. This I hope he will do, and I have written to the Commodore to day recommending the same to him in the strongest terms. Hitherto a happy agreement has done much. It has disappointed the enemy from effecting, notwithstanding their repeated efforts, what they seemed to consider without difficulty; and should the same spirit and disposition continue, I flatter myself they will produce the same ends.”—Washington to Colonel Smith, 21 October, 1777. “I cannot but repeat my ardent desire that harmony and a good understanding between the fleet and the garrisons may be mutually cultivated. On this every thing depends; nothing but disappointment and disgrace can attend the want of it. The best designs and most important pursuits have been and ever will be defeated by foolish differences when they exist between those engaged in them.”—Washington to Commodore Hazelwood, 21 October, 1777.

“You seem to have mistaken the Commodore’s meaning. From his letter I understand, that he will always assist you whenever it is in his power. He tells you, that in rough weather his galleys and armed boats cannot live, and therefore guards you against expecting much assistance from them at such times. I beg you of all things not to suffer any jealousies between the land and sea service to take place. Consider that your mutual security depends upon acting perfectly in concert. I have wrote to Colonel Greene to afford you every possible assistance from Red Bank, till the reinforcement gets down.”—Washington to Lieutenant-Colonel Smith, 28 October, 1777.

“I find something of the same kind existing between Smith and Monsr. Fleury, who I consider as a very valuable officer. How strange it is that men, engaged in the same important service, should be eternally bickering instead of giving mutual aid! Officers cannot act upon proper principles who suffer trifles to interpose to create distrust and jealousy. All our actions should be regulated by one uniform plan, and that plan should have one object only in view, to wit, the good of the service. Where this is the case, although there may be a diversity of opinion, there can be no real obstruction. I hope all these little rubs will be done away by your prudent management.”—Washington to Brigadier-General Varnum, 4 November, 1777.

This function of peacemaker made many calls upon Washington’s time, for the opportunities for differences and jealousies were frequent. “General Woodford complains that he lately wrote you a polite letter requesting necessaries for his Brigade which he sent by an officer, to which he says, you only returned him a rough verbal answer, without complying with his demand even in part. As General Woodford is an exceeding good officer and one who I think would not make extravagant or unnecessary demands, I could wish you would clear up this matter to his satisfaction.”—Washington to James Mease, 12 November, 1777.