Autographs

Only months after he lost his son Quentin, shot down by the German planes over France, Theodore Roosevelt consoles a woman on the death of her relative, killed by an artillery shell on the Western Front.

Theodore ROOSEVELT (1858-1919) Fine content Autograph Letter Signed, “Theodore Roosevelt” 1 page, 165 x 128 mm (5 x 6 1/2 in.) [Columbus, Ohio], 30 September 1918, addressed in his hand on the accompanying transmittal envelope to “Miss Betty Trudeau” in Columbus. Matted and framed with a transcript of the original letter from Truseau to Roosevelt and a 1907 Harris and Ewing photograph, a bust portrait of Roosevelt. 215 x 165 mm. (6 1/2 x 8 1/2 in) (sight).

A touching letter to a young woman, who had offered her condolences to the former President for the recent death of his son Quentin, an Army Air Service pilot who had been shot down over France. According to an anonymous relative, who’s account of the exchange is framed together with Roosevelt’s letter, accomplished on Ohio State University Department of Botany letterhead, that Betty had written the letter to Roosevelt, “who was here today to open the Liberty Loan campaign. It was her own idea and she carried it out without suggestion from anyone – even taking the letter to the Deshler Hotel so it would be delivered.”

Below, the writer proceeds to transcribe the contents of Betty’s letter: “The reason i am writing to you is because i have loved you ever since I was old enough to realize. I am so sorry about your son. I have two ungles [sic] in the war and my cousin Dick was killed at C[h]ateau Thierry. He was only 19 and was big and had rosey [sic] cheecks. He was hit by a shell and blown all to bits. I wish you would come to our house dinner and we would have all the children in the neighborhood like a big birthday party. Mother says I could have you if you will come.”

Her heartfelt letter elicited the following response from Roosevelt the same day: “Dear little Miss Betty, That’s a dear note of yours, I am very sorry about your gallant cousin Dick, and I hope all you other kinsfolk who are at the front, fighting bravely, will come tome to you safely. Your friend Theodore Roosevelt“.

The news of Quentin’s death deeply wounded the former President, who after war erupted in Europe in 1914 had staunchly advocated U.S. involvement in the conflict. With Archie Roosevelt already wounded, it was more than either he, or Edith, could bear. Feeling responsible for urging his sons to go into harm’s way, he wrote, “It is rather awful to know ath he paid with his life, and that my other sons may pay with their lives, to try to put in practice what I preached.”¹ While in Columbus, Roosevelt was greeted by Justice E. W. McCormick, whose son, Lt. Vaughn R. McCormick had been Quentin Roosevelt’s commander in the 22nd Aero Squadron. Tragically, Lt. McCormick had also killed serving in France on September 12, 1918—only two weeks before.²

His loss did nothing to deter his resolve to prosecute the war vigorously. Roosevelt had been in the midst of a multi city speaking tour promoting the Liberty Loan, including Baltimore, Columbus, Kansas City, and Wichita before returning to New York. As he had in Baltimore the evening beforehand, Roosevelt urged “universal obligatory service” for both men and women, as a means of preparedness as well as the deportation of conscientious objectors employing the reasoning that only those who were wiling to die for the country were fit to live here. Roosevelt also cited the lack of American preparedness before she entered the war, arguing that “‘the war would have been over ninety days after this country entered it…'”³

Expected folds, some minor but normal loss to top margin of transmittal envelope, else very good condition.

(EXA 6002) $5,750
_________
¹ Kathleen Dalton, Theodore Roosevelt: a Strenuous Life (2007), 504.
² Plain Dealer, Cleveland, 2 Oct. 1918, 13.
³ New York Times, 1 October 1918, 8.

Franklin Roosevelt signs a beautiful color print of the White House in the controversial 1936 Democratic Book

Franklin D. ROOSEVELT (1882-1945) His signature, “Franklin D. Roosevelt” as President, accomplished beneath a charming color engraving of the White House 365 x 285 mm. (14 1/2 X 11 1/2 in.), bound in a limited edition volume THE DEMOCRATIC BOOK 1936. ([Philadelphia, 1936]) 384 pp., quarto, bound in soft brown leather with gilt lettering and the original pictorial wraps bound in. Limited Edition #2,120 of 2,500 copies.

A voluminous book of information and advertising (many liquor ads) that was used as a fundraiser for the Democratic Party containing FDR’s acceptance speech, the Democratic Platform of 1936, and biographies of all the Cabinet members as well as articles on Congress, the Supreme Court, the Cabinet departments, and reproductions of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Franklin Roosevelt signed 1936 Democratic Book

The Democratic National Committee published the volume with fund-raising for the 1936 campaign in mind, charging $2,500 for full-page advertisements. Republicans, observing that many of the sponsors, which included General Electric, General Motors and U.S. Still, had pending business before the government, immediately accused the D.N.C. of violating the Corrupt Practices Act.

Boards and spine rubbed at edges and especially at corners, interior pages and signed White House print is pristine and other pages quite clean.

(EXA 6006) $2,650

After suffering a sprained ankle after a day of golf in the midst of the Election of 1912 against Wilson and Roosevelt’s Bull Moose, Taft assures his correspondent, “A few more days of rest, and I’ll be out on the links again.”

Typed Letter Signed, “Wm H Taft” as President, 1 page, 6″ x 6.5″ (sight) on White House letterhead, Beverly, Massachusetts, September 7, 1912, to Charles A. Ricks in Collinwood, Ohio. Matted and framed with a photograph.

Taft writes, in full: “Thank you for your kind letter of September 7th. It won’t be necessary for me to try Doctor Phillips’ remedy this time, for, I am glad to say, my ankle is very greatly improved. A few more days of rest, and I’ll be out on the links again. I appreciate your thoughtfulness, old man!”

What exactly constituted the doctor’s “remedy” is anyone’s guess. Taft was the target of a good deal of ridicule in the press due to his penchant to hit the links during the bitter campaign against Theodore Roosevelt’s breakaway Progressive Party, which split the Republican vote and cost him the Presidency. Ironically, he sprained his ankle while playing golf over the weekend before he returned to Washington on September 4, 1912.¹

The recipient, Charles A. Ricks (1869-1914) was a manger for Standard Oil in Cleveland when he organized the G. C. Kuhlman Car Company, serving as the electric railroad car manufacturer’s secretary and treasurer until his death in 1914.²

Fine condition.

(EXA 6003) $1,200
_________
¹ “Taft Suffers from Sprained Ankle,” The New Orleans Item, 4 Sept. 1912, 5.
² Samuel Peter Orth, A History of Cleveland, Ohio: Biographical (1910), 819; Electric Railway Journal, 29 Aug. 1914, 44:409.

Horatio Gates Spafford writes to Aaron Burr, recently returned from a self-imposed exile in Europe, for information on New York City’s fortifications to use in the latest edition of his New York Gazateer

Aaron BURR (1756-1836); Horatio Gates SPAFFORD, Sr. (1778-1832) American author, publisher, inventor, attorney and entrepreneur who authored and painstakingly compiled the first comprehensive atlas of New York state, A Gazetteer of the State of New-York; Carefully Written from Original and Authentic Materials, Arranged on a New Plan . . . With an Accurate Map of the State (H.C. Southwick: Albany, N.Y., 1813); The American Magazine, A Monthly Miscellany, Devoted to Literature, Science, History, Biography, and the Arts; Including also State Papers and Public Documents, with Intelligence, Domestic, Foreign, and Literary, Public News, and Passing Events; Being an Attempt to form a Useful Repository for every Description of American Readers (E. & E. Hosford: Albany, 1815), and the text book General Geography, and Rudiments of Useful Knowledge (Hudson, N.Y., 1809). He acquired a patent for fireplace improvements in 1805, and is largely credited as the inventor of the Bessemer process for steelmaking. He corresponded frequently with Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John Adams, championing the establishment of education in the arts and sciences as a means for national advancement. During the American Revolution, his father, Captain John Spafford, commanded a company of Green Mountain Boys under Ethan Allen, participating in the Battles of Ticonderoga and Crown Point, and served under General Horatio Gates at Bennington. His son, Horatio Gates Spafford, Jr. (1828-1888) was a prominent Chicago attorney best known for penning the Christian hymn “It is Well With My Soul” following the tragic deaths by shipwreck of his wife and four children.

Autograph Letter Signed “Horatio Gates Stafford“, 1 page, 248 x 205 mm. (9 3/4 x 8 in.), Albany [New York], 17 March 1813, to Aaron Burr, and docketed by Burr on the address panel, “Horatio Gates Stafford 17th March -13″.

Seaford writes in full (with original spellings retained throughout): “Does my Hon[orable] d[ear]. Friend Col. Burr, know that I am still waiting for his description of New York, with its fortifications, &c.? Or has he forgotten it, in a press of other, & more important business? Such is the present progress of my work, that I shall very much need that within 1 or 2 weeks at most. Should it not, therefore, be in thy power to send it me, please advise me immediately, & very much oblige. But, should thy want of time prevent, some friend, as thou suggested when I last saw thee, would probably do it at they request. And if attendance with any expense to thyself, that amount I was to cheerfully & gladly refund. I will not assent to conceal that I am very solicitous for thy aid in it, & the discriminating exercise of they judgement. That aid to be acknowledged to the public, or not, at they option. And how is thy health, & prosperity; for I hope to be gratified in them.”

Usual folds, soiling, light creasing, overall very good to fine condition.

(EXA 6057) $600

A Know-Nothing and a Jacksonian Democrat spar over the Nullification Crisis.

(Nullification Crisis) John Conrad BUCHER (1792-1851) Pennsylvania politician and lawyer who served as a Jacksonian Democrat in the 22nd Congress, (1831-1833) during the Nullification Crisis. Following his Congressional tenure, he was elected a trustee of Harrisburg Academy, Franklin College (Lancaster) and Marshall College (Mercersburg). In 1839, Bucher was appointed associate judge of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, by Governor David R. Porter, a position he held until his death in 1851.

A collection of four Autograph Letters Signed “John C. Bucher” and “Jno. C. Bucher“, 8pp., various sizes, Philadelphia and Washington, 18 Sept. 1830 to 19 January 1833 to his brother-in-law William Ayres (1788-1856) of Harrisburg,* providing great detail on the political polarization afflicting Congress during the Nullification Crisis of 1832. Bucher exercises wit and scorn in equal measure when chastising Ayres for his Anti-Mason position, and delivers some derisive jabs regarding his brother-in-law’s public conduct. Bucher issues corrections to accusations made by the press, and assists Ayres, perhaps half-heartedly, with furthering a Revolutionary War soldier’s petition for compensation from the government. He also addresses a personal conflict between himself and Ayres regarding the administration of the estate of Bucher’s father (and Ayres’ father-in-law), John Jacob Bucher (1764-1827).

The correspondence reads, in part: “[Philadelphia, 18 September 1830] This afternoon I received a letter from Harrisburg… it is alleged you are making great complaints, about the sale of a Lot, belonging to our late Fathers Estate,— and that you can produce a person that will give $1000— for the same property… as so much has been said about this matter it is to be presumed the purchaser is ready,— will you be so good as to assure the Gentleman, that so far as my control of the matter goes, he shall have the property. I will expect you to attend to this to see this to see this engagement consummated… You were not consulted about this, it is true— but no disrespect was intended by me— I pray you if your purchaser does not intend to close in, that you say nothing about it, that the parties with whom I had the interview know nothing of this… if you are not authorized by facts; to animadvert as severely as you have on my course of action, that your conduct is uncourteous, and exhibits more recklessness than I thought your nature would urge you to… my situation with our Fathers Estate has necessarily caused me to have more than a proportionate share of duty to perform, but I have never wished to assume more than my equal part… [Washington City, 18 December 1832] …the arena of Strife, furnishes matter continually for intense consideration— John C. Calhoun is elected to the Senate— vice R. Hayne who is elected Governor of South Carolina, we have arrived at serious crisis in the affairs of our Country, to preserve peace among ourselves, and the preservation of those principles, which a large majority of us, say are fundamental— the right of protection— did time permit, I should like to run my thoughts here, by asking, or saying, whether our notions of protection, were not more interwoven, with our political creeds than in our absolute knowledge of the practical benefits resulting therefrom— before the Tariff Bill of last session was passed, our Legislature and our people, gave an almost unanimous expression in favor of holding on to ultra notions of protection— the majority in Congress adopted a modified scheme— reducing the scale of protection considerably— no evil consequences resulted, few dissenting voices were heard— all were satisfied— now if to save our Country— and to get rid of six million dollars per annum taxes which you anti Masons look on as a great bug bear— can preserve the Union— and with it the blessing of peace, and happiness to the American people, ought it not to be done? [Washington City, 12 January 1833] The Harrisburg Intelligence rec’d today has sounded the tocsin alarm— so has General Willis Foulke of Carlisle… the Editors say… the House have agreed to the consideration of the bill to repeal the Tariff by a vote of 188 to 82— when this vote was taken— the bill was not before the House, it was a mere vote, that the House would after a certain time viz next Monday and each day after at one o’clock, go into Committee on that Bill— that is a very different thing from voting on the Bill— as the reasons are obvious for the one act— you can alone judge when you see the vote on the other… [Washington City, 19 January 1833] …You mistake me much in supposing, my charge against you, was referring to any publication in the P. Intelligence, in relation to my public acts— not so— they were spread before the public before they reached Harrisburg. Mr. Strong and yourself are at liberty to put such construction on them, as you please. My allusions were to editorial remarks… which had such a squinting to opinions I had communicated to you, that I had concluded you had furnished them— and especially as you called my attention to said papers— as to the compliment of Mr. Strong, to Mr. George H. Bucher, it was merely to send a phillipick at me— the compliment you pay the Jackson party, calling them all slaves— is a beautiful idea— there are then a vast proportion of the population, that are slaves— perhaps it may be the increasing popularity of that man that worries you so much— and prompts you to such an imputation… Those ‘Honorable matters’ you refer to, that you were so kind to suppress— which my neighbors knew— it is a strange kind of suppression, to conceal that that every body knew— you know me long enough to know that I have never endeavoured to suppress any act of mine— hence I too frankly speak my actions— in the revolution of circumstance, certain acts will admit of interpretations or glossary at one time, differently, from another— no man can foresee that the public may use him at any future time for a candidate for office, he cannot therefore shape every act of his life— to shield him from the Paul Pry’s of the times… You have as good right to the enjoyment of your opinion as any man— it never was, nor never shall be for me to question them— but if you should accidentally be placed, as I was placed— and I should act towards you, as you have towards me— you will be enabled alone to judge of the propriety of the course.”

Bucher concludes his correspondence with an acknowledgment that his Congressional career has come to an end by no choice of his own, “On the 4th of March I again return to my private pursuits, with feelings of much gratitude to my fellow Citizens, for the honor they have conferred on me— to the expression of the people, in having chosen another to represent them in my place. I have not, not will not complain, the voice of the majority must prevail; I find many here like myself— it has been so heretofore and it may be so hereafter…“

Soiling, light toning and edge wear, usual folds, overall fine condition.

(EXA 3594) $1,250
_________
^* Ayres was admitted to the bar in Harrisburg in 1826. Active in Whig party politics, he was elected to the Pennsylvania Legislature, serving from 1833 to 1835, and as coadjutor of Thaddeus Stevens, fought for the establishment of a free school system in Pennsylvania. In 1841, he was elected Director of the United States bank at Philadelphia. Between 1850 and his death in 1856, he sat as President of the Harrison Gas Company, the Huntington and Broad Top Railroad, and the Harrisburg and Hamburg Railroad Company. He married Mary Elizabeth Bucher (1795-1847), sister of John Conrad Bucher, in 1817.

Edith Kermit Roosevelt hand makes a gift for the Needle Guild of America in the depths of the Great Depression

Edith Kermit ROOSEVELT (1861-1948) Autograph Note [in Edith Kermit Roosevelt’s hand?] on her “MRS. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, SENIOR SAGAMORE HILL OYSTER BAY, NEW YORK” stationery, 175 x 150 mm. (6 7/8 x 5 7/8 in.), offering her “Best wishes for a successful coed party“. Offered together with the enclosure, a purple and tan felt thread holder fashioned as an owl, stitched with black thread, 165 x 80 mm. (6 1/2 x 3 in.). One of the more unusual pieces that we have had the pleasure of offering in some time.

Her note and gift are accompanied by a note of provenance from “Aunt Marion” to “Lois“, writing “…here is that item Mrs Roosevelt made for the Needle work Guild of America, quite a long time ago, November 1932, she did not date her note, I wish I had, as you can see it is a quite hold…” 227 x 152 mm. (9 x 6 in.).

Housed in a 8 x 7 x 1 1/2 in. Cardboard box addressed to “MRS. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, SAGAMORE HILL, OYSTER BAY“. On a printed label from The American Stationery Co., of Peru, Indiana.

Fine condition overall.

(EXA 6007) $750

Collection of medical prescriptions for William & Ida McKinley signed by the President’s personal physician, Admiral Rixey

President & Mrs. McKinley medical prescriptions

(William and Ida McKINLEY) Admiral Presley Marion RIXEY (1852-1928) Surgeon General of the U.S. Navy fro 1902-1910, personal physician to Presidents William McKinley (1897-1901) and Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909). He attended to McKinley after he was shot by American anarchist Leon Czolgosz in Buffalo, New York in 1901.

Eleven Autograph Documents Signed “R.“, 1 page each, 85 x 124 mm. (3 3/8 x 4 7/8 in.), 3 January 1899 to 12 June 1900, prescriptions for President McKinley (1) and Mrs. McKinley (10), on U.S. Naval Dispensary prescription paper. The prescription for President McKinley for Glyco-Thymoline (mouthwash) was issued on 12 June 1900, a week before he diverted troops from the Philippines to spearhead the China Relief Expedition, a multi-national military rescue mission sent to liberate U.S. Citizens and European nationals trapped in China during the Boxer Rebellion.

Light soiling and edge wear, some creasing, overall fine condition.

(EXA 6001) $950

The United States Navy begins preparations for the Second Barbary War by authorizing the French born block maker, John Rose, to oversee the construction of a new block mill to replace the one destroyed by the British burned Washington the previous summer.

(Second Barbary War) Benjamin Williams CROWNINSHIELD (1772-1851) Hailing from the Boston Brahmin Crowninshield family of shipping merchants, Crowninshield served as United States Secretary of the Navy from 1815 to 1818, spanning the administrations of Presidents James Madison and James Monroe. He oversaw naval strategy during the Second Barbary War of 1815, and otherwise transitioned the Navy to a peace time force following the War of 1812. He was elected to Congress in 1823, serving four consecutive terms as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts, concluding in 1831.

Autograph Letter Signed “BW Crowninshield” as Secretary of the Navy and initialed “BWC” under postscript, 2pp., 317 x 203 mm. (12 1/2 x 8 in.), 15 March 1815, Navy Department [Washington], to Mr. John Rose, Sr., employing him as a superintendent of a Block Mill for the United States Navy.

Crowninshield writes, in large part: “Having full confidence in your integrity and ability, I hereby engage, on the part of the Government of the United States, to employ you in the service of the Navy Department, at a Salary of fifteen hundred dollars per year, payable quarterly. You will be employed in either of the United States Navy Yards, as shall be hereafter decided upon you are to have the charge of superintendence of a Block Mill, to be erected, and put into operation, for the purpose of making all the Blocks which may be required for the United States Naval Service; and you will engage, on your part, to use your best exertions and talents in the erection of such a Block Mill, complete in all respects, and equal to the one formerly in operation at the Navy Yard at Washington City and District of Columbia; the said Block Mill to be erected at the expense of, and for the sole use of the United States; and the Machinery to be erected therein, with all its parts in perfect operation, shall, at your decease, revert to the benefit and exclusive right of the said United States for ever. For the consideration, hereinmentioned, you are to devote your whole time and faithful Services to the Public, under the immediate Orders of the Secretary of the Navy Yard, to whom you will refer the subject of all improvements, to be sanctioned by the Secretary of the Navy, previous to the expense being incurred…” Added in a postscript: “It is also distinctly understood, that besides making all the Blocks which may be required for the Naval Service, you will prepare every other Article necessary to the equipment of our Ships of War, such as Dead Eyes, Shot Racks, Portfire Sticks, Pumps, and generally all the Apparatus that can be performed by the Machinery in the Block Mill, or that may be reasonably required of you to do.”

In 1812, Hajji Ali, the Dey of Algiers declared the annual tribute offered by the United States under the terms of a 1795 treaty as insufficient and declared war. The United States, in the midst of war with Great Britain, was unable to respond. The singing of the Treaty of Ghent at the close of 1814 however allowed the country to focus its attention on North Africa. On March 3, 1815, Congress authorized the use of force against Algiers, and the Navy sent a full squadron under the command of Stephen Decatur to the Mediterranean.

Needless to say, John Rose (1749 – 1828) had his work cut out for him, as the Navy was still rebuilding after a costly but successful sea war against the Royal Navy. Born in France as Louis Rose in L’Orient, he was a seasoned block maker for Louis XVI’s navy at Brest and Le Harvre by the time he arrived in the United States in 1805—leaving his native country due to his dislike of Napoleon Bonaparte. Constructing a block mill in Philadelphia, he came to the attention of Benjamin Henry Latrobe who secured Rose services to run a block mill at the Washington Navy Yard. The industrious block maker secured several patents for improvements in block making, and in conjunction with Latrobe, erected a a powered block mill, which was destroyed by the Navy Yard officials before the British overran and burned Washington in August 1814. Although the Navy wanted to construct a new block mill, and in the present document, retained Rose’s services in supervising its erection, Congress was unable to find sufficient funds to undertake it. Still a valuable, skilled craftsman, Rose remained on the government payroll as a senior block maker and machinist. He became a naturalized citizen in 1817—having already anglicizing his first name to John. He remained working for the Navy until his death in January 1828.¹

Rose’s letter to to the Board of Naval Commissioners, submitted in response to legislation that all employees of the federal government had to be U.S. Citizens, in which he declares his loyalty to the United States, is worth quoting at length: “… I quitted the French government in 1805 with the intention to Conform to every Law and Regulation that might be required of me, and am Resolved at an Advanced age to devote all my inventions and talents for the Utility of the Country which I have Adopted. Conformable to the Law for the Encouragement of Aliens, in Feb. 1814 I took out a patent for the Block Mill Machines; with the intention of giving the invention, to the sole use of the U.S. Navy. At the same time the greatest part of the Machines were Completed, and in full Activity in the Navy Yard ; My first Agreement I fulfilled with that fidelity and integrity , becoming an honest man which I think you can testify. Since that period, on the 15th of March 1815 I made a fresh agreement with the Hon Secretary of the Navy to be retained in the Service, and to build another Block Mill, and likewise for that purpose to hold myself in readiness to proceed to such Navy Yard…”

A fine piece of Navy history documenting the numerous ties between France and the United States, despite frayed relations over the previous two decades.

Usual folds with some separation at folds and seam, tape repair to horizontal center seam, edge wear, light soiling and toning, overall very good to fine condition.

(EXA 6021) $1,200
_________
¹ John G. Sharp, “John Rose, Letter April 22, 1817” Washington D.C. Genealogy Trails (http://genealogytrails.com/washdc/WNY/wnyroseletter1817.html).
² John Rose to Thomas Tingey, 22 April, 1817, NARA, as quoted in Sharp.

A fine military-content letter by the Hero of Fort Griswold, William Ledyard, reporting on the exploits of privateers, the gradual British withdrawal from Newport, and most importantly, recruiting artillerymen to staff the fort he would die defending from the traitor Benedict Arnold

William LEDYARD (1738-1781) Connecticut militia officer who commanded Fort Griswold guarding New London, Connecticut. He was tragically killed on 6 September 1781 during Benedict Arnold’s Raid on New London. Although Ledyard ordered his men to lay down their arms when the enemy captured Fort Griswold, the British officer in command killed him with the sword he had offered in surrender—precipitating a massacre of the fort’s eighty defenders.

Fine content War date Autograph Letter Signed, “Wm. Led yard” as Lieutenant Colonel, 2pp., 195 x 155 mm. (7 5/8 x 6 1/4 in.), New London [Connecticut], 2 February 1779, addressed in his hand on the integral transmittal leaf to “Maj General [Jabez] Huntingdon In Norwich“. Docketed on verso by Jabez HUNTINGTON (1719-1786). An informative letter, updating his commander on naval affairs, and British moves around Newport, as well as the critical need to recruit artillerymen to reinforce Fort Griswold.

Ledyard opens his letter reporting on the continued success of American privateers operating against British shipping on Long Island Sound: “Since Writing your Honor yesterday nothing material has turn[e]d up in this Department except the arrival of two Prize Brigs this morning taken by the two privateers Sloops Commanded by Capts Havens & Conklin[g], their Cargoes Consist chiefly of Oats — about 30 Puncheons of Rum –” Nearly 3000 imperial gallons of rum and 12,000 bushels of oats bound for British troops stationed in eastern Long Island was the day’s haul for Connecticut privateer sloops Beaver, commanded by Captain Havens and the sloop Eagle, a six gun vessel, led by Captain E. Conkling. The ships they had seized were part of a much larger relief fleet that had arrived in New York from Cork several weeks before, providing much-need supplies to their headquarters in New York and garrisons in Newport and other outposts. The seizure proved to be the end of a productive week for the two Connecticut privateers who had the previous week had taken the Ranger a 12-gun British privateer that had been terrorizing the Long Island Sound for some time. The Connecticut captains had surprised the Ranger at Sag Harbor, and after delivering the brig to New London, again took to the sound where they were forced to take shelter behind Gardiner’s Island after they spotted a large fleet of 20 sail under escort, entering the Sound bound for New York. The next morning they arrived again at Sag Harbor where they found seven of the ships they saw the previous day anchored at Sag Harbor. The However the Connecticut brig, Middletown, which had accompanied the Beaver and Eagle, became stuck on a shoal and became an easy target for the British armed brig protecting the other vessels. After about 4 or 5 hours, the crew of the Middletown was forced to abandon ship. The other two Connecticut vessels took on them on and left the area only to happen upon the two aforementioned British brigs hauling oats and rum—a worthy consolation prize.¹

Ledyard also chronicles the beginning of the end of the British occupation of Newport—a post that had been under severe stress for want of supplies following the American attempt wrest control of the town the previous year at the Battle of Rhode Island. He reports the observation of “… the Capt. of one of the Brigs in forms that the Fleet that passed this Harbour last Saturday, he saw up near the Narrows Consisting of about 40 Sail I think it probable the Troops made mention of as Embarking at R[h]ode Island was in this Fleet…” A contemporary newspaper account corroborates Ledyard’s suspicions: a man who crossed the British lines from New York around 2 February reported that an entire brigade had arrived in the city from Newport—which would correspond to timing of Ledyard’s report². Only a month before, a British expeditionary force of 3,500, drawn from Sir Henry Clinton’s main army in New York, had taken Savannah, Georgia. Now, seeking to take Charleston, South Carolina as well, he required reinforcements—enough so to make the continued occupation of Newport impracticable. By October 1779, they had abandoned the Rhode Island town for good. Ledyard’s report of the troop embarkation from Newport appears to be the beginning of Clinton’s drawing-down process.

While Ledyard surely welcomed prospect of the end of British control of Newport, that alone would not end British threats to the Connecticut coast. He moves on to the subject of reinforcing Fort Griswold, a critical defense for the town of New London, and the place he would meet his fate in 1781: “… the Officers of the Artillery are now out on the business of Inlisting Men, shall inform your Honor with their Success by every opportunity In the Interum should bee glad of some orders with regard to Garrison the Fortifications here, I shall do all in my power to get Men to engage in the Artillery Companies, I am now engaging a number of Volunteers to enter the Fortifications is case of an alarm, for their Defence which Volunteers I expect will consent to mete & Exercise the Cannon once or twice a week.—”

Although Fort Griswold, situated on the eastern bank of the Thames River opposite New London, commanded a strong position, it’s secrets were betrayed by Benedict Arnold, who, in September 1781, led a raid on New London, burning much of the strategically-important Connecticut seaport. Arnold, having an intimate knowledge of the Fort’s layout and firing angles, managed steer the British fleet clear of its guns. A detachment of 600 redcoats, led by Lieutenant Colonel Eyre, landed on the eastern bank of the Thames and surrounded Fort Griswold, demanding its surrender. Ledyard refused, and the British attacked the Fort, defended by less than 160 poorly-trained militiamen. Despite the odds, Ledyard’s men defended it for at least an hour, mortally wounding Colonel Eyre during the action. Command devolved to Major Montgomery, who was, in turn, killed while mounting the parapet.

Next in command was Major Bromfield, a Loyalist, who managed to breach the entrance and led the troops into the fort’s interior. When he entered the fort, he demanded to know who had been in charge. Ledyard reportedly responded, “I did sir, but you do now,” and offered his sword in surrender. Bromfield took the sword and stabbed Ledyard to death with it, which set off a massacre of about 80 of the fort’s now defenseless defenders.

Benedict Arnold, who was busy setting fire to New London across the river, was not present at the Fort Griswold massacre. That did not prevent him from attempting to cover up the crime in his report to Sir Henry Clinton in New York the following morning: “I have inclosed a return of the killed and wounded, by which your excellency will observe that our loss, though very considerable, is short of the enemy’s, who lost most of their officers, among whom was their commander, Col. Ledyard. Eighty-five men were found dead in Fort Griswold, and sixty wounded, most of them mortally. Their loss on the opposite side (New London) must have been considerable, but cannot be ascertained.”³

A superb military-content letter, by an important officer, tragically killed in action.

Expected mailing folds, minor loss to integral transmittal leaf from seal tear well clear of any text, else quite clean and bright and in very fine condition.

(EXA 6000) SOLD.
_________
¹ Connecticut Journal, New Haven, 10 Feb. 1779, 3.
² Exeter Journal (N.H.), 23 Feb. 1779, 3.
³ “Ledyard, William, “Appleton’s Cyclopædeia of American Biography, 1892 ed.

Important letter by abolitionist Gilbert Farquhar Mathieson on the possibility of emancipation in Jamaica and other British possessions in the Carribiean

“… unless we resign the islands to the Negroes entirely, it is impossible to give them their liberty at any definite period, consistently with the safety of the whites, and the happiness of the whole Community…“

(Abolition and Slavery) Gilbert Farquhar MATHISON (MATHIESON, c. 1803 – 1854) British author, traveler, abolitionist, served as private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and as Secretary to the Mint beginning in 1828. Mathison is also the author of Narrative of a Visit to Brazil, Chile, Peru and the Sandwich Islands, during the years 1821 and 1822 (1825) describing his journey to Macao, China, where he worked for his cousin Walter Stevenson Davidson in the opium trade.

Fine content Autograph Letter Signed “Gilbert Farquhar Mathieson“, 11pp., London, 26 April 1824, a lengthy communication to Captain Henry L. DeKoven^* aboard the Ship America docked in Canton, China, regarding his intentions to join the clergy, his current course of legal studies, and the necessity of emancipating the slaves in the British colonies in the West Indies.

A young Mathison, recently returned from a world tour that brought him to South America, Hawaii and China, writes on his prospects and expectations for his life, and ponders becoming a clergyman. He muses: “… I may or may not make a trip to Jamaica some day, according to circumstances, and if so shall hardly fail to take America en route…” A mutual associate, Mathison notes, “is now there in Kingston in my father’s employ,” but thinks that a position might open up for himself as his father’s current man was in “very low spirits and appears terribly apprehensive about catching the fever…”

Mathison then discusses the prospects for ending slavery in the British colonies at some length: “You are not likely to have heard much in South America, about the question of emancipating the Slaves in the West Indies that has been agitated by Mr. Wilberforce & his friends in Parliament of late— It has given rise to much paper warfare, and in the general dearth of all Political events of importance abroad or at home, the controversy between the West Indian Planters & abolitionists has excited general attention— The object of the latter is to leave a definite period named after which all the Children who are born shall be considered free & independent of their former masters. It is asserted that they will then work in the same way that our peasants do for wages, & become not only more happy but more industrious & virtuous than they now are so as to render the plan of abolition mutually beneficial to all parties.— The Planters on the contrary attest, that to suppose 800,000 negroes, would in a free state, be content of serve & obey a few score thousand whites is little short of downright folly— That to imagine that the present generation would go on toiling as before and remain slaves, whilst their children were all free, is equally absurd, and in short, that unless we resign the islands to the Negroes entirely, it is impossible to give them their liberty at any definite period, consistently with the safety of the whites, and the happiness of the whole Community— In a country where people may support themselves & families by working one or two days in the week, it is say they irrational to believe that they would voluntarily toil the other five, except the hour of necessity waged them— Which of these two opinions is best founded I have you to judge, but shall only mention, that the Abolitionist party has completely succeeded if not in emancipating the negroes, at least in depreciating to a nameless[?] extent the value of all West India property. No one will accept it as security for the smallest loan, and whilst our great capitalists are investing Millions in South American loans, mines &c., at a great risk, they neglect to give any credit to their own colonies. The West Indians on their side remonstrated very waringly against the interference of the British Parliament in their local concerns… Some of their men went so far as to threaten to renounce their allegiance to England & so to at the Protection of America, in case Government persisted in its attempts to legislate for them… The course pursued by Mr. Canning & Ld. Bathurst is I think the wisest that could be adopted… [Lord Bathurst] in his place as Minister… the universal outcry against slavery was so strong, that he sent out orders to the West Indian Legislatures respecting their slaves which they have since refused to obey… The small island of Trinidad is about to be selected as the Theatre of such experiments as Government may deem expedient for the advancement of the Negroes to a state of Civilisation & freedom… the administration of James Monroe in America is not more satisfactory to his constituents than that of George Canning, at the present moment to the Citizens of Great Britian. He has upon several occasions taken the opportunity of declaring his respect & good will towards your Government & country. I sincerely trust that good will may long continue to subsist between our two Governments, and that whenever war is again necessary, we may cooperate as allies & brothers, rather than as enemies—…”

His father, Gilbert Mathison, died in 1828, and his inheritance included a number of slaves. When Great Britain ordered the emancipation of colonial slaves in the 1830s, Mathison was assessed with ownership of twenty-five individuals.

Light creases and expected mailing folds, light toning and soiling, else very good.

(EXA 5935) SOLD
________
^* Henry Louis DeKoven (1784-1804) Middletown, Connecticut shipping magnate active in the China trade during the early 19th century, a merchant and banker, and an early land holder in what would later become Chicago.

1 2 3 4 5 >»