Autographs

Gilbert Dench on his long appeal for $20,000 in depreciated notes from the Continental Congress.

(Revolutionary War Finance) Gilbert DENCH (1742-1807) Autograph Letter Signed, “G. Dench“, 2pp., 240 x 188 mm. (9 1/2 x 7 3/8 in.), Philadelphia, 31 January 1795, likely to a member of the House of Representatives which had just denied his petition for reimbursement for an army supply contract he fulfilled in 1782 in which he was paid in depreciated paper rather than in specie as the contract specified.

Dench, whose petition had been rejected by the House of Representatives the day before, writes in full: “Please Except of my acknowledgement for your attention to my Case, and bel[i]eve me that Ingratitude has no Place in my mind as to the Term of my Case had in Congress the other day, was as unfor[e]seen and as uncontrived by me, on my, Death Day— the facts, are these, the day I was with ye Com[mitt]ee there was but two or three Papers read, when Dr. Hotlon¹ [sic] to two other Gen[tl]eman told me, those Gentlem[en] was before me, & that I had better le[a]ve all my Papers I handed to Mr. Forster² who had read Sum & left the Chamber, and never have I been with s[ai]d Com[mitt]ee more then five moments Since,— as I had a hint what the report would be, Concluded, it was the only one that would Pass the House, and as I thought most of you Gentlemen was of opinion that this was the only best way for me to obtain Something— Concluded there would be no objection to the acceptance of it, as to it being accepted or not was not for me to Determine nor did I ever Desire any one Gentleman to op[p]ose the Acceptance of it, or have the Papers read, although my Claim was on Congress, as I thought to nowhere else. I don’t say I have not said hard things of some Legeslatins [sic] of Massachusetts, and of the Present one, as to there Ingratitude towards you & me, feeling sore in this Pursuit, having road [sic] more then 40000 miles hope to meet with your Pardon, for any Inadvertence in me, for any Int[e]rest Dictated no such Process— so that on all occasions [sic], I shall, acknowledge your Friendship to me, as well as your Great Concern for The Publick Good, as to your Letters they went before the Com[mitt]ee with my other Papers, without any thought of mine, that such a use would be made of them, as was, nor did I ever think they would be read, nor ever did I mention it to any Person to have them read,— this is my Evidence that if the Should be read it must af[f]ront, those, whose favors I ever wished to Secure.”

In 1781 and 1782, Gilbert Dench transported clothing and other supplies for the Continental Army as a contactor. While Dench’s 1781 contract specified payment in certificates from Congress, his 1782 contract was to be paid in $20,000 of specie. However Jabez Hatch, the quartermaster responsible for paying the contract, did not have hard money available when payment came due. Instead, Hatch obtained a loan from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and paid Dench with certificates. When Robert Morris reimbursed Massachusetts for the loan in specie, those notes rapidly depreciated in value.

Dench began petitioning Congress for redress in 1791 with the support of Elbridge Gerry.³ That petition was rejected, but Dench approached Congress again in 1795 but was again rejected. According to a separately published report issued the same year on Dench’s petition: “The Committee are of opinion, that there is no existing obligation on the United States, to make up depreciation in the present case; more especially, as the United States have paid for the services rendered by the petitioner in specie; and if there exists an obligation on any body of men, to make up to the petitioner his depreciation, it certainly must rest upon the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”⁴

Undeterred, Dench petitioned the House again in 1797, which prompted a lively debate on the floor that, unlike the deliberations in 1795, were published (together with a formal report). While many of the Representatives, including Henry Dearborn, James Madison, Joseph Varnum, George Thatcher, and William Livingston sympathized with Dench’s plight, they could find no means to assist him. Jeremiah Smith of New Hampshire noted that although “Dench had been badly used… innumerable other cases were much worse. Mr. Dench suffered no more than others who took depreciated paper instead of specie. He was obliged to sell his certificates before they were due; but the citizens of Massachusetts actually paid in real specie the tax of which these certificates were partly in anticipation…the House was every day rejecting claims more equitable than this one.” Robert Williams of North Carolina feared “complying with this demand would open the door to numbers with this principle in their view.” Jonathan Dayton concurred, warning that granting Dench’s petition “would be letting in a flood of claims.”⁵ Still Dench persisted, petitioning Congress again in 1800 with the same response. The report issued by the House of Representatives denying Dench’s claim was worded exactly as the one they issued in 1797.⁶ Undaunted, Dench again approached Congress in 1800 and 1804, and was denied again.⁷

Dench died insolvent in 1807 and his estate was auctioned in 1811.⁸ Thirty years later, Dench’s heirs revived the campaign, submitting petitions to Congress in 1837, 1840, 1843, and 1846. The last time Dench’s heirs petitioned the Committee of Revolutionary Claims, it does not appear to have ever been considered as Congress’ records are silent on the matter after this point. ⁹ It appears that the family finally abandoned their Revolutionary ancestor’s quixotic battle for justice nearly 60 years after the first attempt.

Toning, minor creasing and edge wear, slight water damping at bottom left margin just barely affecting content, usual folds, overall very good condition.

(EXA 3506) $650
__________
¹ Samuel Holten (1738-1818). Massachusetts physician and politician, member of the Third Congress, 1793-1795.
² Dwight Foster (1757-1823) Massachusetts attorney and politician who served in Congress form 1793 to 1800, and in the Senate until 1803.
³ Maryland Journal (Baltimore), 16 Dec. 1791, 2: Elbridge Gerry presented one on Dench’s behalf, “praying compensation for damage and loss by him sustained, in contracts for transporting cloathing [sic] and military stores.”
⁴ Report of the Committee of Claims on the Petition of Gilbert Dench. Made the 29th of January, 1795. ([Washington: United States Congress, [1795]), 3.
⁵ The Debates and Proceedings of the Congress of the United States (1849), 1835-1839.
⁶ Report of the Committee of Claims, on the Petition of Gilbert Dench. 4th January 1797 (Evans 32995); Report of the Committee of Claims, on the Petition of Gilbert Dench. 21st March 1800 (Evans 38843).
⁷ United States House of Representatives, Journal, 31 March 1800; Ibid, 21 December 1804.
⁸ “Mansfield-Perkins Ancestry” Rootsweb. (http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=jim_stevens&id=I149): Mathew Metcalf Esqr and John Jones, yeoman, both of Hopkinton and John Fisk, gentleman of Framingham were appointed on 14 October 1807 to take inventory of Gilbert Dench’s estate. The real estate included the homestead and 70 acres in Hopkinton, an acre of land with a small house also in Hopkinton, 54 acres in Holliston, one half of 25 acres in Framingham with half of a small house & barn & half of the mills thereon, owned in common with Isaac Dench, and a pew in Hopkinton meeting house, totaling $5,630.00. With the personal estate, the estate was valued at $6,136.18. However, the debts due from the estate were also considerable, totaling $5,280.00, more than half due on mortgages, so that on 10 November 1807, John Fairbanks as executor asked that the estate be declared insolvent. Matthew Metcalf Esqr and Jeremy Stimpson, physician, both of Hopkinton, were then appointed commissioners to examine the claims. The personal estate was sold 30 November 1807, with many of the items purchased by his son Isaac Dench, his daughters’ husbands and by other relatives, including Samuel and Thomas Valentine, John Jones, Dr. Stimpson, and Peletiah Bixby. The real estate was to be auctioned Monday 1 April 1811, however, that day being very stormy, the sale was adjourned to the next Monday. The homeplace was sold to Elijah Haven, the mill to Isaac Dench, the wood lot to Dr. John O. Wilson, and the one acre in Hopkinton to Elijah Pike. The auction raised only $1579.50, so that the court ordered that the creditors be paid 22 cents for each dollar of their claim”.
⁹ House, Journal, 30 January 1837, 29 December 1837; 27 June 1838; 5 February 1840; 8 March 1842; 22 December 1843; Senate, Journal, 7 January 1846.

Battlefield inventory of General Mariano Arista’s silver plate service captured at Resaca de la Palma, May 1846

(Mexican-American War) A field inventory taken by an unknown American soldier, 1 page, 249 x 198 mm. (9 3/4 x 7 3/4 in.), on or around 9 May 1846, itemizing the silver service of General Mariano Arista, acquired as spoils of war by the American army over General Mariano Arista’s Mexican forces at the Battle of Resaca de la Palma. General Zachary Taylor led American troops to force General Mariano Arista (1802-1855) and his army to make a hasty retreat to Monterrey, Mexico, leaving behind Arista’s silver service, writing desk, military and personal papers, chest, baggage and artillery. At the end of the Mexican American War, General Arista ordered the sale of the silver service with the proceeds delivered to Mexican soldiers wounded at the Battle of Resaca de la Palma. Major William W. Chapman (d. 1859) arranged to have the silver service sold to John E. Gary. It now resides at the Museum of New Mexico in Santa Fe.

In full: “Inventory of Silver plate belonging to General Arista.
12 Silver breakfast plates.
2 round dishes.
1 round do [illeg…].
2 Goblets.
2 Tea cups
1 Coffee cup
6 Table spoons”

Usual folds, slight creasing, edge wear, toning as shown, overall fine condition.

(EXA 5314) $500

A richly detailed description of stage coach journey across New Jersey and Pennsylvania, 1832.

(Nineteenth Century Travel) A lengthy Autograph Letter Signed “C. G. S.” 4pp., 250 x 200 mm. (9 7/8 x 8 on.), Pittsburgh, 17 January 1832, with integral address leaf bearing black “PITTSBURGH Pa JAN 19” cancellation. The correspondent relates to his Uncle, Dr. Charles Smith of New Brunswick, New Jersey, a detailed description of his overland journey from Princeton, New Jersey to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, together with his impressions of the town upon his arrival. While recovering from his arduous stage coach trip across the Alleghenies, our correspondent set down to describe it to his uncle: “…My journey was upon the whole as pleasant as such a journey could well be at this season of the year – Few very respectable people are to be found going over the whole road between this and Phila [sic] at this time – & he may think himself fortunate – who, like I – can say he had decent companions. But to begin – I succeeded in getting in the Stage at Princeton on Tuesday a little after 12 – with a number of gentleman and one lady – the gents appeared to be all citizens of Phila. One was called Col. Prevost & had just returned from Europe. Certainly very much of a gentleman – a Mr. Richards – Mr. Biddle & a Mr. Newkirk (I suppose Charles G’s partner for he talked of having been at New Orleans & was evidently a merchant) – and two others who were like myself in cog [sic] – We arrived at Phila. about 7 – I took lodgings at Head’s Mansion House Hotel & went as soon after as I could find any one to show the way to the Pittsburgh stage office – The 2 o’clock stage was full and I took a seat in the other which start as 1/2 past 6 – We left the city in the Morng [sic] with a state full of passengers & came ten miles to breakfast – During the first days ride we had a very agreeable set until we came near Lancaster about dark, when they began to drop off one by one – First the ladies left us – and we regressed our loss exceedingly – one of the beautiful, good tempered, sensible & well educated girl from Lancaster – a Miss Elizabeth Humes had been the life and should of the whole party & every face looked grave at least if not sad when dropping a most graceful courtesy she gave us her ‘Good bye – Gentlemen’ & tripped away – I had little opportunity of seeing the city of L – it was dark when we passed through – A part of it is composed of old fashioned frame houses one story & a half high with roofs almost perpendicular but the better part of the town has fine laye [sic] brick buildings & quite a modern appearance – We entered Harrisburgh at one o’clock in the morng & after being detained an hour at the Stage office rode on towards Chambersburgh – From thence we continued our journey after a short delay – with great anxiety to arrive at our sleeping place a most excellent house at the Eastern foot of Sideling hill – In our way we crossed the Tuscarora Mtn. ascending by one Winding road 4 or 5 miles into the very regions of frost, sleet, snow & ice – & descending the same distance on the other side – In descending this Mtn I felt serious apprehension for my neck & limbs – We can down the whole way with the horses on the gallop – the coach now bounding over a cradle – jolt – now staggering within a few feet of a precipice over which we might have fallen hundreds of feet before we could have reach the bottom ground – The reasons they give for this furious driving are – that in going slow with the hills covered as they now are with sheets of ice there is great danger that the weight of the coach should cause it to slide off the road – & that with careful drivers & good horses they find it both easier and safer to run down the mountains – At this pace we came over all of the Coachmen began to use whips to horses more after the fashion of Eastern men – When we had gone over a few of the hills in this mad way – my fears vanished & I felt quite as secure as I could have done in riding over Jersey roads – Generally speaking the coaches are good and strong & comfortable too – the horses sure footed & the drivers careful & obliging – & when a person has all these requisites for traveling over the mountains he is as safe as the foresight & power of man can make him – A tree laden with ice may fall & crush him – a piece of rock might roll into the road & the coach be dashed in pieces against it or thrown over the ledge beneath – but unless some such (hardly probable but) possible occurrence should happen his is safe – But I am out of the road – To return – We reached our halting place before eight with a greater disposition to sleep than sup – though we had eaten nothing since daybreak. The night seems by two minutes long and we were off at four again – In this days ride and the next we crossed Sideling hill and Tusseys Mountain – passed through Bedford near which are the famous Springs surmounted the Allegheny. Laurel Hill & Chestnut Ridge – three famous obstacles, and having left behind us a number of Knolls beside, we reached here as before without javg met with any remarkable adventures or having been exposed to any imminent peril – through we were occasionally in danger.” Not only does the traveller describe in great detail his harrowing trip to the west of Pennsylvania, he also gives his impressions of early Pittsburgh: “I was agreeably disappointed in Pittsburgh & its appendages had been making up my mind to find it so vile a place, that upon reaching here I found imagination had overshot the M[ark] & was surprised to find it so tolerable – It is black – it is In rainy weather it is very wet (as I discovered to my infinite satisfaction yesterday) and in damp weather & when there is little wind it is so smoky everywhere that you that you can hardly see your next neighbor [sic] – but it makes up for these disadvantages by the industry honesty and enterprise [sic] of its inhabitants – by the meanings it affords of gathering up this worlds goods – by its situation in the Valley of the Mississippi which all allow is on day to hold the balance of power and wealth in North America – in the inexhaustible stores of bituminous coal which are to be found everywhere about this region – Easily obtained at five cents the bushel or one dollar eighty cents per children [sic] – & serving the poor both for light and fuel – & in many other things I dare say which I know nothing about yet – Allegheny town is very well situated on the West bank of the Allegheny River – is connected with the city by a fine bridge of Eleven hundred feet in length – I do not recollect the number of inhabitants – but it has increased & is increasing rapidly – & from all I can hear or see or judge from, will one day surpass its neighbor in size &c &c…”

Light folds, a few marginal tears, else fine condition.

(EXA 4276) $550

Decius Wadsworth writes to Congressman George Michael Troup regarding the reorganization of the Ordnance Department in 1812

Decius WADSWORTH (1768-1821) Officer in the U.S. Army who served as ordnance chief during the War of 1812. He headed the Ordnance Department until 1821 where he drafted uniform regulations for the armory system and the manufacture of ordnance for the U.S. Army. In 1817, Wadsworth developed a cipher system based on one designed by Thomas Jefferson. Wadsworth’s system would remain the standard (with additions and improvements) until the Second World War.

Important Autograph Letter Signed “Decius Wadsworth“, 3pp., 335 x 200 mm. (12 7/8 x 7 7/8 in.), Washington, 19 June 1813 to Congressman George Michael Troup (1780-1856) offering his recommendations for the reorganization of the Ordnance Department soon after its creation by Congress in May 1812.

“The Ordnance Department as originally organized, consisted of one Commissary General, one Assistant Commissary General four Deputies, and not exceeding eight assistant Deputies. At the last Session of Congress, an Augmentation of the assistant Deputies to 15 was authorized. The duties of the ordnance department as prescribed by law are various and important. Such as 1. Inspecting and proving, Cannon, Cannot Shot, Shells and Gunpowder. 2. Superintending the Construction of Gun Carriages, Ammunition, Waggons [sic], Equipment for Cannon and all Machines used by the artillery in Garrison or Field. 3. Preparing ammunition both for the artillery and Infantry, and all kinds of ordnance stores. 4. Furnishing to the Secretary of War, Semiannual Returns, exhibiting the actual state of the ordnance and ordnance Stores, throughout the United states together with the necessary Estimates of wear, Tear & Expenditure on which to found Contracts and Purchases to ensure future adequate Supplies. 5. Visiting and inspecting the Several Forts Ports and Camps in the United States to see that the ordnance & ordnance Stores are kept in Serviceable order properly distributed and economically expended. The ordnance Department, as at present filled[?], seems inadequate to the discharge of these Duties. General [William Henry] Harrison has judged it necessary to appoint on his own Authority one Deputy Commissary and two assistant Deputies, to act with the Army under his Command. General [James] Wilkinson has selected one officer of artillery to act as a Deputy Commissary and appointed another ad interim to the the Station of Assistant Deputy General. Generals [sic] Dearborn and General Bloomfield have each appointed an officer of the artillery to act in the ordnance Department. And lastly General Pinckney is solicitous to have two assistant Deputies appointed for the District under his command in addition to one deputy already under his Command. It has been decided by the War Department to establish three principle Laboratories and Arsenals, one at or near Albany, one at or near Pittsburgh, and one on the Waters of the Chesapeake. At each of these Establishments thirty or forty Workmen will be employed, which will require at least one Superior Officer and three or four inferior at each Station. The arsenals and Laboratories will therefore alone require 15 or 16 officers. To each military district one deputy Commissary ought at least to be allowed . My Opinion is therefore the Deputy Commissaries ought to be increased to 11 or 12, leaving the Number of Assistant Deputies at 16 as not established. Nor should we be deterred by the Idea of increased Expence [sic] In fact a great deal of Money would be saved by making systematic arrangements in Relation to this Branch of the Service. We cannot possibly avoid these Expensces; in some Way or other they must be incurred. Cannon, their Carriages and Equipments for our Armies in the Field, our Posts on the Frontier and the fixed and moveable Batteries on the Seaboard must be provided. Powder Shot and Shells must at any rate be procured. The appropriations for the ordnance Supplies I am informed amount to upwards of one Million of Dollars, and the future annual Expenditure during the War will probably not be less. It is worth while to incur some Expence to ensure the faithful judicious and …economical [sic] Expenditure of such an sum of Money. I know an instance where $120 per ton has by the Interference of Militia officers been paid for Cannon shot on the very spot where the United States had contracted to have them delivered at $72 per ton. Such Extravagancies will be continually taking Place while chance and momentary Exigencies regulate the Supplies to be furnished to the military Posts in our extensive Country. Besides, while the ordnance department remains inadequate to the discharge of its duties incessant complaints will arise of Want of ammunition Want of Artillery, Arms and Accoutrements and other Articles essential to Protection and Defence [sic].”

On 14 May 1812, Congress authorized the creation a separate Ordnance Department and Wadsworth was placed in charge as Commissary of Ordnance—the name changing later to Chief of Ordnance. During his tenure, he composed a set of regulations to ensure standardization and in the armories and the manufacture of ordnance as well as setting standards for small arms and reducing the types used. Wadsworth served in that capacity until he left the service in 1821.

Weak at folds with partial separations, minor marginal wear and light, even toning, else good condition.

(EXA 4715) $1,000

An editor seeks words from William T. Sherman on the late Henry Ward Beecher for a memorial volume.

William Tecumseh SHERMAN (1820-1891) Autograph Letter Signed “W.T. Sherman“, 1 page, 235 x 140 mm. (9 1/4 x 5 1/2 in.) bifolium, “5th Ave Hotel” [New York], 13 March 1887, to Edward W. Bok, in Brooklyn on his inability to write something for a memorial volume for Henry Ward Beecher.

“Yours of the 11th is received, on my return from Phia[delphia] some days ago I wrote to Major J. B. Pond some thoughts about Mr Beecher — I have no copy but I am sure the Major must possess enough letters to take up half a dozen volumes. I think you had better see him.”

Despite his apologies, Sherman did finally manage to compose some words on the late pastor for Edward W. Bok’s 1887 volume of tributes to the late pastor of Plymouth Church. Sherman wrote that “The friendship excising between Henry Ward Beecher and myself was most warm. We met often at the festal board and on the platform, and I recall our wanderings together…. His mind and imagination could not be tied down to the narrow dogmas which shackled smaller men…”^*

Edward W. Bok (1863-1930) was a Dutch-born American editor and Pulitzer Prize-winning author. For three decades Bok edited Ladies Home Journal where he coined the term, “Living Room”—updating the Victorian parlor for the twentieth century. Bok began collecting autographs in his early teens, impressing presidents, generals, and celebrities in numerous fields with his engaging questions which in turn elected some excellent letters.

Major James B. Pond (1838-1903) began his career as a printer in Wisconsin. During the Civil War, he served with the 3rd Wisconsin Cavalry where he rose to the rank of major. He was one of few the survivors of the Baxter Springs massacre in 1863. Later in life he began managing public lecturers and other performers including Henry Ward Beecher, Mark Twain, Henry Stanley, P.T. Barnum, and William T. Sherman^†

Light creases and expected folds, very minor wear along top margin as shown, extremely lightly toned at lower margin on verso, else very good.

(EXA 4666) SOLD
_________
^* Edward W. Bok, ec., Beecher Memorial: Contemporaneous Tributes to the Memory of Henry Ward Beecher. 3-4.
^† “Major J. B. Pond is Dead” New York Times (22 June 1903), 1.

Samuel Morse’s first backer, Francis O. J. Smith, proposes to trade his rights to build a telegraph to California to Amos Kendall in exchange for a claim against the New York & Erie (Western Union)

(Early Telegraphy) Francis Ormond Jonathan SMITH (1806-1876) Three-term United States Congressman from Maine 1833 to 1839 who assisted Samuel Morse in promoting the electric telegraph and became a quarter interest owner in the patent.

Excellent content Autograph Letter Signed “F.O.J. Smith”, 1 page, 253 x 203 mm. (10 x 8 in.), “Irving House” New York, 4 February [18]52, to his rival Amos Kendall (1789-1869), concerning an exchange of construction rights in New York for a telegraph route to California:

“Your note of yesterday respecting California came to hand. In reply, I suppose my former note on the subject of my proposal (Jan[uar]y 31, [18]52) of April 1850 was sufficiently fluent, that such proposal, settlement[?] unanswered[?], was no longer an open one. This, however, I will do— accepting such line or lines extending into California as Congress should aid in contracting. I will take your principals’ claim upon the NY & E line in exchange for my interest in California, in lieu of each. The N.Y. & E. have for which payment should have been made by the contractor is 330 miles— that is deducting loss in crossing Hudson River, & deducting Binghamton line, & at $37.50 per mile, amounts to $12,375. To wait[?] on other appropriations to a settlement, I will draft an offer you made (March 24, 1850) on— take your stock in the line from Boston to the British Provinces for an equal amount of stock— N Orleans & Ohio line.”

Only twelve years after Samuel Morse first publicly demonstrated the electromagnetic telegraph, the nation was gripped with a massive (and often anarchic) building boom of lines from New England to New Orleans — not unlike the internet frenzy of the 1990s. Francis O. J. Smith was the first to financially back Morse in 1838 and served as his business manager until the mid 1840s. After a falling out with Smith over financing, Morse retained Amos Kendall to act as his agent and attorney. Smith still retained rights to the patent, which set the stage for conflict. In 1847 Kendall and Smith agreed to divide the nation into exclusive territories in a bid for coopeation. However, the two were soon at odds when Smith constructed a telegraph trunk line from Lake Erie to New York City in violation of an agreement that gave control of main-line telegraph service in the State of New York to Kendall. Smith’s competing line, The New York & Erie, managed by Ezra Cornell and Joshua Speed, proved ultimately unsuccessful and went bankrupt in the early 1850s. On 15 January 1852, only two weeks before Smith wrote this letter, Cornell purchased the defunct line and reorganized it as the New York & Western Union Telegraph Company—shortened later to Western Union after a merger in 1855. Smith, who was losing his grip on future profits in telegraphy, attempted to exchange his rights to build a line to California, as well as his interest in the valuable line from Boston to Nova Scotia, in exchange for a claim against his old company. Whether this deal transpired is unknown, but It would require another decade for telegraph service to reach the West Coast. In 1860, The Federal Government awarded Western Union with the contract for the first transcontinental telegraph. It is unknown whether Smith appreciated the irony.

Toned with some paper loss at left margin, typical folds and other minor wear, else very good condition overall.

(EXA 5209) SOLD.

James Grant 1778 ALS to East Florida Lieutenant Governor John Moultrie

“…things have taken an astonishing turn & we are as much in the dark as you are. A French War was expected. The declaration has been postponed, at least not taken place the 9th of April. Think of a French Alliance and Laurens President of Congress…”

James GRANT (1720-1806) Major general in the British Army during the American Revolutionary War. Fine content war date Autograph Letter Signed “James Grant” 2pp. 224 x 184 mm. (8 7/8 x 7 1/4 in.) Philadelphia, 4 June 1778 to East Florida Lieutenant Governor John Moultrie (1729-1798), the brother of American General William Moultrie. Grant, writing from British-occupied Philadelphia, comments on the recent election of their mutual friend Henry Laurens as President of the Continental Congress. Grant also remarks on the fresh news of the Franco-American alliance that would ultimately force Great Britain to end the conflict and recognize American independence.

“Much obliged for your letter of the 3rd March and quite happy to hear of the flourishing state of Bella Vista & Timonka. I flatter myself you are not likely to be disturbed by your neighbors and if a French war should happen, those gentleman probably would not think of troubling you — the Barrs formerly so much complained of are a security, and you will soon be put upon a respectable footing by a new general and considerable reinforcement of troops. [James] Moncreif who has gained great credit & reputation with this army, goes a passenger with Capt. Elphius Lowe & returns to East Florida to assist his friends and look after his private affairs which seemed to have suffered in his absence. He will give all the news. I wish I had more agreeable to communicate to you but things have taken an astonishing turn & we are as much in the dark as you are. A French War was expected. The declaration has been postponed, at least not taken place the 9th of April. Think of a French Alliance and Laurens President of Congress. Much subject of conversation if we were together. I can say nothing for certainty about myself for the remaining part of the summer but shall always be happy to hear from you & beg of you to assure Mrs. Moultrie & family of my best respects & wishes as I shall ever be with truth and regard…”

Unbeknownst to the general, Great Britain had already declared war on France on 17 March 1778 following Louis XVI’s decision to recognize American independence on 6 February. Word of the treaty with France had only arrived in the Americas at the beginning of May. Coincidentally, on the same day that Grant wrote the present letter, the Lancaster-based Pennsylvania Packet reported that “a gentlemen arrived at Elizabeth town on Saturday last, from New York, who brought an account that war had been declared there that day in form, against France…” Official reports of the British declaration began trickling in several days later.¹ Two weeks after he wrote to Moultire, Grant joined the British Army in evacuating Philadelphia and commanded two brigades at the Battle of Monmouth (28 June). The following year, Lord Germain ordered Grant to the West Indies to supervise the construction of British garrisons in the islands.

Prior to the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, Grant, John Moutlrie, and Henry Laurens were close friends business and associates. They became acquainted during the French and Indian War when Grant led a force of 2,600 in South Carolina against the Cherokee in 1761. Following the war, Grant served as the first British governor of East Florida (1764-1771), and John Moultrie became his Lieutenant Governor. Both Grant and Moultrie purchased plantations in Florida. Moultrie’s properties were named “Bella Vista & Timonka” while Grant operated an indigo plantation he named “Villa” as well as another, “Mount Pleasant,” which produced rice. To staff his properties, Grant purchased approximately 70 slaves — most of whom came from Henry Laurens, who also happened to be a prominent Charleston slave trader.²

Grant also discusses the departure of James Montcrief (1741-1793). Montcrief was a military engineer who took part in numerous campaigns during the Revolutionary War. He came to America in 1763 in the employ of Governor Grant of East Florida and drafted a current map of St. Augustine. In 1779 he was appointed Chief Engineer, responsible for the defenses of Savannah and during the following year he would take part in the Siege of Charleston. In 1780, Montcrief took command of the Black Pioneers, a Loyalist force composed of freed slaves.

An excellent historical and association piece that highlights the network of personal and familial relationships in Colonial America wrenched apart by the Revolutionary War.

Expected folds with minor separations repaired in serval places with glassine and period paper, small loss to first page only marginal wear, else very good.

(EXA 5382) SOLD

_________
¹ Pennsylvania Packet, (Lancaster) 6 June 1778, 3; Connecticut Courant (Hartford) 9 June 1778, 3: “…March 17. A Privy Council is summoned to meet this day at St. James after the levee is over said to be on the issuing a proclamation for the declaration of war against France…”

² James Grant Papers, National Archive of Scotland. The archive includes several bills from Laurens invoicing Grant for slaves.

Gideon Welles submits a Revolutionary War claim for the widow of a guard at Connecticut’s infamous New Gate Prison

Gideon WELLES (1802-1878) Autograph Letter, 3pp. 251 x 201 mm. (9 7/8 x 7 7/8 in.), “Comptroller’s Office” Hartford, [Conn.], 10 Nov. 1842, a partial draft with numerous edits and annotations concerning the Revolutionary War service of Perchas Capin on behalf of the veteran’s widow, Theodosia.¹

Welles, then serving as Connecticut Comptroller, provides evidence in support of the “application in behalf of the Widow of Perchas Capin for testimony of his services during the Revolutionary war as one of the Guard at New Gate, or the Prison in Simsbury Ct…” In an attempt to substantiate the claims in Widow Capin’s application, Welles “searched the record of the Council of Safety and the books of the Pay Table remaining in this office.”

In the first paragraph, Welles took time to confirm the prison’s existence at the time, and that that the facility was actually a cave, “an extensive cavern, or caverns, which was and during the revolutionary war for conspiring Tories, suspected persons, and state offenders.” (The prison had been established in 1773 by the State of Connecticut in an abandoned copper mine.)

Welles’ first citation is dated the 15 July 1776 minutes of the Simsbury Council of Safety remarking on the “‘dangerous situation of New Gate Prison, and especially since a number of Tory Prisoners are committed there, and the great uneasiness of the People concerning them, and that the keeper is uneasy with his situation &c &c and requesting liberty of a guard &c…'” The council of safety resolved to provide for two or more “‘faithful men every night … carefully to watch and guard sd Prison…'” Welles continues with several citations from the public records mentioning Capin and the management of New Gate Prison but ended the draft mid-sentence on the third page with, “I would also state that”.

The following day, Welles drafted another version of this letter which was sent to Washington and became part of Theodosia Capin’s application file.² The letter begins in the same manner and contains some of the same content, Welles decided to rework the letter significantly. Although according to another affidavits found in the pension application file, Capin was the chief of the guards for approximately two years at New Gate Prison, Welles was unable to discover any evidence in the state records of Capin’s employment as a guard. He only found references two bills for unspecified goods or services submitted to the State by Capin in connection with the prison.³

Usual folds, a few other minor creases, else very fine condition.

(EXA 5083) $350

_________
¹ Case Files of Pension and Bounty-Land Warrant Applications Based on Revolutionary War Service, compiled ca. 1800 – ca. 1912, documenting the period ca. 1775 – ca. 1900. (NARA 300022)

² Ibid. Letter of Gideon Welles, 11 Nov. 1842.

³ Ibid. Affidavit of Timothy Holcomb, 21 Oct. 1842. “…I well recollect that the name of the officer of the Guard was Capin and that he was here as officer of the Guard for the space of two or more years during which time I frequently saw him at the Prison on duty.” This claim is seconded by Heziah Viet’s affidavit, 20 Oct. 1842: “I think he was the principal man of the guard. There were other men as assistant guards…”; Welles: “I do not find the name of Purchas Capin on the Pay Table books, nor any mention of individuals connected with the guards, from the time that the duty of selecting a keeper was delegated to the overseers, until the commissioning of Lieut. Owen in 1780 by the General Assembly.”

Gouverneur Morris speculates in Adirondack real estate, with a superb 1809 manuscript map of Postdam and Louisville, New York

Morris letter to Attwater, 1811

Attwater’s letter to Morris, 1809

Gouverneur MORRIS (1752-1816) Signer and framer of the United States Constitution and signatory to the Articles of Confederation. Fine content draft Autograph Letter, 3pp. 305 x 215 mm. (12 x 8 3/8 in.) Morrisania, 2 June 1811 to Russell Attwater concerning his plans to subdivide and market land around Louisville, New York just to the south of the St. Lawrence River. Together with Russell ATTWATER (1762-1851) Autograph Letter Signed “Russell Attwater”, 1p. 250 x 203 mm. (9 7/8 x 8 in.) Russell, [N.Y.] 14 May 1809 with integral transmittal leaf addressed to Gouverneur Morris with the interior of the bifolium letter sheet bearing a detailed manuscript map of Potsdam and Louisville, New York delineating Morris’ lands in Louisville, New York. One of the earliest detailed maps of this region, including property divisions in Potsdam to the south well as the course of the Raquette and Grasse Rivers. An informative pair of letters between Gouveneur Morris and Russell Attwater, his agent in St. Lawrence County, New York. In 1787, Alexander Macomb purchased a large tract in present-day St. Lawrence County. He appointed Morris as his attorney in 1792 to help develop the tracts. Morris himself purchased a 2,854 acre tract in the southwest corner of Louisville on 15 December 1803.¹ Morris turned to Russell Attwater, a recent migrant from Massachusetts to help facilitate land sales and develop mills and other improvements to the land.

Attwater’s 1809 map of Potsdam & Louisville, NY

Morris’ 1811 draft advises Attwater on a variety of matters including a proposed deal to purchase an adjoining tract with James McVicker, then sell it to a millwright by the name of Church at double the cost. Morris also facilitates Attwater’s access to cash in order to develop the region and offers his advice on the best placement for a mill on the Raquette River. He writes (and for clarity’s sake we only include his edited text) that he is,”glad to find that Mr Church thinks so well of Louisville as to be so desirous of engaging in a Plan of Improvement there. for the facility of Keeping Accounts it will I conceive be best that he own the same share both of the Works and the Land viz 1/4th His fourth of 2854 Acres is 713 1/2 which at $5 is 3567 1/2 from this however[?] presently deducted his quarter of all Sales already made. We must furnish our three quarters of the Expence [sic] of Building the Mills & Bridge and clearing the Navigation after deducting what Mr. McVicar [sic. James McVicker] may incline to advance This Gentleman, I suppose, lies by to see others improve his Land should that be the Case it may be best to purchase that Part of his Land which is convenient and which he will (I suppose) sell at $2 1/2 on a fair Credit if I become your Security. I suppose also that Mr. Church would take a Quarter Interest in that Purchase at $5 provided he had such Credit as to pay the Principal & Interest out of his Share of the Sales of the whole Tract. I understand from your Letter that Mr Church means to pay the $3567 1/2 in Cash or what is equivalent viz in creating the Dam Bridge and Mills. It will be proper for the Sake of Regularity that his Sum and any other Sums which you may have received (deducing his 1/4) be brought to the Credit of the Account of our joint Concern and that Interest being calculated on the Cost a Ballance [sic] be struck which will then be the new Capital or Cost of over 3/4 being 3/8 instead of 4/8 of the whole. This Money so credited will of course be payable to me and from it my 3/8 of the Cost of the Mills &c. But you may perhaps have expected that a Part (perhaps the whole) of your share of the Improvement should be taken from the Sum so payable by Mr Church. If so I shall not object but in that Case it will be proper that you give me your Bond for Whatever Sum may thus be applied to your Use. this must be convenient to you because the Rents and Profits of the Mills will of Course exceed the Interest of the Cost. Mr Church being a good Millwright and therefore a perfect Judge of the Power of Water it would be absurd for me (who have never seen the spot) to give an opinion. I will hazard however to say that (generally speaking) A Bridge below a fall which breaks the ice is more secure than above it That A Dam above a fall is more secure than below it because to produce the same Head less Height is required, and that Mills fed by Race Ways are less exposes to the Rage of rivers than such as adjoin the Dams. The Inconvenience of frost may be obviated by laying Pipes under Ground for the Race Ways which filling a Penstock will give the Power required for overshot undershot or Breast Wheels as may best suit the Machine.” Morris then opines on the merits of the various types and their application for grist versus saw mills, but thinks the better of it and deletes the sentence. After Morris left the U.S. Senate in 1803, he mainly concerned himself with matters related to New York State’s vast interior. He was one of the early proponents of constructing a canal connecting the Hudson River with Lake Erie. Mindful of the young nation’s potential (“the proudest empire in Europe is but a bubble compared to what America will be, in the course of two centuries, perhaps of one”) 1810 to 1813, Morris chaired the Erie Canal Commission. and at the same time he sought to profit from the growing settlement and natural resources available. Attwater’s letter, dated two years before presents the map accomplished on the reverse side: “This plan will give you some little view of the relative situation of the land in Louisville it is necessary to know whether any attention will be made in the lines, before much is done, your opinion on that subject will govern me, in my proceeding. if you should think no alterations will be made in he Town lines, I shall proceed to lay of the land as you have described it and survey it into small lots and probably make some improvement this season the length of the lines, I mentioned in my last letter.”

detail of Attwater’s 1809 map of Potsdam, NY

The map Attwater drafts for Morris’ benefit is a fine example of draftsmanship and appears to be one of the earliest detailed maps of this region.² The map depicts the sectional boundaries of Louisville with their number designations as well as the property divisions in Potsdam. Attwater also traces (fairly accurately) the course of the Raquette and Grasse Rivers as well as the south bank of the St. Lawrence River. Along the route of the Raquette (or “Racket” as it appears on the map), Attwater has added double lines to denote falls. It is likely that Morris used this map when referencing his discussion concerning the placement of mill in his 1811 letter to Attwater. Interestingly, it appears that Attwater may have constructed a mill on the Raquette River near present-day Norfolk, New York, which had been previously known as Atwaters [sic] Falls.³ The remnants of a mill seat are still present along that section of the Raquette River. Born to Reuben Attwater (1728-1801), Russell Attwater was a partner with his father in a mercantile concern in Blandford, Massachusetts until 1799. For several years, Russell carried on a partnership with Moses A. Bunnel which was dissolved in 1803. Sometime afterwards, Russell moved to St. Lawrence County where he helped found several towns including Russell, New York. He did much to promote and improve the region, organizing roads, constructing mills, as well as holding various public offices.⁴

Rough margins, expected folds, some minor bleed through, else very good.

(EXA 5037) SOLD
__________________
^1↩ Gates Curtis, ed., Our County and It’s People: A Memorial Record of St. Lawrence County, New York. (1884), 83.
^2↩ The earliest published map that includes any significant detail in the region that we have was Simeon De Witt’s landmark work: A Map of the State Of New York. ^3↩
David H. Burr, Map of the County of St. Lawrence (1829). ^4↩
Federal Spy, (Springfield, Mass.), 17 Sept. 1799, 4; Republican Spy (Northampton, Mass.), 13 Dec. 1803, 4; Cabinet (Schenectady, N.Y.), 14 April 1813, 3: advertisement soliciting a road builder to construct a road from Wellstown to Russell, N.Y.; Curtis, 526-532.

Only weeks after Grant dismissed him from command for the failed Fort Fisher expedition, Butler casts the blame on Admiral David D. Porter

Benjamin BUTLER (1818-1893) Fine content Autograph Manuscript, 1p. 129 x 204 mm. (5 x 8 in.), [n.p., n.d. c. January 1865], a portion of a draft speech with several corrections and emendations, concerning his failed plan to use an explosive-laden ship to breach the walls of Fort Fisher which became popularly known as “Butler’s Folly.” The disastrous mistake resulted in Grant relieving Butler of command. In protest, Butler, delivered a speech on 29 January 1865 in Lowell, Massachusetts defending his conduct. The speech was published under the title: A Speech by Maj.-Gen. Benj. F. Butler, upon the Campaign Before Richmond, 1864. Delivered at Lowell, Mass., January 29, 1865 (Boston: 1865), p. 18.

Still smarting from the disgrace of Grant’s dismissal, Butler attempts to cast the blame on Admiral David D. Porter. He writes, in full: “…Yet, Porter thinks would intimate I had too much faith in the efficacy of the Powder boat and that he had no belief in its effect. Certain it is admitted that he got his fleet so far away from the scene of the explosion that for that or some other reason he could not get back again under ten hours thereafter to fire the first shot at [the] fort after the boat powder boat exploded.” Page bears a notation in Butler’s hand, “27 1/2 ‘C’” in the upper left corner, and a collector’s ink notation in left margin “Gen. Benj. F: Butler’s handwriting”.

In October 1864, the Union Navy was assembled at Hampton Roads, Virginia, awaiting Grant to provide adequate ground support to the Navy’s impending advance on Fort Fisher, North Carolina. In November, Grant, who was preoccupied by the Union siege of Petersburg and Richmond, reluctantly agreed to detach an infantry to accompany the naval expedition to North Carolina. Grant’s inaction became General Butler’s opportunity to forward his own plan of blowing the ramparts of Fort Fisher to smithereens with an enormous floating bomb. Butler argued that Fort Fisher was particularly vulnerable because of its earthen walls, easily toppled with the right amount of explosive force. The Navy rolled out Butler’s plan to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars, outfitting the U.S.S. Louisiana with 260 tons of gunpowder, a complex detonation system, and a coat of white paint to disguise the ship as an ordinary blockade-runner.

On 23 December 1864, under the cover of darkness, with 64 vessels of the North Atlantic Squadron commanded by Admiral David Porter stationed 12 miles out to sea, the disguised U.S.S. Louisiana was towed inland by the U.S.S. Wilderness, and dropped anchor in the shallows below Fort Fisher’s Northeast bastion. Unbeknownst to everyone, the Louisiana became caught in an undertow and drifted off course. Way off course. The Union officers awaited impatiently for the explosion. At 1:40am on Christmas Eve, they were treated to a spectacular light show and all Union ships in the area received a fierce rattling, but no damage was done to Fort Fisher. “Butler’s Folly” was an incredibly expensive and embarrassing failure for the Union Army and Navy, and Grant was left with precious little alternative but to dismiss Butler from his military post.

A classic example of a disgraced officer seeking to deflect blame over his own actions by casting in on others.

Provenance: William Stackhouse Collection; Minnesota Historical Society.

Light toning, creasing, soiling and edge wear, else fine.

(EXA 5139) $700

«< 2 3 4 5 6 >»