Chapter 14 Monument of Disgrace

FOLLOWING THE Penobscot inquiry, the committee ordered that a copy if its final report be immediately dispatched to Congress sitting in Philadelphia “that they may take such order thereon, as to them may seem most conducive to public Justice.”1 It also directed that, as soon as the court-­martial proceedings against Dudley Saltonstall were concluded, the report was to be published in one of the Boston newspapers. Paul Revere, however, would receive news of the findings well before Congress or the public at large.

Prior to the announcement of the committee’s findings, Revere had received assurances that he would be exonerated of the charges against him. In private conversations among his friends in the legislature, he had been informed that it was the council’s opinion that Carnes had not proved his allegations. Even Timothy Danielson had said, according to Revere, that there was not “the shadow of a crime” against him. And yet, Revere complained bitterly upon reading the findings that “the Committee in their report have not mentioned me.”²

On October 8, the day after the report was issued, Revere drafted and forwarded a petition not only to the council but to the entire Massachusetts House of Representatives complaining that his character had been greatly abused by the many false reports and rumors propagated against him and that, although he had endured the humiliation of complaint, arrest, and inquiry, the committee “have neither condemned, or acquitted him.” Accordingly, he requested that the committee reconvene to consider his case exclusively—or as an alternative, that a court-­martial be appointed for his immediate trial according to Continental regulations.³ On October 12, Revere again petitioned the council and specifically requested that a court-­martial be convened to hear the charges against him. Concerned that several of his “chief evidences” were heading to sea, Revere requested that quick action be taken on his behalf.

With the assistance of several friends in the Assembly, Revere received near-­instant results. The matter was immediately submitted back to the committee of inquiry; and though the legislature had refused to initiate a full military court-­martial, summonses were forwarded yet again to several sea captains and sailors of the Penobscot Expedition ordering their appearance on the second Thursday of the next legislative session “to give evidence of what they know respecting the Conduct of Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere during the aforesaid expedition.”4

Revere had made an extraordinary demand on the Massachusetts legislature. It had spent countless hours in investigating and inquiring into the expedition, and the committee had issued its findings after careful deliberation. The work of government and the massive problems faced by the province required the full attention of those in the legislature, yet Paul Revere once again demanded that the clearing of his reputation become a priority of the people. Despite the daunting task in Massachusetts of conceiving the first state constitution and the continuing travails of a country torn by revolution, it appeared that the cheerless memory of the Penobscot Expedition would linger a little longer.

Paul Revere had, through the years, kept a very detailed ledger book of day-­to-­day business matters, but he is not known to have ever maintained a personal diary or journal. When the committee appointed by the General Court reconvened on November 11 in the east lobby of the Massachusetts State House, however, Revere submitted such a diary to the members and swore to its truthfulness as his formal deposition under oath.

The diary, which began with the arrival of the fleet at Townsend on July 21 and concluded with the discovery of his artillerymen at Fort Western on August 19, appears to be a sanitized litany of orders followed, councils of war attended, and events witnessed.⁵ It offers no hint of controversy or dissatisfaction surrounding his actions at Majabigwaduce, nor does it provide any basis for accusation. Unsurprisingly, Revere’s diary stands as a chronicle of a steadfast and reliable officer on the Penobscot Expedition. What is not entirely clear, however, is whether its entries were recorded contemporaneous to the events described or if they were created later in specific preparation for the coming inquest.6 In either case, the members of the committee accepted Revere’s “deposition” without known comment or further inquiry of its author.

While each of the several witnesses compelled by the committee had received summonses on October 19 to attend the November hearing and to testify as to what they knew, the committee only provided Revere himself with formal notice of the proceedings the day before they were to take place and simply “requested” that he attend.⁷ Clearly, the committee had no intention of formally examining the accused. The sworn witnesses, however, would provide compelling evidence—both for and against Revere.

Of the surviving records from the November 11 hearing, it is known that Revere examined Captain Alexander Holmes of the Charming Sally,⁸ who had not appeared or offered any statement during the initial committee hearings. When asked whether he had, in fact, seen Revere with his men on July 28 and 29 “busily employed in getting up the Cannon” after the Rebels had gained the heights, Holmes replied that he had.

“Did you see me active, as active to promote the service, as any other officer during the expedition?” asked Revere.

“Yes.”

Thomas Wait Foster, the gunner aboard the Warren, who also had not appeared at the earlier hearings, testified about the repeated difficulties experienced by the marines in getting artillery supplies and equipment from Revere after the taking of Nautilus Island.⁹ “Captain Furlong applied to Captain Saltonstall for Shot . . . Furlong said he had applied several times to Colonel Revere, but could not get Shot that were suitable, all the Shot he had received were too small.” Foster testified that he was called on to deliver cartridges, sponges, and worms to the Rebel guns on Majabigwaduce from the Warren’s own much-­needed stock because Revere had not supplied them when requested.

Despite Foster’s apparent condemnation of the artillery commander, however, he stated that he never encountered “any backwardness” in Revere during the expedition. “[H]e ever appeared to me to be busy in endeavoring to find out the strength of [the] enemy.”

With the additional testimony of its new witnesses together with the various statements compiled in the prior hearings, the committee then closed the proceedings. It would now reconsider the evidence as it related solely to Paul Revere and, as requested in the petition, render an opinion as to his conduct alone during the Penobscot Expedition.

Prior to the start of the initial committee hearings on September 22, the Massachusetts Council had forwarded an appeal to John Jay, president of the Continental Congress, informing him of the dire financial situation the state found itself in as a result of the failed expedition. The petition also boldly requested the authority to withhold six million dollars of Continental tax receipts to defer the attendant expenses of the mission.10

On November 16, Elbridge Gerry, James Lovell, and Judge Samuel Holton, all members of the Massachusetts delegation to the Second Continental Congress, drafted a letter to the state legislature warning its members of the lukewarm federal response to their petition for economic aid. The Penobscot Expedition, it had been argued during congressional debates, was exclusively a state-­run venture and its failure, cautioned the delegates, will not, without opposition, be accepted as a Continental liability.¹¹

The battle over economic responsibility for the defeat at Penobscot clearly would be an ongoing affair, but the question of military responsibility, the Massachusetts Council hoped, would finally be settled on the committee’s rendered opinion on Paul Revere.

The distressing news from Congress would take several days to reach Boston, but as Gerry, Lovell, and Holton dispatched their letter from Philadelphia, Artemas Ward and his reconvened committee considered the evidence both for and against their obstinate artillery commander and formulated their decision.

The committee delivered the final report, also in question-­and-­answer format, to the Massachusetts Council on November 16; and several days later, John Hancock, speaker of the house, concurred with the opinion.

1.Was Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere culpable for any of his conduct during his stay at Bagaduce, or while he was in, or upon the River Penobscot?

Answer: Yes.

2.What part of Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere’s Conduct was culpable?

Answer: In disputing the orders of Brigadier General Wadsworth respecting the Boat; & in saying the Brigadier had no right to command him or the boat.

3.Was Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere’s conduct justifiable in leaving the River Penobscot, and repairing to Boston, with his Men, without particular orders from his Superior Officer?

Answer: No, not wholly justifiable.12

In the meteorological parlance of the day, the winter of 1779–80 would be spoken of by the people of Boston as the last “old-­fashion winter.”¹³ The snows, blinding and deep, began in November, and by January the town had found itself entombed, its roads navigable only by snowshoe or child’s sled. The temperature had dropped so bitterly low that the ice accumulated on fragile rooftops without a trace of thaw, and Boston Harbor itself froze solid almost to Nantasket. Not since 1717 had inclement weather driven everyday industry to such a thorough standstill.¹⁴

While the snow and cold effectively postponed the third session of the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention until late January, it could not prevent the people of Boston from deriding Paul Revere with a torrent of gossip. Word of the committee’s adverse ruling had inflamed an already negative public sentiment, and feelings began to run high against the town’s artillery commander.

Though the committee had distilled the multiple allegations against Revere into two simple findings of culpability—refusing use of the Castle barge to General Wadsworth and leaving the Penobscot without orders—Revere still remained outraged by the pall of doubt cast on his character. In the weeks following the decision, he braved the bitter temperatures of Boston and badgered his friends in the legislature and Board of War for the appointment of a court-­martial to rehear and formally determine the charges against him. On January 4, 1780, however, a committee comprised of Samuel Adams, Timothy Danielson, and Noah Goodman—all members of the Constitutional Convention—voted unanimously to deny Revere’s demands.15

There was, perhaps, a sense among Revere’s contemporaries that he had gotten exactly what he deserved.¹⁶ Unsatisfied because the committee had neither acquitted nor condemned him, he had refused to let the matter rest. He had insisted on a new inquiry, one specifically focused on him, believing that once a full and fair hearing was convened, he would, of course, be acquitted on every count. Now, with Revere having received the inquest that he wanted, though the committee had decided against him, it was said that he ought to “pocket the chagrin and humiliation”¹⁷ and put the Penobscot Expedition behind him.

But Revere was not a man to put away his pride—especially in matters of character and reputation. He fully believed that he had been falsely accused, and it was not within him to let others have the final word regarding his personal or professional integrity.

On January 17, 1780, Revere once again took quill to paper and, in a flourish of obdurate frustration, reproved the Massachusetts Council for its impolitic refusal to grant him a court-­martial. “I must once more beg your Honors indulgence on a matter that so [d]early affects me . . . ,” began Revere.

It is more than four months since I was arrested by your Honors, and Ordered to give up the command of the Castle . . . Twice I have petitioned your Honors and once the House of Representatives for a Court Martial but have not obtained one. I believe that neither the Annals of America, or Old England, can furnish an Instance (except in despotic Reigns) where an Officer was put under an arrest, and he petitioned for a Trial, (although the Arrest was taken off) that it was not granted.¹⁸

Manifestly recognizing that his place in history was at stake, Revere continued his impassioned plea:

The complaint upon which my arrest was founded, [is] amongst your Honors’ papers and there will remain an everlasting monument of my disgrace if I do not prove they are false. Is there any other legal way to prove them false, than by a Court Martial? Have not I a Right to demand one? . . . It is indifferent to me who are the members of the Court, provided they are not my personal Enemies, and are honest Men.19

And again Revere lamented the damage to his reputation as a result of the persistent rumors circulating about him. “It is reported through the State, that I have been broke and cashiered (I have heard of it more than once) and lay under every disgrace that the malice of my enemies can invent, and it will remain so till the Facts are published.”²⁰

“I would once more Pray your Honors that you grant me a [trial] by a Court Martial,” begged Revere.

As part of his petition, Revere also requested that the Council deliver his back rations of food and pay, which had been withheld since the end of the Penobscot Expedition. “I have been maintaining a Family of Twelve ever since, out of the remains of what I have earned by twenty years hard labor . . . and am now brought to almost my last shilling,” he wrote.²¹ He signed the letter, “Your Suffering Humble Servant, Paul Revere.”²²

Four days later, the council issued an order granting Revere all of his back and future rations.²³ It completely ignored, however, his ardent plea for a court-­martial.