Chapter 15 The Court-Martial of Paul Revere
AS REVERE CONTINUED his personal crusade for vindication, the American Revolution neared its fifth year. In Morristown, New Jersey, General Washington and his depleted army endured their second harsh winter at the strategic enclave. “The situation of the Army with respect to supplies, is beyond description, alarming,” wrote Washington to Joseph Reed, governor of Pennsylvania. “We have never experienced a like extremity at any period of the war.”1
While Revere still could not persuade the Massachusetts Council to convene a court-martial to hear his case, Benedict Arnold finally would receive his own. From December 19 through January 26, Arnold would be tried in Morristown for the misappropriation of government property and the illegal transaction of goods, and he would receive a reprimand from Washington after a mixed verdict from the appointed panel.2 It was a punishment that would portend Arnold’s infamous act of treason—his plot to turn the fort at West Point over to the British.
In Boston, the General Court still wrestled with the Continental Congress in an effort to shift the economic burdens of the Penobscot Expedition “to the Continent in general.”3 On February 9, Jeremiah Powell again dispatched to Philadelphia and argued, perhaps with a trace of duplicity, that the expedition had been undertaken from the start with the expectation that Congress would fund the mission.4 Powell pointed out that the fisheries and timber grounds of the eastern shores were of vast importance to North America as a whole and that it was “just and reasonable” for the country to bear the expense of its protection. “We are persuaded,” concluded Powell, “that no Exertions of yours will be wanting upon this occasion.”5
Angered by the Council’s refusal to grant him a court-martial, but undeterred and nearly obsessive, Paul Revere filed yet another petition with the General Court on March 9. He protested that for the last six months he had been “suffering all . . . [the] Indignity which his Enemies, who he conceives make it a personal affair, are pleased to impose upon him,” and he once again begged the legislators “to take his Case under Consideration and Order a Court Martial to try his conduct.”6
A week later, John Hancock ordered a legislative committee, fortuitously chaired by Revere’s friend and former customer Joseph Greenleaf, to “report what is proper to be done” on Revere’s renewed petition.7 As a member of the North Caucus and Boston’s Committee of Correspondence since 1772, Greenleaf had close dealings with Revere, and the two had developed a friendship. In early 1775, Greenleaf, while working with Isaiah Thomas on the start-up Royal American Magazine, had employed Revere to create political cartoons and engravings for the publication and their relationship expanded. Whether as a result of political influence, fair and deliberative adherence to law, or sheer and utter exasperation, on March 18, 1780, to the astonishment of many including, no doubt, Paul Revere himself, the Massachusetts Council voted to grant Revere his court-martial.8 A combination of assiduous conviction and unrelenting perseverance finally had given him the opportunity to clear his name. To the people of Boston, however, Revere’s court-martial would represent yet another sad chapter in the ruinous Penobscot debacle that the Castle Island artillery commander simply refused to let die.
Under the Massachusetts Militia Act, which governed and regulated the state-operated militia regiments during the Revolutionary War, a court-martial consisting of “a majority of the field officers of the same brigade” was appointed to try any “field officer” (which included Revere) accused of a misdemeanor or breach of duty in violation of the act.9 Though the task of appointing the actual court-martial was, according to a strict reading of the law, reserved for the brigadier of the charged party, General Wadsworth, Revere’s brigadier general, had been sent back to Maine in defense of the region; thus, this legal oversight apparently was ignored in deference to pragmatism. The court-martial, ordered by the Massachusetts Council, would be conducted in Wadsworth’s absence.
In the coming weeks the council agreed on the details and particulars of the proceedings, and it designated the members of the tribunal. The council ordered the court-martial of Paul Revere to take place on April 18 at the County Courthouse on Queen Street in Boston, before an array of eleven militia officers, with William Tudor as judge advocate and Edward Proctor as president.10
A merchant and importer of West Indian goods, Proctor was widely recognized as a prominent citizen of Boston and an ardent Patriot. He was an officer in the local militia unit and, as a devoted servant to the cause of liberty, was known as “prompt, efficient, and thoroughly loyal.”11 Edward Proctor was also, perhaps, the worst choice that could have been made as president of Revere’s court-martial.
As early as 1765, Proctor is known to have been a customer of Revere’s goldsmith shop and, as sword bearer in the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, was a Masonic brother to Revere.12 As the seeds of rebellion began germinating in the taverns and meetinghouses of Boston, the two men were closely affiliated in the North Caucus and as fellow Sons of Liberty. They worked on town committees together, and Proctor was known to have joined Revere as an active participant of the Boston Tea Party.13 It is fairly evident that the two men were, at a minimum, close acquaintances and more likely intimate friends.
One may speculate that the council’s perplexing choice of Edward Proctor to preside over the court-martial may have been designed to avoid even the slightest hint of bias against Revere in the event of an adverse ruling. Given that Revere evidently seized on the slightest hint of conspiracy against him, perhaps the council wished to preclude any possibility of further petitions and appeals. Whatever the reason, Proctor was having none of it.
On April 15, two days after his appointment, he wrote to the council and begged leave to decline the position. “[N]ot only on Account of the intimacy that has long subsisted between us,” explained Proctor, “but as Colonel Revere is an Officer of the Train of Artillery, I cannot think myself a competent Judge (it being out of my line) . . . for these & many other Reasons that might be Offered—your Petitioner has no doubt your honor’s will excuse him from the Above mentioned Service.”14
On April 17, the day before Revere’s court-martial was to assemble, the council summarily denied Proctor’s petition for recusal. The original order appointing the tribunal directed Proctor to summon Paul Revere and such other witnesses as he may deem necessary and, at the conclusion of the proceedings, to deliver a copy of the decision to the council. Proctor, a man of intense loyalty, elected to completely ignore the order and refused to convene the inquest. As Revere would later muse, “[F]or reasons best known to himself, he never called them together.”15
Once again frustrated and confounded by the political doings of those thought to be his friends, Revere found himself ignored and seemingly powerless to clear his name. Though he had envisaged the charges against him to be an “everlasting monument of . . . disgrace,” it seemed that the people of Boston had lost interest. Talk of the Penobscot Expedition had begun to fade, and Revere’s unrelenting ruminations and political prodding had become an unwelcome reminder of the entire sorry escapade. Forbes would write of the time, “[N]o one cared whether Paul Revere went up or down a river and in what or whose boat; whether on a certain night he slept on shore or on a transport.”16
And now Revere faced another problem: the three-year interval during which the artillery regiment was raised was set to expire in early May. Though his personal military commission as an officer in the state militia would remain unaffected, the expiration of his regiment would effectively end his military career—and potentially render any court-martial proceeding moot. “I was left without a trial,” he wrote.17
The Massachusetts Constitution, drafted by John Adams and debated by the various towns and villages throughout the winter and spring of 1780, was placed before the people on June 5 and, article by article, approved by a two-thirds majority. On June 15 the Constitutional Convention affirmed the ratifying vote and authorized the first election of a governor and new General Court in the state. “This great business,” wrote Samuel Adams to his cousin John Adams on July 10, 1780, “was carried through with much good Humor among the people . . . Never was a good Constitution more wanted than at this Juncture.”18
Meanwhile in Philadelphia, James Lovell, one of the Massachusetts delegates to the Continental Congress, informed the council that the question of financial responsibility for the Penobscot Expedition had been left “undecided.” He lamented whether it was even proper for them to have so strenuously argued the point in view of “the then apparent Temper of Congress” against the measure.19 The message was clear; for the time being, Massachusetts would have to deal with the economic consequences of the disaster on its own. Through its tax measures and with resort to whatever remained in its public treasury, Massachusetts would, for the time being, be left to its own devices to rebuild its navy, to satisfy the many claims for loss of vessels and property, and to respond to the stream of petitions for economic assistance from the inhabitants of the eastern country. On February 26, 1780, Abigail Adams wrote to her “dearest friend” John Adams, who was by then on a diplomatic mission to Paris, enclosing a list of taxes to be paid. “In April a much larger [tax] is to be collected to pay Penobscot score,” she added.20
As obsessed as he was over his own reputation, Paul Revere was far from oblivious to the momentous events and tribulations that pervaded his town and state. As angered and frustrated as he remained over his inability to obtain what he perceived as justice, it was clear that he had no choice but to quietly suspend his personal battles while political events unfolded around him.
“I thought it best to go to my business again,” Revere wrote to a cousin regarding the expiration of his engagement with the artillery regiment. “I am in middling circumstances and very well off for a tradesman.”21 With the financial burdens created by his lengthy military service, Revere returned his attentions to the goldsmith and engraving trades. He began dealing with imported goods; and his merchant accounts indicate, at the time, a willingness to accept payment for services with such merchandise as “indigo, silk handkerchiefs, plated spoons” and other exotic goods.22 Though Revere no doubt thought himself shabbily treated by those in government, in 1780 the Massachusetts legislature entrusted the task of engraving a new state seal, upon ratification of the new constitution, to none other than Paul Revere. And as was the norm with Revere’s prior requisitions for payment, the state also thought this one high and reduced it by a third.23
By January of 1781, however, with newly elected Governor John Hancock settling into his post, Revere’s thoughts again turned to Penobscot. On the twenty-second he crafted yet another impassioned plea to the General Court explaining that on six separate occasions since 1779 he had filed petitions for a trial by court-martial, but none had ever taken place. In a tone of near-hopelessness, he requested that his case be taken under consideration and that a court-martial “or a number of Officers, three, five, seven, or any number the Honorable Court may see proper . . .” be appointed to inquire into his conduct during the Penobscot Expedition—“. . . that the truth may appear and be published to the World.”24 Notwithstanding the expiration, in May of 1780, of the time for which the artillery regiment had been raised, Revere still pleaded for a forum—any forum—to hear his case. His engagement with the military may have expired, but as far as he was concerned, the cloud of controversy regarding his service remained. As a still-commissioned soldier, a court-martial was preferable, but any body of qualified officers to hear his case was apparently acceptable to Revere.
Though the Massachusetts Council had once before found ample evidence to rule against him, and despite a record of questionable conduct on the Penobscot Expedition supported by the testimony of multiple witnesses, Revere refused to accept even the possibility of his guilt. “I am not conscious of the least failure of duty,” he would write.25 With his military service apparently at an end and his business endeavors reemerging, Paul Revere placed his trust in the newly formed government and clung to the hope of evenhanded justice.
But again Revere’s efforts met with frustration. His petition was all but ignored—referred to a committee and marked by the clerk “ordered to lie till next Sessions.”26 Clearly dissatisfied with this result, Revere began inquiring of the committee to which the matter had been sent, and he was informed by its chairman that a petition for court-martial should be submitted directly to the governor.27
Meanwhile, Major General Benjamin Lincoln, home from the disastrous southern campaigns of the Continental Army and reeling from inquiries into his own conduct regarding the fall of Charleston,28 apparently sympathized with Revere’s plight and offered to intercede on his behalf. “About that time the honorable Major General Lincoln offered me his service to mention the affair to the Governor,” Revere wrote. “A few days after he sent me word, that he had made application to the Governor, and that he would appoint [a court-martial] upon my application.”29
Cheered by the news and anxious to finally clear his name, Revere petitioned Hancock on March 1, 1781, and, for the eighth time since the Penobscot Expedition, requested the convening of a court-martial into his conduct. On the twentieth, Hancock sent word to Revere that he would get his wish. “I received his Excellency’s promise that he would appoint one,” Revere later wrote.30
As the weeks passed, Revere anxiously waited for his court-martial to be summoned, but astonishingly the promise again proved to be an empty one. “I heard no more of the matter,” he would write.31
His campaign effectively on hold, Revere returned his attention to business and reacquainted himself, through a series of letters, with extended family in St. Foy (Quebec City) and on the Isle of Guernsey, off the coast of Brittany.
In October of 1781, Revere informed his second cousin, Mathias Rivoire, of his “situation in life” and of his previous military service. “Before this reaches you,” wrote Revere, “you will have heard of the victory gained over the British Army by the Allied Armies [at Yorktown] commanded by the brave General Washington.”32 Though the actual surrender of General Cornwallis would not occur for several weeks, Revere expressed his hope that the campaign would result in peace in the colonies.
To his cousin on the Isle of Guernsey, John Rivoire, who with his strong imperialist leanings expressed grave doubts about the Franco-American alliance and disparaged the colonial uprising against Great Britain, Revere responded, revealing in passionate terms his characteristic and still adamant political zeal. “You do not use all the candor which I am sure you are master of, else you have not looked into the merits of the quarrel,” he lectured.
[The British] covenanted with the first settlers of this country, that we should enjoy “all the Liberties of free natural born subjects of Great Britain.” They were not contented to have all the benefit of our trade, in short to have all our earnings, but they wanted to make us hewers of wood, & drawers of water. Their Parliament have declared “that they have a right to tax us & Legislate for us, in all cases whatever”—now certainly if they have a right to take one shilling from us without our consent, they have a right to all we possess; for it is the birthright of an Englishman, not be taxed without the consent of himself, or Representative.33
Notwithstanding the continuing frustrations suffered by the workings of his own government in Boston, Revere’s personal convictions regarding the cause of liberty and the tyranny of England remained unshakable. In stark contrast to Benedict Arnold, who had likewise suffered perceived indignities at the hands of Congress and the Continental Army and who consequently had plotted with the British to turn over control of the fort at West Point, Revere had remained true to the cause. For all of his frantic self-importance, his loyalty to country had not faltered.
In the first week of January 1782, as all hope of personal vindication seemed to fade, “a friend” assured Revere that if he once again applied to the governor, a court-martial would in fact be appointed. As directed, Revere promptly renewed his petition and on the sixth again requested Governor Hancock to convene the hearing.
Perhaps John Hancock had, by now, gained a clear understanding of the tenacious and resolute constitution of Paul Revere. Though he had been criticized, ridiculed, and ultimately ignored, he had refused, for right or for wrong, to retreat from a matter of principle and a question of character. Undeniably fixated on his perceived standing in the community and angrily driven to clear his reputation, Revere repeatedly had sought scrutiny into his own conduct, and though the results had not yet been to his liking, he demanded the opportunity for further inquiry. After nearly three years of relentless pursuit, Hancock could no longer deny Revere his court-martial.
On Tuesday, February 19, 1782, a general court-martial was convened in Boston “by virtue of the Orders of his Excellency John Hancock, Esq. Governor & Commander in chief of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, for the Trial of Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere of the Corp of Artillery late belonging to this State, touching his Behavior as an Officer when retreating from [Majabigwaduce].”34
Brigadier General Warham Parks, an aide to Benjamin Lincoln during the battle of Stillwater—but otherwise having no disqualifying connection to Paul Revere (as had Edward Proctor, the president of Revere’s first appointed court-martial)—had been appointed by the governor as president of the court-martial and presided over a panel of twelve other legal and military minds. John Ashley Jr., Seth Cushing, Seth Washburn, Gideon Burt, Ebenezer Battle, Charles Cushing, Joseph Webb, Lieutenant Colonel John May, Major Captain Edward Farmer, Ebenzer Mattoon, Joseph Bradley Varnum, and Thompson J. Skinner all had extensive military experience in various Massachusetts Militia regiments and possessed at least some working knowledge of the artillery regiment and its functions.
The court previously had been provided with the detailed depositions from the 1779 committee of inquiry, and several witnesses had been summoned and now appeared at the county courthouse, amid the Atlantic winter chill, to testify of what they knew.
The judge advocate, Joshua Thomas, a Continental officer and soon to be president of the Plymouth County Bar,35 was charged with the responsibility of advising the members of the court-martial and presenting the evidence against the defendant in accordance with applicable law. The November 16, 1779, committee report already had distilled the myriad charges and allegations against Revere to two remaining triable counts. The proceedings, therefore, would be narrow in scope and limited only to the issues in question.
General Parks called the hearing to order and administered an oath of duty and allegiance to the members of the court. Joshua Thomas then rose and firmly delivered the formal charges against Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere.
“For his refusing to deliver a certain Boat to the Order of General Wadsworth . . . upon the Retreat up Penobscot River from [Majabigwaduce].”
“For his Leaving Penobscot River without Orders from his Commanding Officer.”36
In light of the extensive witness statements already available to the court as a result of the earlier council inquiries, Thomas felt it unnecessary to produce any live witnesses at Revere’s court-martial. The already established record would speak for itself.
In support of the first indictment, Thomas recited the damning allegations from General Wadsworth’s original deposition regarding Revere’s refusal to allow the use of the Castle barge in the rescue of the floundering schooner. “[T]hat upon the Retreat of the Army up Penobscot River,” began Thomas, “a small schooner having on Board the greatest Part of the Provisions, was then in the Strength of the Tide, drifting down on the Enemy,—that it was in vain that a Number of Boats were ordered to tow her across the Stream, and with much Difficulty that a Boat was got off to take out her Crew,—that in endeavoring this, he was directly opposed by Lieutenant Colonel Revere, who said, that he (the General) had no Right to command either him or the Boat, and gave orders to the contrary.”37
The members of the court listened intently to the allegations narrated by the judge advocate, and the tension in the courtroom no doubt escalated while the accused quietly contained his mounting unease.
“The General further deposes,” continued Thomas, “that the Reason Lieutenant Colonel Revere assigned for refusing the Boat was, that he had all his private Baggage at Stake, & asked who would thank him for loosing that, in attempting to save the Schooner to the State?”38
Following the hearing Revere would make light of Wadsworth’s charge, saying that whether it was true or false it presented little consequence to his honor.39 The people at large, he premised, would place no significance on the allegation since it had not affected the overall success or failure of the expedition. In reality, Revere could not help but to have been embarrassed by the implication that he had placed his personal business and property ahead of the mission to which he had been charged. The allegation itself was damning on its face and his enemies would take notice. “[T]hat this Colonel did refuse General Wadsworth a certain boat is clearly demonstrated,” William Todd would later write. “The truth of the affair is, that Lieut. Colonel Revere had his Baggage on the boat . . . he exclaimed against the maneuver, and said his baggage was more to him than all the vessels, and that if he left it the State would give him no recompence.”40
Regarding the second charge against Revere, Joshua Thomas relied solely on the prior statements of Artillery Captain Perez Cushing and asserted before the court “that upon the Retreat up Penobscot River, Colonel Revere to whose Corps he belonged, left him on the Bank of the River, promising to return in a few Minutes,—that he continued there with about forty men he had collected, expecting the Return of Colonel Revere . . . but saw Nothing of [him], until he got to Kennebeck River.”41
Scanning Cushing’s deposition, Thomas distilled the salient allegations and concluded his indictment of the accused. “[T]hat Colonel Revere had an Opportunity of giving Orders to . . . [Cushing] and the Men before he & they left Penobscot River, if he had inclined to, but did not.”42
With that, Judge Advocate Thomas rested his case.
Called to offer his defense, Paul Revere gathered his thoughts and ambled toward the witness stand. Revere was now forty-eight years old, and his straight brown hair showed signs of graying. His bulbous face had grown worn from fatigue, but his eyes still burned with the passion of absolute resolve. Revere turned toward the panel of judges, raised his artisan-worn hand before Warham Parks, and swore to tell nothing but the truth in the matter before the court.
Revere began his defense with an uncharacteristic admission. He confessed that, in fact, he had refused to deliver the Castle barge to General Wadsworth on his order to do so. He stated, however, that his refusal had been issued impulsively and without thought or the intention to violate orders. Upon “immediately recollecting that General Wadsworth was his Superior Officer,” stated Revere, he insisted that the barge was delivered without further delay.43 “[W]hether this could be called ‘a sudden refusal’ or one dictated by reflection,” wrote William Todd, “I will not myself determine. I think it answers for itself.”44
On the question of leaving Penobscot River without orders, Revere testified that during the retreat from Majabigwaduce the entire army was in a state of confusion and that he departed in the company of other officers on the same orders to leave the river as had been delivered to the whole.45 “I might as well have been charged with leaving that river without orders from the Council or the General Court,” later complained Revere. “When the whole army was routed and dispersed, when no place of rendezvous was appointed, the militia scattered and twenty four hours advanced on their way with the principal part of my men through the woods to Kennebeck River, the ships and transports on fire, and the officers and men setting off for their respective homes, I could not conceive myself bound to wait there till I received orders to change my situation.”46
Revere offered no evidence as to his retreat from Majabigwaduce other than his own testimony on the issue, but he called three witnesses who all swore to his “good Conduct . . . in general, [and] that he was Judicious, calm, vigilant, and attentive to the Object of the Expedition.”47 Captain Amos Lincoln, Revere’s son-in-law, joined fellow artillerymen Lieutenants Nicholas Phillips and Andrew McIntyer, who loyally testified on behalf of their commanding officer.
Having no further witnesses, the defense was then closed, and the court-martial of Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere was adjourned.
Though the court, on mature deliberation, issued its findings in Revere’s case fairly quickly (even the judgment in the month-long court-martial of Benedict Arnold was issued within four days of submitting the case),48 “[i]ndisposition & some little matters of business” prevented Joshua Thomas from immediately providing a transcribed copy of the proceedings and judgment to the governor.49 With humble apologies for the delay, Thomas finally delivered the findings of the court to John Hancock on February 28. The furnished order, which derived from a true copy of the minutes, described the formal charges against Revere as well as the evidence adduced during the hearing and then formulated its detailed conclusions.
The Court find[s] the first Charge against Lieutenant Colonel Paul Revere to be supported (to wit) his refusing to deliver a certain Boat to the Order of General Wadsworth when upon the Retreat up Penobscot River from [Majabigwaduce]; but the Court taking into Consideration the Suddenness of the Refusal, and more especially, that the same boat was in fact employed by Lieutenant Colonel Revere to effect the Purpose ordered by the General, as appears by the General’s Deposition, are of Opinion that Lieutenant Colonel Revere be acquitted of this Charge.
On the Second Charge, the Court considering, that the whole Army was in great Confusion, and so scattered and dispersed, that no regular Orders were or could be given, are of the Opinion, that Lieutenant Colonel Revere be acquitted with equal Honor as the other Officers in the same expedition.50
Governor John Hancock pondered the findings for a moment and, perhaps, reflected on the service Paul Revere had rendered to his country and even the selfless warning he had provided to Hancock himself on the evening of April 18, 1775. Revere had been a dedicated asset to the American cause of liberty, and though his military service might be questioned, his allegiance to country never was. The disastrous Penobscot Expedition would tarnish the man for a time, but Revere was determined to never let it define him.
John Hancock dipped his quill into the vessel of ink and began writing on the bottom margin of Joshua Thomas’s findings.
“I approve of the opinion of the Court Martial as stated in the foregoing Report—John Hancock.”51