Chapter 10

"After discoursing upon the subject of the letter I had put into your hands, you mentioned to me that your furniture was packed up to go to Maryland; that you had been waiting for rain to lay the dust, and that if anything was to come of this business, it must be _speedily_.

"I ENDEAVOUR to give the _words_ used,--I certainly do not deviate from the _purport_ of what was said."

This is not the least of the many _misrepresentations_ in which Mr. Reed is convicted in the course of my reply.

[F] Being called upon by General Cadwalader to recollect the conversation we had at the Coffee-House, in the fall of the year seventy-eight, when he related what had passed between him and Mr. Reed at Bristol, I remember the subject corroborates with those queries I have since seen published in Mr. Oswald's paper, of the 7th of September, 1782. I likewise remember giving him a hint, that some of Mr. Reed's friends were present, on which he repeated what he had related before, and then addressed himself to the gentlemen, and informed them, if any of Mr. Reed's friends were present, they were at liberty to make what use they pleased of it.

THOMAS PRYOR.

_Philadelphia, March 8, 1783._

[G] See Gen. Reed's Address to the Public, pages 24, 25.

[H] As a proof of my having made this declaration, and the occasion of it, I offer the following letter:

DEAR SIR:--I have, at your request, charged my recollection with what fell from you, in the hearing of myself and several others, at the trial of Mr. William Hamilton, on the subject of Mr. Reed, who assisted the prosecution; it was in terms to this effect; that it indicated the extremity of baseness in him, to attempt to destroy another for taking the very step he had once lifted his own foot to take. This, at the instant, made a deeper impression me, as having never till then, though living in the closest intimacy, heard you drop the most distant hint of any intended defection of Mr. Reed, of which I myself had no suspicion.

Your humble servant, GEORGE CLYMER. _March 2d, 1783._ General Cadwalader.

[I] If the countryman was sent, as he insinuated, for intelligence, and not for a protection for Mr. Reed and his friend, is it not very extraordinary, in a case of this nature, after the man had so narrowly escaped with his life, that no circumstance relating to so delicate an affair, (transacted in so private a manner) should ever have come to my knowledge, till I heard this testimony from Major Lennox?

I will venture to say that no officer of the army, at that critical period, would have risked his reputation, though he had afforded no cause to suspect his firmness, by instructing a spy to apply for a protection for him, with a view of gaining intelligence, without mentioning it to his commanding officer before the transaction. But in the instance before us, it is worthy notice, that in so critical a situation of public affairs, Mr. Reed, knowing how dangerous such a plea as the messenger had used might prove to his reputation, in the hands of the enemy, should not have endeavoured to obviate such a tale, by mentioning the circumstance to the commanding officer at Bristol, who might have vouched for his innocence, in case Donop should attempt to injure him afterwards.

[J] I have ample proofs of Mr. Ellis's attachment to the enemy, which may be produced, if necessary.

[K]

_M'Kenney's Ferry, 25th December, 1776, 6 o'clock, P. M._

Dear Sir,--Notwithstanding the discouraging accounts I have received from Col. Reed, of what might be expected from the operations below, I am determined, as the night is favourable, to cross the river, and make the attack on Trenton in the morning. If you can do nothing real, at least create as great a diversion as possible.

I am, sir, your most obedient servant,

GEO. WASHINGTON.

[L] The following extracts from General Reed's letter to his Excellency the President and the Honorable the Executive Council of the State of Pennsylvania, dated Philadelphia, 22d July, 1777, assigning his reasons for not accepting the office of Chief Justice, may serve to prove his opinions of the constitution at that time. "If there is any radical weakness of authority proceeding from the Constitution; if in any respects it opposes the genius, temper or habits of the governed, _I fear, unless a remedy can be provided, in less than seven years, government will sink in a spiritless langour, or expire in a sudden_ CONVULSION. It would be foreign to my present purpose to suggest any of those _alterations_, which, in my _apprehension are necessary_ to enable the constitution to support itself with _dignity_ and _efficiency_, and its friends with _security_. _That some are necessary I cannot entertain the least doubt._ With this sentiment, I feel an _insuperable difficulty_ to enter into an engagement of the _most solemn nature_, leading to the _support_ and _confirmation_ of an entire system of government, which I cannot wholly _approve_." Again, "the dispensation from this engagement,[M] first allowed to several members of the Assembly, and afterwards to the militia officers, has added to my _difficulties_, as I cannot reconcile it to my ideas of propriety, the members of the same state being under different obligations to support and enforce its authority." But he adds, "If the sense of the people who have the right of decision, leads to some alterations, I firmly believe it will conduce to our happiness and security; if otherwise, I shall esteem it my duty, not only to acquiesce, but to support as far as lays in my power, a form of government confirmed and sanctified by the voice of the people." Here, then, he says, "he feels an _insuperable difficulty_ to enter into an engagement of the most solemn nature, leading to the support and confirmation of an entire system of government, which he cannot wholly _approve_; but he shall think it his duty to acquiesce, and support the government,--if confirmed and sanctified by the voice of the people." How inconsistent, then, must his conduct appear, when it is notorious, that he took a decided part in support of government, accepted of his seat in Council, and afterwards the Presidency, long before the sense of the people was expressd[TN] by the _fabricated instructions_ to the members of Assembly, requiring them to rescind the resolution for calling a convention for the purpose of revising the constitution. And yet he says, in the 27th page of his pamphlet, he "so effectually vindicated every part of his conduct, that every gentleman present, (myself excepted,) acknowledged his mistake."

These were the ostensible reasons for not accepting the Chief Justiceship, and taking the oath of office; but an oath of another kind, no doubt, induced him to decline this appointment. He had not taken the oath of allegiance which the law, (passed the 13th June, 1777,) required of every male white inhabitant; nor did he take it, as appears by the publication signed Sidney, in the Pennsylvania Journal, No. 1565, 12th February, 1783,) till the 9th of October, 1778, which was the very day he was elected a Councillor for the County of Philadelphia. And though disfranchised of all the rights of citizenship, and incapable of being elected into, or serving in any office, place, or trust, in this commonwealth, Mr. Reed dared to disregard the voice of the people, and violate the law, by accepting the Presidency, and exercising the powers of government annexed to that office. If he had taken the oath of allegiance, agreeable to law, why did he take it _again_, on the day he was elected a councillor? as the mere oath of office only, upon that occasion, would have been required of him.

As Mr. Reed has not touched this point in his pamphlet, or furnished his friends with a single argument to defend him, against a charge supported by authentic proofs from public records, the public have very justly pronounced him guilty. If certificates can be produced of his oaths of abjuration and allegiance, agreeable to law, why have they not been published? If he is not defranchised[TN] of the rights of citizenship, why was his vote refused at the last election? or is this one of the subjects reserved for "_legal examination_?" and if so, why does he not suspend the public opinion by such information?

[M] _By the "dispensation from this engagement," above mentioned, is meant, that the oath prescribed by the constitution was dispensed with, and many members of Assembly were permitted to take another oath, in which they were not bound to support the constitution._

[N] That this opinion was not entertained by Congress, may reasonably be inferred from the following letter:

_"Philadelphia, 12th September, 1778._

"SIR,--His excellency, General Washington, having recommended to Congress the appointment of a General of horse, the House took that subject under consideration the 10th instant, when you were unanimously elected Brigadier and commander of the cavalry in the service of the United States.

"From the general view above mentioned, you will perceive, sir, the earnest desire of the house, that you will accept a commission, and enter as early as your convenience will admit of, upon the duties of the office; and I flatter myself with hopes of congratulating you in a few days upon this occasion.

"I have the honour to be, with particular regard and esteem, sir, your most humble servant,

HENRY LAURENS, "The Hon. Brigadier-General Cadwalader. "President of Congress,"

But not wishing to have it suggested, that I entered into the service at so late a period of the war for the sake of rank, as the French treaty had taken place, and I had conceived all offensive operations at an end, I declined the appointment in these terms.

_Maryland, 19th September, 1778._

SIR,--I have the highest sense of the honour conferred upon me by Congress, in appointing me a Brigadier in the Continental service, with the command of the cavalry, more particularly as the voice of Congress was unanimous.

I cannot consent to enter into the service at this time, as the war appears to me to be near the close. But should any misfortune give an unhappy turn to our affairs, I shall immediately apply to Congress for a command in the army.

I have the honour to be, with the greatest regard and esteem, your excellency's most obedient humble servant,

JOHN CADWALADER. His Excellency Henry Laurens, Esq., President of Congress.

End of Project Gutenberg's Nuts for Future Historians to Crack, by Various