SERVICES OF GEN. SULLIVAN.
��327
��you will secure your estate, and you will be further amply rewarded." Notwith- standing Bancroft has made strong im- putations upon the fidelity and patriotism of Sullivan in another of his volumes, we yet believe his charge is groundless, and that the evidence and reasoning of Hon. Charles H. Bell in refutation of such charge, which has recently been spread before the public, are sufficient to satisfy the most skeptical upon this subject. The letter of Livius was detected on its pas- sage, and there is no evidence that it reached Gen. Sullivan, while the war continued, or that this correspondence was invited by him or listened to for a moment.
Returning to the military life of Sulli- van, we find him in August, 1777, plan- ning and executing an expedition against the enemy on Staten Island. This was not entirely a failure, nor did it prove so successful as 4 he had anticipated. It was alleged that he had not the authority of Congress, or the commander-in-chief, for engaging in this enterprise. Gen. Sulli- van demanded a court of inquiry, and ob- tained it. It was composed of General Knox, McDougal, Spencer and Lord Stir- ling. The substance of their finding was, using their language, " That Gen, Sulli- van's conduct in planning and executing the expedition upon Staten Island was such, in the opinion of the Court, as de- served the approbation of his country, and not its censure." This seems to have been a complete vindication of his con- duct. In the autumn of this year both the battles of Brandy wine and German- town were fought, in each of which Gen. Sullivan commanded a division of the army. As to the battle at Germantown, Sullivan had the command of the right wing of the army, and acted immediately under the eye of Washington, who bore strong testimony to his bravery and gal- lantry on that occasion. As to the Bran- dywine battle, it appears that a repre- sentative of North Carolina in Congress, by the name of Burke, claimed to have been a spectator of this conflict, and pre- ferred his complaint against Gen. Sulli- van's conduct. His charge was met by Sullivan, who, on the 27th day of Sep- tember, 1777, addressed a letter to John
��Hancock, President of Congress, giving a full and circumstantial account of the events, as they occurred in battle, espe- cially vindicating his own conduct, and asking for such justice as a Court of In- quiry might give him. His request for this Court was granted, and a trial was had, and he was honorably acquitted. The aforesaid letter may be seen in the July number of 1823 of the Historical Collections of this State. It is obvious that Sullivan's Division bore the weight of that battle, and that a portion of his men did not behave with their usual bravery. The attack upon him was sud- den and unexpected, and made by supe- rior numbers, before he could form his troops into a perfect line. Hence, confu- sion ensued, and some of his troops fled from the field. It required much exer- tion and ability on the part of Sullivan to maintain the contest as well as he did. Fayette was wounded in that battle. He testified before the Court of Inquiry, '• That such courage as Sullivan display- ed on that day deserved the praise of all." Washington testified, " His conduct was active and spirited." If Bancroft had been present at that Court, and heard the evidence in favor of Sullivan, we are of the opinion he would have withheld the ungenerous fling published by him a cen- tury afterwards.
It is a matter of historical record, that early in the year 1778, Gen. Sullivan wrote to Washington, that the wants of his family at home, the loss of his private property by cue robbery of the enemy, and the inadequacy of his salary, must compel him to leave the army. At the request of Washington, he consented to remain in the service, and he was soon afterwards appointed to the important separate command of the American for- ces then assembled at Rhode Island. The French fleet was unable to co-operate in the proposed attack upon the British troops and shipping stationed there, therefore, Sullivan was compelled to re- treat, and in effecting this, he was attack- ed by the enemy, and they were repulsed. For his services rendered in this expedi- tion he received the thanks of Congress, and of both of the Assemblies of New Hampshire and Rhode Island. In 1779,
�� �
