X.—WHO WAS THIS ACCUSER?
In December, 1776, a few days before the battle of Trenton, in the darkest
hour of the Revolution, when Washington and his army were menaced
with immediate destruction, an important conversation took place at Bristol,
on the banks of the Delaware.
The interlocutors were John Cadwallader and the Adjutant General of
the Continental Army.
The conversation was explicit; no disguise about its meaning, not a
doubt in the sound or purport of its every word.
The adjutant general of the Continental army, to whom Washington had
entrusted duties, involving, in their faithful performance, the well-being,
perchance the existence of that army, remarked to General Cadwallader:
“That he did not understand following the fortunes of a broken-down
and shattered army—”
At the very moment that he said this, Benedict Arnold was out yonder,
on the brink of the ice-bound river, assisting with his heart and hand, the
movements of George Washington.
But sheltered by the convenient silence of a comfortable chamber, the
Adjutant General continued:
“That the time allowed by General Howe, for offering pardons and
protections to persons who would come in, before the 1st of January, 1777,
had nearly expired—”
The philosophical nature of this remark becomes evident, when you remember
that at the very hour when the Adjutant General spoke, there was
a price set upon the head of the Rebel Washington.
“And—” continued this Adjutant General—“I have advised the Lieutenant
Colonel, my brother, now at Burlington, to remain there, and take
protection and swear allegiance, and in so doing he will be perfectly
justifiable.”
You will all admit, that this was beautiful and refreshing language from
any one, especially from the Adjutant General of the Continental army.
Much more was said of similar import, but the amount of the whole conversation
was in one word, that the Adjutant General, tired and sick of
the Rebel cause, was about to swear allegiance to his Majesty, King
George.
General Cadwallader, the bosom friend of Washington, heard these remarks
with surprise, with deep sorrow. From pity to the Adjutant General,
he locked them within the silence of his own breast, until the brilliant
attack at Trenton, which took place a few days afterwards, made it a safe
as well as comfortable thing, for the trembling patriot to remain true to his
country's flag.
Time passed, and General Cadwallader communicated this conversation
to certain prominent men of the time, thinking it better from motives of
kindness, to avoid a public exposure of the Adjutant General's intended
Treason.
But in the year 1778, a circumstance took place which forced the truth
from the lips of this memorable witness.
It was in a Court of Justice. A young man charged with Treason, was
on trial for his life. The Adjutant General, now transformed into an Attorney
General, urged his conviction with all the vehemence of which he
was capable. There may have been some extenuating circumstances in the
young man's case, or perhaps, the manner of the Attorney General, betrayed
more than patriotic zeal, for General Cadwallader a spectator in the Court,
filled with indignation that he could not master, uttered these memorable
words:
“It argues the effrontery of baseness—” said the brave officer, directing
his eagle eye toward the Attorney General—“in one man to pursue another
man to death, for taking a step which his own foot had once been
raised to take.”
These were hard words. The steady look and pointed finger, and deep
voice of Cadwallader, made them intelligible to the entire Court.
The Adjutant General never forgot them.
In the course of some four or five years, a discussion was provoked, fact
after fact came out in its proper colors, and General Cadwallader accused
the Adjutant General before the whole world, of the painful dereliction
stated in the previous pages.
He did not merely accuse, but supported his accusation by such evidence
that we are forced to the conclusion in plain words, that either the Adjutant
General was a Traitor in heart, speech and purpose, or General Cadwallader
was a gross calumniator.
The evidence which he produced in his published pamphlet, was a thousand
times stronger than that which stripped the laurel from Arnold's brow.
As a part of this evidence, we find a letter from Alexander Hamilton, dated
Philada. March 14, 1783, in which that distinguished statesman affirms his
remembrance of a conversation, which occurred between him and General
Cadwallader, in '77, and which embraced a distinct narrative of the dereliction
of the Adjutant General in December, '76.
Benjamin Rush, and other eminent men of that time, by letters dated 5th
Oct. 1782, March 12, 1783, and March 3, 1783, either record their remembrance
of a conversation, with General Cadwallader, in which he narrated
the treasonable sentiments of the Adjutant General, or distinctly affirm
a conversation with that individual himself, had before the battle of
Trenton, and full of Disloyalty to the Continental cause.
Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Rush, were never given to falsehood.
And then comes a statement from Major Wm. Bradford, which dated
March 15, 1783, strips the Adjutant General of every vestige of patriotism.
This brave officer states, that while he was at Bristol, in command of the
Philadelphia militia, in 1776,
the Adjutant General went over to Burlington,
where the enemy were, and was gone three days and nights. It was
the opinion of Col. Bayard, that he had gone over to swear allegiance to
King George.
Such is but a portion of the testimony, presented in the memorable
pamphlet, signed by the bosom friend of Washington, John Cadwallader.
This case demands no elaborate argument, no expenditure of invective.
Either the Adjutant General was a Traitor, or John Cadwallader a * * * *.
There is no skulking away from the question. One way or other it
must be decided by every honest man, who peruses the evidence.
You will remember that I give no opinion about the matter. There are
the facts; judge every honest man for himself. That John Cadwallader
was no base calumniator, is attested by the records of history, by the
friendship of Washington.
To what fearful conclusion then, are we led?
That the Adjutant General in the dark days of 1776, not only avowed
his intention of deserting the Continental army, but was in fact, three days
and nights in the camp of the enemy.
Was this the conduct of a Patriot, or—it is a dark word, and burns the
forehead on which it is branded—A Traitor!
This adjutant general, was General Joseph Reed, President of the Supreme
Council of Pennsylvania, and the prominent accuser of Benedict
Arnold.
In his defence before the Court Martial, Arnold used these words:
—“I can with boldness say to my persecutors in general, and to the
chief of them in particular—that in the hour of danger, when the affairs of
America wore a gloomy aspect, when our illustrious general was retreating
through America, with a handful of men, I did not propose to my associates
basely to quit the General, and sacrifice the cause of my country to my personal
safety, by going over to the enemy, and making my peace.”—
Can you see his eye flash, as he looks upon the “Chief of his Persecutors?”
