Part 4 (1/2)
The colony of Ma.s.sachusetts alone furnished 67,907 men for the Revolutionary War, while all the colonies together south of Pennsylvania furnished but 50,493, hence the sentiment prevailing in Ma.s.sachusetts would naturally be very powerful in determining any question pertaining to the army. When the country sprang to arms in response to that shot fired at Lexington, the echoes of which, poetically speaking, were heard around the world, the free Negroes of every Northern colony rallied with their white neighbors. They were in the fight at Lexington and at Bunker Hill, but when Was.h.i.+ngton came to take command of the army he soon gave orders that no Negroes should be enlisted. He was sustained in this position by a council of war and by a committee of conference in which were representatives from Rhode Island, Connecticut and Ma.s.sachusetts, and it was agreed that Negroes be rejected altogether. The American Negro's persistency in pressing himself where he is not _wanted_ but where he is _eminently needed_ began right there. Within six weeks so many colored men applied for enlistment, and those that had been put out of the army raised such a clamor that Was.h.i.+ngton changed his policy, and the Negro, who of all America's population contended for the privilege of shouldering a gun to fight for American liberty, was allowed a place in the Continental Army, the first national army organized on this soil, ante-dating the national flag. The Negro soldier helped to evolve the national standard and was in the ranks of the fighting men over whom it first unfolded its broad stripes and glittering stars.
[Transcriber's Note: This footnote appeared in the text without a footnote anchor:
”To the Honorable General Court of the Ma.s.sachusetts Bay:
”The subscribers beg leave to report to your Honorable House, which we do in justice to the character of so brave a man, that, under our own observation, we declare that a Negro man called Salem Poor, of Col. Frye's regiment, Capt.
Ames' company, in the late battle at Charlestown, behaved like an experienced officer, as well as an excellent soldier. We would only beg leave to say, in the person of this said Negro centres a brave and gallant soldier. The reward due to so great and distinguished a character we submit to the Congress.
”Cambridge, Dec. 5, 1775.”
These black soldiers, fresh from heathen lands, not out of slavery, proved themselves as worthy as the best. In the battle of Bunker Hill, where all were brave, two Negro soldiers so distinguished themselves that their names have come down to us garlanded with the tributes of their contemporaries. Peter Salem, until then a slave, a private in Colonel Nixon's regiment of Continentals, without orders fired deliberately upon Major Pitcairn as he was leading the a.s.sault of the British to what appeared certain victory.
Everet in speaking ”of Prescott, Putnam and Warren, the chiefs of the day,” mentions in immediate connection ”the colored man, Salem, who is reported to have shot the gallant Pitcairn as he mounted the parapet.” What Salem Poor did is not set forth, but the following is the wreath of praise that surrounds his name:
Jona. Brewer, Col. Eliphalet Bodwell, Sgt.
Thomas Nixon, Lt.-Col. Josiah Foster, Lieut.
Wm. Precott, Col. Ebenr. Varnum, 2d Lieut.
Ephm. Corey, Lieut. Wm. Hudson Ballard, Capt.
Joseph Baker, Lieut. William Smith, Capt.
Joshua Row, Lieut. John Morton, Sergt. (?) Jonas Richardson, Capt. Richard Welsh, Lieut.]
It is in place here to mention a legion of free mulattoes and blacks from the Island of St. Domingo, a full account of whose services is appended to this section, who fought under D'Estaing with great distinction in the siege of Savannah, their bravery at that time saving the patriot army from annihilation.
When the Revolutionary War had closed the brave black soldier who had fought to give to the world a new flag whose every star should be a star of hope to the oppressed, and whose trinity of colors should symbolize Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, found his race, and in some instances himself personally, encased in a cruel and stubborn slavery. For the soldier himself special provision had been made in both Northern and Southern colonies, but it was not always hearty or effective. In October, 1783, the Virginia Legislature pa.s.sed an act for the relief of certain slaves who had served in the army whose ”former owners were trying to force to return to a state of servitude, contrary to the principles of justice and their solemn promise.” The act provided that each and every slave who had enlisted ”by the appointment and direction of his owner” and had ”been received as a subst.i.tute for any free person whose duty or lot it was to serve” and who had served faithfully during the term of such enlistment, unless lawfully discharged earlier, should be fully and completely emanc.i.p.ated and should be held and deemed free in as full and ample manner as if each and every one of them were specially named in the act. The act, though apparently so fair on its face, and interlarded as it is with patriotic and moral phrases, is nevertheless very narrow and technical, liberating only those who enlisted by the appointment and direction of their owners, and who were accepted as subst.i.tutes, and who came out of the army with good discharges. It is not hard to see that even under this act many an ex-soldier might end his days in slavery. The Negro had joined in the fight for freedom and when victory is won finds himself a slave. He was both a slave and a soldier, too often, during the war; and now at its close may be both a veteran and a slave.
The second war with Great Britain broke out with an incident in which the Negro in the navy was especially conspicuous. The Chesapeake, an American war vessel was hailed, fired upon and forced to strike her colors, by the British. She was then boarded and searched and four persons taken from her decks, claimed as deserters from the English navy. Three of these were Negroes and one white. The Negroes were finally dismissed with a reprimand and the white man hanged. Five years later hostilities began on land and no opposition was manifested toward the employment of Negro soldiers. Laws were pa.s.sed, especially in New York, authorizing the formation of regiments of blacks with white officers. It is remarkable that although the successful insurrection of St. Domingo was so recent, and many refugees from that country at that time were in the United States, and our country had also but lately come into possession of a large French element by the Louisiana purchase, there was no fear of a servile insurrection in this country. The free colored men of New Orleans, under the proclamation of the narrow-minded Jackson, rallied to the defence of that city and bore themselves with commendable valor in that useless battle. The war closed, however, and the glory of the Negro soldier who fought in it soon expired in the dismal gloom of a race-slavery becoming daily more wide-spread and hopeless.
John Brown's movement was military in character and contemplated the creation of an army of liberated slaves; but its early suppression prevented any display of Negro valor or genius. Its leader must ever receive the homage due those who are so moved by the woes of others as to overlook all considerations of policy and personal risk. As a plot for the destruction of life it fell far short of the Nat Turner insurrection which swept off fifty-seven persons within a few hours.
In purpose the two episodes agree. They both aim at the liberation of the slave; both were led by fanatics, the reflex production of the cruelty of slavery, and both ended in the melancholy death of their heroic leaders. Turner's was the insurrection of the slave and was not free from the mad violence of revenge; Brown's was the insurrection of the friend of the slave, and was governed by the high and n.o.ble purpose of freedom. The insurrections of Denmark Vesey in South Carolina, in 1822, and of Nat Turner, in Virginia, in 1831, show conclusively that the Negro slave possessed the courage, the cunning, the secretiveness and the intelligence to fight for his freedom.
These two attempts were sufficiently broad and intelligent, when taken into consideration with the enforced ignorance of the slave, to prove the Negro even in his forlorn condition capable of daring great things. Of the probable thousands who were engaged in the Denmark Vesey insurrection, only fifteen were convicted, and these died heroically without revealing anything connected with the plot.
Forty-three years later I met the son of Denmark Vesey, who rejoiced in the efforts of his n.o.ble father, and regarded his death on the gallows as a holy sacrifice to the cause of freedom. Turner describes his fight as follows: ”The white men, eighteen in number, approached us to about one hundred yards, when one of them fired, and I discovered about half of them retreating. I then ordered my men to fire and rush on them. The few remaining stood their ground until we approached within fifty yards, when they fired and retreated. We pursued and overtook some of them whom we thought we left dead. After pursuing them about two hundred yards, and rising a little hill, I discovered they were met by another party, and had halted and were reloading their guns. Thinking that those who retreated first and the party who fired on us at fifty or sixty yards distant had all only fallen back to meet others with ammunition, as I saw them reloading their guns, and more coming up than I saw at first, and several of my bravest men being wounded, the others became panic struck and scattered over the field. The white men pursued and fired on us several times. Hark had his horse shot under him, and I caught another for him that was running by me; five or six of my men were wounded, but none left on the field. Finding myself defeated here, I instantly determined to go through a private way and cross the Nottoway River at Cypress Bridge, three miles below Jerusalem, and attack that place in the rear, as I expected they would look for me on the other road, and I had a great desire to get there to procure arms and ammunition.
After going a short distance in this private way, accompanied by about twenty men, I overtook two or three who told me the others were dispersed in every direction. After trying in vain to collect a sufficient force to proceed to Jerusalem, I determined to return, as I was sure they would make back to their old neighborhood, where they would rejoin me, make new recruits, and come down again. On my way back I called on Mrs. Thomas', Mrs. Spencer's and several other places. We stopped at Major Ridley's quarters for the night, and being joined by four of his men, with the recruits made since my defeat, we mustered now about forty strong.
After placing out sentinels, I lay down to sleep, but was quickly aroused by a great racket. Starting up I found some mounted and others in great confusion, one of the sentinels having given the alarm that we were about to be attacked. I ordered some to ride around and reconnoitre, and on their return the others being more alarmed, not knowing who they were, fled in different ways, so that I was reduced to about twenty again. With this I determined to attempt to recruit, and proceed on to rally in the neighborhood I had left.”[6]
No one can read this account, which is thoroughly supported by contemporary testimony, without seeing in this poor misguided slave the elements of a vigorous captain. Failing in his efforts he made his escape and remained for two months in hiding in the vicinity of his pursuers. One concerned in his prosecution says: ”It has been said that he was ignorant and cowardly and that his object was to murder and rob for the purpose of obtaining money to make his escape. It is notorious that he was never known to have a dollar in his life, to swear an oath, or drink a drop of spirits. As to his ignorance, he certainly never had the advantages of education, but he can read and write (it was taught him by his parents) and for natural intelligence and quickness of apprehension, is surpa.s.sed by few men I have ever seen. As to his being a coward, his reason as given for not resisting Mr. Phipps shows the decision of his character.”[7]
The War of the Rebellion, now called the Civil War, effected the last and tremendous step in the transition of the American Negro from the position of a slave under the Republic to that of a soldier in its armies. Both under officers of his own race at Port Hudson and under white officers on a hundred battlefields, the Negro in arms proved himself a worthy foeman against the bravest and sternest enemies that ever a.s.sailed our nation's flag, and a worthy comrade of the Union's best defenders. Thirty-six thousand eight hundred and forty-seven of them gave their lives in that awful conflict. The entire race on this continent and those of allied blood throughout the world are indebted to the soldier-historian, Honorable George W. Williams, for the eloquent story of their service in the Union Army, and for the presentation of the high testimonials to the valor and worthiness of the colored soldier as given by the highest military authority of the century. From Chapter XVI of his book, ”Negro Troops in the Rebellion,” the paragraphs appended at the close of this chapter are quoted.
A.
HOW THE BLACK ST. DOMINGO LEGION SAVED THE PATRIOT ARMY IN THE SIEGE OF SAVANNAH, 1779.
The siege and attempted reduction of Savannah by the combined French and American forces is one of the events of our revolutionary war, upon which our historians care little to dwell. Because it reflects but little glory upon the American arms, and resulted so disastrously to the American cause, its important historic character and connections have been allowed to fade from general sight; and it stands in the ordinary school text-books, much as an affair of shame.
The following, quoted from Barnes' History, is a fair sample of the way in which it is treated: