'^^ '*«r« 
 
 
 -ft? ^ . 
 
 
 0' 
 
 
 
 4p c'jfi/i*:*. "*^ V' 
 
 O H 
 
 
 
 
 Q-. * 
 
 e w 
 
 
 ^ *4<<^^^'* <S>- <f, * 
 
 » / 
 
 

 'uLr-^ ^> 
 
 c> *'*^<;^^<^r n^ A. *Z^^i9^* -0.1 
 
 S 
 
 >. -♦ 
 
 
 V » 1 • ° 
 
 
 
 
 ^-*- ""' .^" „,._ <-. ••• '^V -^ 
 
 
 'd > k 
 
 
 o ^ 9^ 
 
 
 
 0" . 'If^..*'- o .^-^ 
 
 Q_ *■ 
 
 
 
K 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 -o 
 
 
 c 
 
 «^ 
 
 3 
 
 ^ 
 
 bo 
 
 
 « 
 
 S2 
 
 '3 
 
 ts 
 
 
 
 oT 
 
 h'^ 
 
 4 
 
 p. 
 
 J 
 
 o 
 
 
 ^-^ 
 
 V 
 
 b. 
 
 ^ 
 
 1* 
 
 k3 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 !« 
 
 
 <^" , 
 
 ^ 
 
 4| 
 
 
 3 S 
 
 S 
 
 -SS 
 
 
 ^■s 
 
 •Ka 
 
 5 s 
 
 s 
 
 &w 
 
 <i) 
 
 cc>- 
 
 ■^ 
 
 ^o 
 
 K^ (>} 
 
 i c 
 
 1~^ 
 
 -'o 
 
 SfiCO 
 
 -O r— 1 
 
 i - 
 
 NIA 
 
 tober 
 
 
 LEDO 
 
 8th Oc 
 
 1", 
 
 -^-^ 
 
 -i4 c5 
 
 CJ T-l 
 
 O -- 
 
 u 
 
 '^ V 
 
 ?;2 
 
 s -^^ 
 
 2V. 
 
 e -< 
 
 o > 
 
 
 .-H 03 
 
 ,, 1 
 
 0) <D 
 
 O 93 
 
 r 
 
 II 
 
 S3 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 • S o 
 
 
 PQ'd 
 
 10 
 
 ^<^ 
 
 >J 
 
 To 
 
 Oi 
 
 j.s'-^ 
 
 ?*- 
 
 o 
 
 cq 
 
 o 
 PS 
 
 
 Jd 
 
 1^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 PQ 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 O 
 
 5.^ 
 
 te 
 
 *>' 
 
 3 
 
 ■to 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 !r; 
 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 IN RELATION TO THE 
 
 CAPTURE OF THE BRITISH BRIGS 
 
 DETROIT AND CALEDONIA, 
 
 ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 8, 1812. 
 
 NOW FIRST PUBLISHED. 
 
 iniuAr ).y^- 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 
 UNITED STATES BOOK AND JOB PRINTING OFFICE, LEDGER BUILDING. 
 
 18-13. 
 
(Lo-j^-^ 
 
 8t«rc« ttiLl»own 
 
PREFATORY REMARKS. 
 
 The following correspondence never having been laid fully 
 and connectedly before the public, and the whole matter having 
 been of late brought into renewed controversy by recent public 
 discussions, I have thought it desirable that the affair should 
 be clearly and definitively understood. No new ground has 
 been taken, nor is any new hostility toward, or fresh imputa- 
 tion upon any person intended by the present publication : 
 the sole object of which is purely explanatory. It furnishes 
 both the text and the commeutary. 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 West Chester, May Gth, 1843. 
 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 WASHINGTo^' City, July G, 1S35. 
 To Commodore J. D. Elliott : 
 
 Sir — My attention was called to the enclosed article, which had been cut 
 out of the Boston Courier and sent to a friend of mine in this place, with a 
 request that he would obtain Irom me a statement of the services performed by 
 the artillery under my command^ in the capture of the brigs Detroit and Cale- 
 donia, and of the circumstances under which the latter was saved from being 
 burnt to prevent recapture. I understood the information was wanted for pub- 
 lication, to correct what was believed to be erroneous in the article that appeared 
 in the Courier, and to claim for the army whatever credit it was entitled to for 
 that affair. On reflection, I thought that if such publication was made, it should 
 be done by me, and under my name ; and on further consideration, I concluded 
 to make it ; but before my statement was prepared, I noticed several paragraphs 
 in the public prints relating to you, altogether of an unfriendly character ; and 
 I thought that a publication, at that time, contradicting the article in the Courier, 
 which was intended to do you honor, would have the appearance of taking an 
 unfair advantage of the feehng produced by these paragraphs. This, together 
 with the important fact that you were then absent from the country, determined 
 me to postpone it. Your return to the United States moves the objection sooner 
 than I anticipated. It occurs to me, however, that it will be most agreeable to 
 you to make the corrections yourself, and to give my command the credit to 
 which it is entitled. The object of this communication is, therefore, to ascer- 
 tain from you which course you would prefer. 
 
 Your official report, dated October 9th, 1812, the day on which the capture 
 was made, gives but an imperfect account of the boarding of the Caledonia, and 
 says nothing about the subsequent preservation of that vessel under circum- 
 stances similar to those which induced you to cause the Detroit to be burnt. 
 Your report says : 
 
 " By 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I had my men in two boats, which I had pre- 
 viously prepared for the purpose. With these boats, fifty men in each, and 
 under circumstances very disadvantageous ; my men having scarcely had time 
 to refresh themselves after a fatiguing march of five hundred miles, I put off" 
 from the mouth of Buffalo Creek at 1 o'clock the following morning, and at 
 3 o'clock I was alongside the vessels. In the space of ten minutes I had the 
 prisoners secured, the topsails sheeted home and the vessels underway." 
 
 From this, as well as from the statement in the Courier, it would appear that 
 the vessels must have been anchored close together ; that they were boarded at 
 the same time under your superintendence and immediate orders, and that the 
 part performed by the volunteers from the army, was not sufficiently important 
 to be particularly noticed. Whereas, you will recollect that the night was dark, 
 and that the boats separated immediately after leaving Buffiilo Creek, and did 
 2 
 
not see nor communicate with each other after that time ; and you will also 
 recollect that the Caledonia lay nearest the Fort, and to approach her, the boat 
 commanded by Mr. Watts must pass the Detroit. As we passed, we were 
 hailed and questioned, but not otherwise interrupted. At this time we indis- 
 tinctly saw the Caledonia, and Mr. Watts expressed strong doubts about our 
 being able to reach her on account of the current, and censured the pilot for 
 having brought the boat nearer in shore. The pilot insisted on the practica- 
 bility of reaching the brig, notwithstanding the current and the time lost in 
 hesitating about making the attempt. It then became necessary, to prevent an 
 abandonment of the enterprize, so far as we were concerned, that I should take 
 the responsibility and command. We reached the brig with difficulty, and 
 under disadvantageous circumstances. After a sharp conflict, we succeeded in 
 carryi ig her with a loss, on our part, of two killed and thirteen wounded. 
 Your official report mentions but one killed and four wounded ; but that was 
 confined to seamen. You had no return of my command, which consisted of 
 twenty nine artillerists ; of whom one was killed and nine wounded ; making 
 the aggregate as stated. 
 
 After mentioning the circumstances wliich compelled you to anchor the 
 Detroit under the fire of the enemy, and the impracticability of getting her into 
 harbor, you give the particulars of your landing and of the enemy's boarding 
 with forty soldiers, and then being compelled to leave her " with the loss of 
 nearly all his men;" but you do not mention burning the brig to prevent sub- 
 sequent recapture. 
 
 In speaking of the other vessel, you say, '■ The Caledonia had been beached 
 in as safe a position as the circumstances would admit of, under one of our bat- 
 teries at Black Rock." There was no selection of place in "beaching" 
 the Caledonia ; she grounded in the Niagara river, opposite two of the 
 enemy's batteries, which kept up a fire on her at intervals throughout the 
 day. About the time you left the Detroit, Mr. Watts left the Caledonia, with 
 the prisoners taken in her, and did not return. I remained on board with my 
 command, and notwithstanding the fire of the enemy, succeeded in getting the 
 brig afloat by landing part of her cargo. If Mr. Watts, or the seamen, had 
 remained or returned after the cargo was landed, we should have been able to 
 have brought the vessel into port; but for want of nautical skill, I could only 
 succeed in bringing her nearer the shore, and into a safer position, before she 
 again got aground. 
 
 About dusk a seaman came on board with combustibles, and stated that you 
 had sent him with instructions to burn the brig ; that you were informed the 
 enemy had crossed the river below, and was marching to attack Black Rock ; 
 that the troops were leaving the Rock to join the main body, under General 
 Smyth; and that unless the brigs were burnt, they would be recaptured. At 
 this time the Detroit was on fire. As I did not believe the enemy intended to 
 attack, and that if he did, it would be soon enough to burn the brig when it was 
 found he could not be repulsed, I would not permit your order to be executed. 
 The report of the enemy's movements proved to be incorrect, and the Caledonia 
 was saved. 
 
 You will probably ask why, if your official report was considered incorrect, 
 or not sufficiently particular in its details, it was not mentioned to you at the 
 time, and why it has been permitted to remain thus long without explanation 
 or correction ? The answer, so far as I am concerned, is that the day following 
 the date of your report, Mr, Watts called on me, as he said, by your direction, 
 
to request me to furnish you my statement, which you wished to have before 
 you sent your report to Washington. I replied that I was bound to report to 
 my superior officer, then Lieut. Col. Scott, and that I could not comr lunicate 
 officially with you on the subject without disrespect to him. Having thus de- 
 clined to furnish you my statement of the facts, I had no right to complain of 
 the omissions in your report; as you could have had no personal knowledge of 
 some of the most important circumstances connected with the capture of the 
 Caledonia. 
 
 I have been frequently advised to make a statement of the circumstances in 
 the journals of the day ; but it appeared to be a small matter, not sufficiently 
 important to interest the public, and so far as relates to ourselves, that view was 
 probably correct ; but as attention has recently been called to the subject by the 
 article in the Courier, I can no longer remain silent, without neglecting a duty 
 I owe to those who acted with me. I feel the obligation more forcibly since 
 the death of the lamented and gallant Captain Schenck, the only officer who 
 shared with me the duty of making the statement and the responsibility of de- 
 laying it. 
 
 You are unquestionably entitled to all the credit due for planning the enter- 
 prize, and for commanding, in person, the party that boarded the Detroit ; but, 
 in every thing relating to the Caledonia, the brig first captured, you had no 
 other agency than that of suggesting the plan and furnishing the boat and sea- 
 men that boarded her. Although but a merchant vessel, she made a gallant 
 and desperate resistance, and it was not until we had two men killed and thir- 
 teen wounded, (two mortally,) that she was captured, while the Detroit per- 
 mitted you to get alongside before you were discovered, and to board her almost 
 without resistance. 
 
 I have always thought it strange that the Detroit, a British vessel of war lay- 
 ing near an enemy, should have been captured by surprise, more especially as 
 she must have known, from the firing of the Caledonia, the hostile chf.racter of 
 the boat she had just hailed. It was certainly fortunate for us that the person 
 in command was a provincial, and not a regular officer of the British Navy, as 
 I had, until lately, believed. 
 
 As to the preservation of the Caledonia after capture, you will recollect that 
 she, as well as the Detroit, was exposed through the day to the enemy's fire ; 
 that about the time you quitted the latter, and the British got temporary possession 
 of her, Mr. Watts left the former, taking wnth him the seamen and prisoners, 
 while my detachment remained on board, landed part of the cargo and got the 
 brig near in shore. You will also recollect you determined the Caledonia should 
 be burnt as well as the Detroit, to prevent recapture ; but that the p>^rson you 
 sent was not permitted to execute your order, and that the brig thus saved 
 formed part of that gallant fleet that achieved the glorious and importar.t victory 
 on Lake Erie. 
 
 You will oblige me by letting me hear from you as soon after the receipt of 
 this as your convenience will permit. 
 
 Respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 N. TO^YSON. 
 
 To the Editor of the Courier : 
 
 The pen qualifies the sword, and the sword protects the pen ; whei both are 
 wisely united, they constitute civilization ; when separated, they mark a state 
 
8 
 
 of savage life. The fame of Washington would fade away into fable were it 
 not for the pen. The renown of Moses and Joshua, and David and Solomon, 
 would not have reached us, had it not been borne on the wings of literature ; 
 but would have come down to us like the fame of Hercules, and Jason, and 
 Theseus, and the stories of giants. If the sword protects the pen, the pen 
 should, in return, protect the sword. We rarely find them happily united as in 
 a Xenophon and a Julius Caesar. 
 
 I had been led casually to notice a brave military character of our own coun- 
 try, without knowing any thing of his history, from observing now and then 
 his remarkable deeds : first, in the Mediterranean, second, on Lake Erie, third- 
 ly, on the coast of Brazil, and lastly, on the seaboard of South Carolina, when 
 Gen. Scott commanded by land, in the unhappy difficulties of nullification ; in 
 all which it appears that Jesse D. Elliott conducted to the entire satisfaction of 
 the Congress of the United States, and its President. His being selected to 
 carry despatches to Mr. Pinckney, our Minister at the Court of Great Britain, 
 is not worth mentioning, were it not to show that there was something about 
 Mr. EUiott that elicited patronage ; for he stood alone in the world, his father. 
 Captain Robert Elliott, having been slain in battle with the Indians, when under 
 the command of Gen. Wayne. He left a widow and nine children. Congress, 
 exactly thirty years ago, when Nathaniel Macon was Speaker, Aaron Burr 
 Vice-President, and Thomas Jefferson President, voted the sum of two thousand 
 dollars to the widow and children of Robert Elliott, our Commodore being then 
 but a school-boy. 
 
 He was born in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, (although the Port-Folio, Vol. IV., No. 
 6, says in Maryland.) We know not the year of his birth, but guess his age to 
 be about fifty. He was two years at Dickinson College, in Pennsylvania, when 
 Mr. Jefferson gave him a midshipman's commission, under which, it seems, he 
 resolved to carve his way to distinction. He was on board the frigate Chesa- 
 peake when she Was fired into by the British ship Leopard. After that dis- 
 graceful affair, he was transferred to the Essex, and went in her to the Medi- 
 terranean to check the Barbary Powers, who had captui-ed a number of our 
 countrymen, and held them in the bonds of slavery. Deep anxiety on their 
 account pervaded this country, and great responsibility was annexed to this new 
 service. It is a remarkable fact in our history, that the warlike Washington 
 should be reconciled to pay tribute to those lawless corsairs, while peaceful 
 Jefferson sent them powder and ball. Jefferson may be said to have, in a great 
 measure, conquered the Mediterranean pirates. When he was our minister at 
 the Court of France, he never ceased to denounce our humiliating practice of 
 paying tribute to those buccaneers. It was the topic of many of his letters 
 home. 
 
 Congress was enabled to send but a small force on this service^ and our 
 limited means of annoyance compelled our inlant navy to pursue a system of 
 masculine intrepidity, severe discipline, and promptitude of obedience, of which, 
 even to the present hour, we feel the benefits. The ferocity and treachery of 
 the enemy taught our officers and crew to be ever on the alert, while their 
 cruelty created a boldness on our side, that partook, at times, of rashness. It 
 was in such a Spartan school of war that our midshipman commenced his salt- 
 w-ater education. On that element he learned to smile at danger, and become 
 familiar with it. He returned to the United States in 1811; and served on 
 board the ship John Adams, whence he was transferred to the Argus, of which 
 he acted as first lieutenant. 
 
After we declared war against England, for impressing our seamen, and at- 
 tacking, in time of peace, an unprepared frigate, it was determined, as the best 
 means of drawing a British force off from the sea-ports, to divert their attention 
 to their Canadian possessions ; and Commodore Chauncey was with this view 
 sent to Lake Erie on our part, and Sir James Yeo, on the side of the British, to 
 counteract it. Chauncey was desirous of engaging Elliott in that service ; where- 
 upon, Lieutenant Elliott was honored by an appointment to a command on Lake 
 Erie. This we assert on the authority of the Port-Folio, of December, 1814, 
 which contains his life, with a portrait of him. That account adds, that ■■he 
 received orders to repair to Lake Erie, with all possible despatch, purchase 
 what private vessels he could, build two ships of twenty gims, and as early as 
 possible have his fleet in readiness to meet that of the enemy." 
 
 The same authority, p. 330, adds — " Lieutenant Elliott knew the vast import- 
 ance of the command of the Lakes in our war against Canada, and the difficulty 
 and the delay which would attend the building of the vessels, and the expense. 
 He had, in pursuance of his orders, purchased some vessels, but was embar- 
 rassed with the difficulty of getting them up the Niagara, and into the Lake ; 
 and he resolved to obtain them ready made. After revolving all the obstacles, 
 he formed the heroic resolution of capturing two British brigs of war, that lay 
 under the protection of the cannon of Fort Erie (which fortress we took from 
 them since that period.) Elliot accordingly provided two boats with fifty men 
 in each, and at one o'clock in the morning he came alongside of the Detroit and 
 the Caledonia, lying imder the protection of the Fort. He boarded, sword in 
 hand, the two vessels of war, and carried them in ten minutes. He made one 
 hundred and thirty prisoners, with their officers, and released forty of his own 
 countrymen from captivity. They belonged to the 4th U. S. Regiment. Elliott 
 entered the first man on boarding, and opposed three of the enemy with no other 
 weapon than his cutlass." 
 
 I think I hear the reader inquire, with surprise — ^' How catne I not ever to 
 hear of tJiis brilliatit deed before ?" I answer, because heroic men never brag — 
 modesty and bravery go together, hand in hand. If individuals were silent, 
 Congress were not, who passed the following resolve : " That the President of 
 the United States be, and he is hereby authorized to have distributed, as 
 prize money, to Lieutenant Elliott, his officers and companions, or to their 
 widows and children, ttvelve thotisand dollars, for the capture and destruction 
 of the British brig Detroit;" and also, "Resolved, that the President of the 
 United States be, and he is hereby requested to present to Lieutenant Elliott, of 
 the Navy of the United States, an elegant sword, with ■ suitable emblems and 
 devices, in testimony of the just sense entertained by Congress of his gallantry 
 and good conduct in boarding and capturing the British brigs Detroit and Cale- 
 donia, while anchored under the protection oi Fort Erie." 
 
 The Hon. Henry Clay, when the new army bill was discussed in the House 
 of Representatives, January, 1S13, said—" The capture of the Detroit, and the 
 destruction of the Caledonia (whether placed to our maritime or land account) 
 for judgment, skill and courage on the part of Lieutenant [now Commodore] 
 Elliott, HAS NEVER BEEN SURPASSED." See National Intelligencer, February 6, 
 1813, No. 193-2. 
 
 Shortly after this brilliant exploit, Lieutenant Elliot joined Chaimcey at Sack- 
 ett's Harbor, who sailed on the 8th of November, with six schooners, in quest 
 of the enemy's fleet, and on the same day fell in with the Royal George, but 
 found her next morning riding in Kingston Channel, under the protection of the 
 
10 
 
 English batteries. He immediately followed her into the Channel, and engaged 
 her for nearly two hours, and determined to board her in the night ; but the 
 wind increasing and blowing directly on shore, the pilot would not venture, and 
 the Commodore reluctantly gave up the attempt. On this occasion Lieutenant 
 Elliott commanded the vessel destined to lead in the enterprize. 
 
 On the 2 4th of July, Mr. Elliott was promoted over thirty lieutenants to the 
 raxikoi master commandant. Whether this honorable promotion, for there is 
 no date of the year (a negligence too often complained of in American ptibKca- 
 tions,) gave occasion to the unfriendly conduct of Commodore Perry, five years 
 after their battle with the British (the 10th of September, 1813,) we are imable 
 to say; for Perry's high eulogiums on Elliott at that time, and years afterwards, 
 and his tacking about and contradicting them, has been a mystery to the writer, 
 and a matter of deep regret, as Oliver Hazard Perry had his esteem, friendship 
 and respect. 
 
 Captain J. D. Elliott commanded the Madison in Commodore Chauncey's fleet, 
 which carried General Dearborn, with seventeen hundred men, to the attack of 
 Fort George and York ; but, finding that his ship could not be brought into ac- 
 tion, by reason of the shoalness of the water, he asked the Commodore's per- 
 mission to lead the small vessels employed to cover the landing of the troops, 
 of which there is the following evidence of it : — 
 
 " GospoRT Navy Yard, May 24th, 1S21. 
 " To Capt. J. D. Elliott, U. S. Navy : 
 
 "' Dear Sir — I have the honor to acknowledge your communication, and feel a 
 pleasure in stating that you were Flag-Captain of the Commodore's ship when 
 the attack was made on York, Upper Canada. Your ship drawing too much 
 water, could not get into action, and I know you volunteered to take the com- 
 mand of a schooner, and, to the best of my knowledge, you were the first in 
 action. Yours, &c., 
 
 " J. MACPHERSON." 
 
 From what has been said, it appears that our friend Elliott was always on the 
 alert, always pushing forward in the road of danger, and always successful ; 
 and always a favorite of the government ; and we venture to predict that he 
 always will be, unless from disease, or some such sad calamity, he should, like 
 some others, change his nature and his character. 
 
 In our next number we shall speak of a spirited transaction in the Mediter- 
 ranean, with the Bey of Tunis(?) as recorded by Mordecai M. Noah, in page 
 3S3, of his Travels in Europe and Africa; for if Jesse Duhcom Elliott is really, 
 as we now believe, an highly meritorious officer, we are disposed, as far as in 
 our power, to sustain him in his absence; and, if otherwise, leave him to the 
 
 reproaches he may merit from his countrymen. 
 
 B. W. 
 Cambridge, March Ath, 183-5. 
 
 To General Nathan Towson : 
 
 U. S. Frigate Constitution, 
 New York Harbor, July 12th, 183-5. 
 
 Sir — Your communication of the 6th instant, was duly received, and I have 
 given it the careful consideration to which it was entitled, on account of its 
 subject and the distinguished source from wliich it proceeds. I appreciate the 
 delicacy which restrained you from moving in the affair during my absence, 
 and which offers me the option as to the mode in which it shall be made public 
 
• 11 
 
 now. The latter I must decline. What explanations I have to make must be 
 made to yourself, with full permission to use them as you shall think expedient ; 
 I do not feel that the occasion requires me to volunteer a publication, and it is 
 not my practice, nor would it accord with my feelings to force public attention 
 rmnecessarily to actions in wliich I have been engaged in the service of my 
 coTintry. Your position in this case is different from mine, and a publication by 
 you will not be indelicate nor obtrusive. 
 
 Your letter complains that in my official report, dated October 9th, 1S12, of 
 the capture at Niagara Straits of the British vessels Detroit and Caledonia, by 
 the expedition under my command, justice is not fully rendered to yourself, and 
 the services of the party of artillerists, which you accompanied in one of the 
 boats ; and you request that I will supply the deficiency novv'. There is no man 
 who more duly appreciates your liigh services and reputation than myself, and 
 no man who would more reluctantly withhold from another his just meed of 
 praise ; but it does not appear that I can aid you in this case. I cannot, after a 
 lapse of nearly a quarter of a century, luidertake, upon the evidence of a single 
 and not uninterested witness, to alter an official report, made upon the tes- 
 timony and under the correction of all the actors in the affiiir ; a report thus 
 made and that has stood so long unquestioned, carries authority that its author 
 cannot shake. It has become history, and nothing that is in my power to do 
 now could alter it. Indeed, I could but state what you tell me, and which I 
 now hear for the first time, though twenty-three years have passed since the oc- 
 currence ; and my repetition of your statement would add nothing to its intrin- 
 sic weight. Besides, if my intervention hiad any influence whatever, it might 
 rather tend to diminish that weight, because I should feel boimd to speak as the 
 defender of the fame of the gallant dead, which your statement in effect im- 
 peaches. 
 
 The orphan family of the lamented Watts has no dearer inheritance than the 
 lustre of his actions, and that must not be tarnished by the hand of liisold com- 
 mander ; it is late now for any to tarnish it. It appears then to me, that if 
 you continue to desire the publication of your statement, it will proceed most 
 properly from yourself, and I will cheerfully offer here such comments as oc- 
 cur to me upon its contents. There seems throughout your letter, and especially 
 the latter portion of it, a disposition to depreciate the merit of the enterprize 
 referred to, and to decry the part taken by its conductor. I am reluctant to sup- 
 pose that this is prompted by any feeling akin to hostility, and I regret to 
 observe it. For my part, I may aver that I never claimed more merit than my 
 comrades awarded to me, and that I studiously, at all times, have endeavored to 
 render full justice to them and their gallant services. That I did so in your 
 own case, that official report itself bears witness. 
 
 You arc there first named among the subordinate officers, whose gallantry is 
 commended, though you volunteered as a private and had no command as far as 
 I ever knew imtil now, when you inform me of it. That I did this in the case 
 of others it may also testify. There stand prominently the names of the heroic 
 Roach, Prestman and others, besides that of your commander Mr. Watts, vrho, 
 soon after, sacrificed his life in spiking the guns that obstructed the invasion by 
 General Smyth, who, with his command, then including yourself, looked on 
 during the unimproved victory. Indeed, though you complain that the party of 
 artillerists had not their sufficient fame, and invite me to amend the defective 
 report of the action, you expressly defend me from any possible imputation of 
 injustice. 
 
12 
 
 You say that Mr. Watts, who commanded the boat in which you were placed, 
 called on you for any statement that you might desire to offer, in order that I 
 might embody it in my report ; yoit, declined to male any except to your supe- 
 rior officer, then Lieutenant Col. Scott, and that you have, therefore, no right to 
 complain of the omission of any facts not known to me, and of which I could 
 have had no knowledge. That, sir, is perfectly true, and the facts must defeat 
 any suspicion of injustice on my part. The admission is the more generous — 
 as — you will pardon the observation — it develops, not merely, a misapprehen- 
 sion of your duty, but an act of insubordination, the consequences of wliich, to 
 yourself and your corps, you are now, after twenty-three years, endeavoring to 
 remedy. Had you reported to me then, there would have been no occasion to 
 report to me now.* A small party of private soldiers, without officers, were 
 lent to me by the general ; You and Captain Barker volunteered as privates on 
 the expedition ; one only was allowed to go, and you won the privilege by lot — 
 you went as a private, and for the occasion, your only superior officer was my- 
 self. You were to obey and to report to me, and your refusal, when the latter 
 was required, was as much a breach of duty as would disobedience have been. 
 
 Were it not for that step, your present communication would have been un- 
 necessary. It is not apparent, sir, that you ever reported to General Scott ; it 
 is certain, at least, that he has made no statement on the subject; and it is 
 inconsistent with his high, generous character, and perfect knowledge of all 
 military duty, to ascribe liis silence to any other cause than that he received no 
 report from you, or that he justly considered himself not the quarter to which 
 it should have been sent. I may remark, that this omission of your having 
 refused to report to me, while it most completely exonerates me from any cen- 
 sure on account of the omission alledged, does not so clearly effect the object for 
 wliich it was designed. You offer it as the answer to two questions thus stated 
 by yourself. 
 
 " You will probably ask why, if your official report was considered incorrect, 
 or not sufficiently particular in its details, it was not mentioned to you at the 
 time, and why it has been permitted to remain thus long without explanation or 
 correction ?" 
 
 It would certainly be very natural to ask those questions, and impartial ob- 
 servers would hardly consider them conclusively answered by a statement, 
 that, though called upon, you had refused to report to the officer commanding 
 the expedition, and who alone was to make the report which you now seek to 
 correct. Your withholding the report may account well enough for the alledged 
 omission in the official statement ; but it does not explain why that omission 
 was not pointed out at the time, concerning, as it did, an affair so important, 
 that it is a "sacred duty'' to your companions to adjust it now. 
 
 As to the second of the two questions, the answer seems particularly defec- 
 tive ; nor does the further explanation offered appear less so. It seemed a small 
 matter, you say, not worth public attention. Has the death of Captain Schenck 
 increased its intrinsic importance ? Did the publication in the Courier render 
 your duty to your comrades more sacred than it was originally ? The Courier 
 said notlung of the details of the action, nor of the subordinates in the enter- 
 prize. It spoke, and professed to speak, only of the share of the commander. 
 Even of him the writer said nothing new — he merely quoted from an article in 
 a magazine published twenty years ago, statements which liave been before 
 the world all that time, and open' all that time to notice and animadversion. 
 
 * See Major Bankhead's letter in Appendix. 
 
13 
 
 The answer to the second question will appear to the reader quite as unsatis- 
 factory as the answer to the first. 
 
 I have always respectod and borne cheerful testimony to your gallantry and 
 services, and I certainly feel not the slightest inclination to do otherwise now. 
 But your intimation made, as if disparagingly, that my boat's party had more 
 luck than fighting, while that to which you were attached met with a desperate 
 resistance, will excuse me for reminding you that an enemy is never surprised, 
 except by those who exert activity and prompt energy. That the two boats 
 had an equal force of fifty men each. That I assigned to the boat in which you 
 were the easier task of capturing a trading vessel defended by twelve men, in- 
 cluding officers, with two small guns and small arms only, while I chose for my 
 own object, a public armed brig mounting six guns, with a crew of fifty-six 
 men, directed by naval discipline. How long your boat was occupied by her 
 task you can best tell. That both boats succeeded, the public know. But that 
 our effecting a surprise implies the absence of resistance, is very far from the 
 fact. 
 
 I was myself assailed by three men, armed with cutlasses, at the moment 
 when I sprung on tlie deck, and the surprise gained us nothing, except a hand- 
 to-hand fight with an enemy superior in numbers. In the official report equal 
 credit is given to both boats ; or, if there be any difference, yours, which had 
 the easiest task, has the advantage in the report also. I am not criticising nor 
 attempting to refute your communication, but merely toucliing here and there 
 upon such points as appear singular or prominent, and I do not, therefore, at- 
 tempt to notice now all your remarks, nor to correct, by my official records, 
 the errors into which you have fallen. I deprecate controversy at all times, and 
 certainly not less with an officer of your standing and character with whom I 
 have been associated in youthful enterprize, and I trust that no real cause will 
 ever occur to cloud the friendly relations which have so long, as I flattered my- 
 self, existed between us. 
 
 The present is not a subject on which a difference could gracefully arise, nor 
 am I able to perceive how any good can possibly accrue to your bringing it be- 
 fore the public. But of that I am not to be the judge, nor will I obtrude any 
 advice on the subject. As I remarked in the commencement, these observa- 
 tions are entirely at your disposal. 
 
 I have the honor to be, respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 Washington. July 18, 1835. 
 To Commodore J. D. Elliott, 
 
 Sir — I have received your letter of the 12th, in answer to mine of the 6th 
 instant. I regret that you should have misunderstood my object in addressing 
 you. It was not to complain of your official report, and request you to supply the 
 deficiency now : it was, simply, to offer you the opportunity of correcting, your- 
 self, that part of the publication I enclosed to you, that relates to the capture 
 of the Caledonia, and which ascribes to you acts that, from the circumstances 
 of the case, could not have been, and, as you know, were not performed by 
 you. I referred to your official report to show that it is not alone sufficient to 
 refute the statement; but, by its omissions, rather sustains it. I expressly 
 disclaimed all right to complain of those omissions, as I declined furnishing you 
 3 
 
14 
 
 tbe facts at the time it was made ; and I wish you distinctly to understand, that 
 if I had believed I had just cause of complaint, there would have been no delay 
 in urging it ; but not in th# language of solicitation. 
 
 You seem to think it would be indelicate in you to publish any thing on the 
 subject; and say it is not your practice, nor would it accord with your feelings, 
 to force public attention, unnecessarily, to actions in which you have been en- 
 gaged in the service of your country. In this case your friends have " forced 
 public attention, unnecessarily," to your actions, and I do not perceive any 
 more indelicacy in your noticing it, than there would be (if they claimed for 
 you the property of another.) in your saying — it is none of mine. Some un. 
 known person has recently sent me a newspaper, printed in Ohio, in which 
 there is a paragraph or two, relating to this very subject, giving me credit that 
 belongs to you. This I intend to correct ; believing it would be as dishonora- 
 ble in me to wear your honors, as it would to wear your apparel. 
 
 I did not ask, nor did I expect you to publish my letter. I went somewhat 
 into detail in communicating facts that would have been stated in my report, if 
 I had made one to you ; believing you would prefer communicating, yourself, 
 such of them to the public as yon hieiv to be correct. You knew, for instance, 
 that you did not communicate with our boat after we separated on leaving Buf- 
 falo Creek. You knew our boat boarded and carried the Caledonia after a sharp 
 conflict, before you captured the Detroit ; and I presume you must have known 
 that Mr. Watts left the brig the next morning, with the prisoners and seamen, 
 soon after the enemy commenced firing on her ; and that the artillery remained 
 on board, landed the greater part of the cargo, and brought the vessel near in 
 shore ; and you certainly know that you intended she should be burnt, as well 
 as the Detroit, to prevent the enemy's getting possession of her ; and that she 
 would have been burnt if I had permitted your order to be executed. These 
 facts are all known to you, and do not rest " upon the evidence of a single and 
 not uninterested witness." What occurred in the boat between Mr. Watts, the 
 pilot, and myself, about the practicability of reaching the Caledonia, on account 
 of the current, could not have been known to you, unless commiuiicated by 
 Mr. Watts ; and it was not, therefore, expected you would say any thing about 
 it. You knew the crecht for commanding, in person, the boarders that captur- 
 ed that vessel, belonged either to Mr. Watts or myself, and not to you ; and 
 this was all it was expected you would state. I have no wish to do Mr. Watts 
 injustice. It was his opinion the brig could not be approached, and although 
 the event proved he was wrong, the difficulty in doing it showed that he had 
 good grounds for his belief. 
 
 In your " comments" on my letter, you say — " It here seems throughout 
 your letter, and especially the latter portion of [it,] a disposition to depreciate 
 the merits of the enterprize referred to, arid to decry the part taken by its con- 
 ductor. I am reluctant to suppose this is prompted by any feelings akin to 
 hostility, and I regret to observe it." I will be candid with you on that 
 as on every other subject. I do think that you might have made greater 
 efforts to have brought the Detroit into harbor before you abandoned her ; that 
 the circumstances imder wlrich she was burnt, if such as to justify the act, did 
 not imperiously require it, and that it was not in keeping with the chivalrous 
 daring which could plan and execute so hazardous an enterprize as the board- 
 ing, with an inferior force, and capturing " a public armed brig, mounting six 
 guns, with a crew of fifty-six men directed by naval discipline." 
 
 Some years past I was appHed to, by a personal friend of Commodore Perry, 
 
15 
 
 for a statement of the facts contained in the last parasnraphj to be used to your 
 prejudice, in the controversy then pending between you ; but I refused to give 
 it; informing him that I had no official claim on you, as he supposed, for ne- 
 glecting me in your report ; and that the fact of your planning and undertaking 
 so hazardous an enterprize removed from my mind all suspicion of what, many 
 of Commodore Perry's friends seemed to suppose, had prevented your aiding 
 him in the action on Lake Erie, as he expected. Candor requires me to say 
 that I then, and until lately, did believe the Detroit was commanded by a re- 
 gular officer of the British navy. If such was not the fact, as I am informed, 
 and that the commander was your relative, the enterprize, in my judgment; 
 loses much of its daring character. 
 
 I did not expect, nor did I wish, any tiling to be said in correcting the article 
 of which I complain, that would detract from the credit the public have award- 
 ed you so far as relates to the Detroit, and planning the capture of the other 
 brig. My object in submitting to you a comparison of the service performed 
 by the two parties, was to show that, although you undertook that wliich ap- 
 peared to be infinitely the more hazardous, it did not turn out to be so ; and, as 
 the result shows, our boat had its full share of fighting and danger. It was not 
 your fault, but your good fortune, that your adversary was not more vigilant ; 
 that he permitted you to make a prize of him at the cost of one man '• lost" 
 and '• one officer wounded." instead of anniliilating you, as he had the power 
 to do with liis superior force and advantages, and as I believe would have been 
 done had he been a regular officer of the British navy, especially after know- 
 ing by what occurred to our boat, that an enemy was near liim. 
 
 I cannot allow that time cancels the claims of truth and justice ; and that a 
 report which remains unquestioned, until " it becomes history,'' cannot be al- 
 tered by its author. But my business is not with your report, but with the 
 statement of an anonymous writer, who now claims for you all merit in rela- 
 tion to this matter, some of which I tliink belongs to others. You tlrink it too 
 late to relinquish it, as the writer has said nothing new of you, "he merely 
 quoted from an article in a magazine, published twenty years ago, statements 
 that have been before the world all that time, and open all that time to notice 
 and animadversion." I know that legal claims are sometimes barred, on ac- 
 count of time, by legislative enactments ; but I believe there is no limitation 
 known to the moral code or to courts of honor. Until I saw the publication, 
 copied from the Courier, I did not know that your biography had ever been 
 written ; much less that it contained such a statement, or I assure you I should 
 not now be taunted with having let the subject rest for twenty years; for, al- 
 though I deprived myself of the right to complain of the official injustice of 
 the omissions in your report, I pever had a doubt of the propriety of resisting 
 the attempt, of any one, to deprive me of a just right. 
 
 You say — '• It is not apparent, sir, that you even reported to General Sec it. 
 It is certain, at least, that he has made no statement on the subject, and it is 
 inconsistent with his high, generous character, and perfect knowledge of all 
 military duty, to ascribe his silence to any other cause than that lie received ao 
 report from you, or that he justly considered himself not the quarter to which 
 it should have been sent." How have you, sir, arrived at the certainty " that 
 he never made no statement on the subject?" You recollect the battle of 
 Queenstown followed soon after the capture of the brigs. Our detachment was 
 put in motion immediately after I joined it, and from that time until we arrived 
 at Queenstown, where tliis distinguished officer was captured, he had no time to 
 
16 
 
 make a report. The following extract from one of his letters to me, shows that, 
 although delayed by his capture, it was not neglected. " In that letter [refer- 
 ring to a previous one,] I informed you of a conversation had with the secretary 
 upon the subject of the capture of the British vessels from under Fort Erie> 
 and of the distinguished part which you bore in that enterprize. He thought 
 you entitled to a brevet. This was on the way from Philadelphia to Baltimore. 
 At Washington, I recalled his attention to the subject in a strong written state- 
 ment. I have no doubt the commission will issue, and I trust without further 
 delay." 
 
 The brevet he mentions has been conferred ; and is one by which I obtained 
 my present rank. 
 
 I must now call your attention to the charge of officers of the army having 
 served with you as privates. This is not the first time you have used that 
 argument, and retracted it in the way I shall now state. You recollect that 
 you handed me the prize-tickets for my command at Fort George, remarking 
 that I would find mine with the rest ; I put the bundle in my pocket, and we 
 separated. When I came to examine them, I found my rank was not recog- 
 nized in the ticket. Supposing it to be a mistake, I laid it by until I should 
 again meet with you, or have an opportunity for explanation. We met, for 
 the first time after the receipt of the ticket, at General Scott's marque, at 
 Buffalo. Knowing that I was to meet you, I put the ticket in my pocket. 
 When we met, I required an explanation, remarking at the same time, that 
 when I embarked in the expedition, I did not dream of prize-money ; and if the 
 object in assigning to me the share of a private was to increase the amount to 
 be divided among the other captors, I would make you a compliment of the 
 whole — offering you the ticket ; but that before I could hold friendly intercourse 
 with you, I must know why it was that I had been designated as a private. 
 You then explained, that under the regulations of the navy, at the time the 
 ticket was made out, you were not privileged to give any other ; but that the 
 regulation had since been changed, and you were then at liberty to do me justice, 
 by recognizing my rank in another ticket, which you soon afterwards sent 
 to me. 
 
 You will recollect, that at a subsequent meeting I refused to receive your 
 offered hand, and to hold intercourse with you, until I ascertained by inquiry at 
 the Navy Department, that there was no established rule for distributing prize- 
 money to troops serving with the navy at the date of the first ticket. I did not 
 then, nor do I now, tlrink tliis a full justification of your course ; for although 
 you were not expressly directed to give to the officers of the army tickets cor- 
 responding with their rank, you were not prohibited from doing so ; and, at least, 
 it was due to them, as an act of courtesy, to explain why you did not. 
 
 Do you suppose, sir, that officers of the army have so little self-respect that 
 they would consent to serve as privates in their proper commands, for the honor 
 and advantage of officers of the navy? If there had been marines, whose ser- 
 vices you could command, would you have expected their officers to have served 
 with them as privates ? Or did you expect an officer of the army would consent, 
 or be required, to furnish you his command, without accompanying it on such a 
 service ? As the detachment of artillery required on that occasion was less than 
 a captain's command, General Scott suggested that it should be furnished by the 
 two companies, in equal proportions, and the command be given to the adjutant 
 of the detachment, the gallant, and afterwards eminently distinguished,* Major 
 
 * See letters of General Smyth and Major Bankhead in Appendix. 
 
17 
 
 Roach, against which Captain Barker and myself remonstrated in the most de- 
 cided terms, notwithstanding the entire confidence we had in that othcer, and 
 the strong friendship, (not to say brotherly affection,) we entertained for him. 
 Nay, so tenacious were Captain Barker and myself on that point, that had the 
 rank been settled between us, w^e should have considered it derogatory to have 
 waived the claim of seniority ; but as it was not, we agreed to decide it by lot. 
 No officer of the army, who is worthy to hold a commission, would consent to 
 serve in the rcinls with his own men, for the purpose of increasing a naval com- 
 mand ; such a proposition is too absurd -to require refutation. My understanding 
 was, that the command of the seamen, and every thing relating to the manage- 
 ment of the boat, and to the navigation of the brig, after capture, belonged to 
 Mr. Watts ; but the entire command of the troops belonged to me. If you are 
 correct as to the conditions on which the officers of the army, who had com- 
 mands, volunteered, w"hy did you not maintain it when I spoke to you about 
 the prize-ticket ? Why did you change that given to private Towson, for one 
 as " captain?" 
 
 I do not agree that I was bound to report to you after I landed. My com- 
 mand, it is true, performed a subordinate duty ; but if it deserved praise or cen- 
 sure, it was to be received from our military superiors. It was proper that our 
 conduct should be represented to the War Department ; and you were not the 
 channel of communication. The rule on this subject, both in the army and 
 navy, is too well settled to be questioned now. 
 
 I will say one word in relation to your report. Although I had no official 
 claim on you for more notice than you bestowed on my command, I should have 
 felt deeply mortified at having dealt as sparingly with you, had I been in your 
 place, and made a report with the same knowledge of facts. 
 
 I have commented at great length on your letter, and with plainness, under 
 the belief, that between gentlemen of our profession there should be perfect 
 frankness. 
 
 I deprecate controversy as much as you can, and regretted the suspension of 
 our friendly intercourse heretofore, as I do on this occasion. You seem to think 
 it never was suspended ; w'hether it is to be renewed hereafter, must depend on 
 yourself. 
 
 It is my present intention to claim for my command what I tliink belongs to 
 it, by a brief statement in the pubhc prints ; and to disclaim what has been im- 
 properly taken from you and given to me. I have no wish to trouble the public 
 with this correspondence, unless circumstances should make it necessary, but 
 leave you at perfect liberty to do so if you think proper. 
 
 Respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 N. TOWSON. 
 
 U. S. Frigate Constitution, } 
 New York H.irbor, July 23, 1835. J 
 To General Nathan Toioson, 
 
 Sir — Your letter of the ISth inst. reached me yesterday. The perusal of 
 it gave me surprise as well as pain. It was painful to see an officer of your 
 reputation involve himself in what I must call so discreditable a manner. I 
 felt surprise, that neither your experience nor your counsellors had been able 
 to save you from the misfortune. You have placed yourself in a predicament 
 so unfortunate, that I believe no gentleman or officer ever incurred the like ; 
 and you appear resolved to force me to exhibit you thus to the public. Your 
 
18 
 
 reputation ascribes intelligence to you at least ; and I feel astonished that, after 
 my letter of the 12th, you should persevere in advancing the absurd claims for 
 which you opened this correspondence. Whether your demand was prompted 
 by restless vanity alone, and you fancied that you might regain pubhc attention, 
 and, perhaps, some slight additional credit, or whether you were urged on by 
 some designing persons of more talent than honesty, is of little moment; in 
 either case, it is very strange that, after reading my letter, you did not perceive 
 that it would be prudent for you to let the affair rest unstirred. I showed you, 
 as delicately as I could, how fatal the discussion upon the claims you advanced 
 must be to your reputation, and intimated my willingness to leave you safe in 
 its oblivion. You appear to have been either incapable of comprehending your 
 danger, and to listen only to the craving for notoriety, or to have been impelled 
 forward by hostility to me, whether of your own, or of some one who does not 
 appear. The general circumstances seem to indicate the former — the tenor of 
 your letters, especially the last, points to the latter. Be it which it may, I am 
 indifferent; no one can know you better than yourself; and if I judge you by 
 your own showing in these letters, you are not one whom I would ever call 
 friend. You must pardon my plainness, sir ; I write frankly, and employ no 
 attorney — for / at least have no special pleading to do. I used what measure 
 of courtesy I could compass in my former letter ; the tenor of your reply, and 
 the light in which you there exhibit yourself, will excuse me from any effort 
 now to wrap up honest meanings in courtly phrases ; nor can I spare time to 
 follow you through all the petty points of your pleading ; the principal ones I 
 will dispose of as briefly as may be, leaving the straws to float or sink with 
 them. The chief subjects on which we are at issue are very few; the capacity 
 in which you attended the expedition is the most prominent. I have asserted 
 that you went as a private ; you distinctly and deliberately affirm that you 
 commanded the soldiers — and on tliis, and one other point, turns the discussion. 
 I will not cloud it by circumlocution, but will meet your assertion by a direct 
 contradiction, and by indisputable evidence. 
 
 I need not copy your statement, and the explanations given to support it ; 
 mine is this : by the copies of letters from General Van Rensselear to Major 
 General Hall and myself, which are annexed, you will perceive that I could 
 have liad militia ; but knowing that they had wives and families, and that the 
 regular troops for the most part had not, I concluded to take the latter, and 
 applied for the loan of some, witho^it officers, who could rank my subordinates, 
 as I designed the latter to retain the command. The general acceded to my 
 request, and directed his brigade-major to detail the troops, which were placed 
 under Ensign Prestman, and were commanded by him. I annex an extract 
 from the letter of the brigade-major himself, and the letter from the general, 
 brought by Ensign Prestman. to prove these facts. You and Captain Barker 
 volunteered as privates ; one only was accepted — and the lot fell on you. You 
 went as a private, under Ensign Prestman, who commanded the troops. The 
 same evidence will establish these facts also. If it does not establish them all, 
 I have no other testimony, save my own word, in my possession. But it must ; 
 it is irrefragable. You dare not contradict Major Bankhead ; you cannot contra- 
 dict the letter of General Smyth, written at the very time, and showing beyond 
 question, that Prestman was designated for the command, and brought me the 
 troops. If it does establish them, in what light do you stand ? After you were 
 reminded of these facts, and had ample opportunity to consult records, as well 
 as your memory, you deliberately assert, and through pages endeavor to prove, 
 
19 
 
 that you went in command of the troops — and all for the purpose of effecting 
 the poor scheme, prompted by some designing knave, or your own vanity, of 
 getting a dispute with me, or some additional credit for yourself. 
 
 Your stand, sir, in the attitude of one who has made a well considered, de- 
 liberate assertion, to his own profit and the injury of others, and then has the 
 utter incorrectness of his assertion proved by the clearest and most direct evi- 
 dence. It is an unpleasant attitude for an officer and a gentleman. I would, if I 
 could, suppose that you believed your statement yoiu'self, but the facts do not 
 warrant the assumption ; they are not of the kind about which one could mis- 
 take. You complain of my report. If you went as a private, that document 
 gave you even more than your full share of praise. If you commanded the 
 troops, the question will still arise, why have twenty-three years been suffered 
 to pass without an effort from you to claim what you say was due to you ? But 
 you u-ere then a private, and your assertion of, the contrary now is as unworthy 
 and unfortunate, as it is foreign from truth. I must place this point strongly, 
 unwilling as I am to see General Townson take such a position, because on this 
 depends really the whole controversy, for it is the foundation of it. If your 
 word is good on this point, against the clearest evidence, it is good for all the 
 rest also — but not otherwise. 
 
 It would have been well, sir, had you comprehended the tenor of my former 
 letter, for it might have saved you. I intimated clearly enough, though deli- 
 cately, that my real reason lor declining the step you proposed was my know- 
 ledge that your statement was not true, and it is unlucky that you did not un- 
 derstand me. You are proved now, sir, to have stated deliberately and repeat- 
 edly what was untrue. But there is more in it — and the degree of stolidity 
 exhibited in your course is absolutely unexampled. If I could be persuaded 
 that you had, after sailing, assumed the command of the boat, I should be forced 
 to condemn you even more severely, if that were possible, than I do now. If 
 you are correct on that point, you not only broke an engagement to which yoiu- 
 honor was pledged, but you were guilty of insubordination and mutiny, for 
 which you might even now be brought to a Court Martial. You were accepted 
 only as a private ; by offering as such you virtually pledged your honor that 
 you would act as such, and would not use your authority with the soldiers to 
 take the command. We were wrong, then, in trusting you, and you broke 
 your woxi. of honor, to your general, to his brigade-major, and to your equally 
 brave, but I hope more trustworthy competitor, Captain Barker. All this re- 
 sults, if we believe your assertion that you assumed the command. But there 
 is more — the terms on which you went Tnade you a private for the time — if you 
 got the command you were guilty of insubordination to the extent that consti- 
 tutes mutiny, and your moral crime was quite as great as though you owned no 
 commission, and cannot be atoned for, if it can even be palliated, by the result 
 of the expedition. 
 
 You have had the credit, sir, of volunteering on a dangerous enterprize as a 
 private when you could not go as an officer, and your vanity, or your managers, 
 have prompted you to reject that, and to claim what did not belong to you, and 
 even is not merit, though you deem it so. You would persuade us that you 
 took advantage of our confidence in your honor to get among us, in a boat in 
 which / was not. and to snatch- then by fraud from the gallant Prestman* the 
 honor of commanding a portion of the victorious party ; and your tale would 
 rob. also, the heroic Watts of his honors. But that, sir, it shall not effect. I 
 
 * See letters of General Smyth and Major Bankhead in Appendix. 
 
20 
 
 step with you into his sepulchre, to defend what you would wrench away, and 
 I do defend his rights by provi/ig your tale untrue. I save even you, also, by 
 restoring the credit which you would discard — of having volunteered as a pri- 
 vate under a subordinate officer. It was well done, sir, and well has it been 
 rewarded. 
 
 Another principal point is as to the preservation of the Caledonia, and the 
 burning of the Detroit. On both these you are as widely in error as in the 
 former, and this part may be cUsposed of in few words. You mistake entirely 
 my reason for burning the Detroit. I had, and coiild have, no fear that the ene- 
 my would remove, if they retook her, for she was riddled with shot and unable 
 to float ; she had already sunk, and was aground, full of water. But I burned 
 her to .save the guns in her hold^ wluch were invaluable to us. Had her masts 
 been left, the enemy might have raised and carried them off; they were pre- 
 vented, and subsequently we erected shears and got out the guns. 
 
 In relation to the other brig, also, you are entirely wrong. I never had a 
 thought of burning her. There was no occasion for it, as, at the time of which 
 you speak, she lay in safety at the Navy Yard, under protection of our battery. 
 Besides, naval officers do not send a nameless sailor with combustibles and a 
 verbal order, as you allege, to burn vessels that are lying in perfect safety. Tlie 
 Detroit was burned by Captain Chambers, of the 5th Infantry, at my request. 
 Your recollection is quite as unfortunate on this point, as it was relative to the 
 capacity in which you served in an expedition of which half the merit you claim 
 to yourself. 
 
 I have letters from officers, eye witnesses, that contradict to the letter almost 
 every thing you alledge respecting the closing incidents of the enterprize, but 
 they would occupy much space, and really your personal testimony does not 
 stand in that degree of credit that might require corroboration of my own op- 
 posing evidence, and of that of circumstances, and we may pass this head as 
 answered. I will furnish one extract, however, to show that I had no reason 
 for burning the Caledonia, as I did not believe the enemy had landed. It is 
 from the letter of Major Myers, then Captain in 1.5th Infantry.* 
 
 I have thus noticed the two principal subjects at issue between us, and I may 
 presume it is done to your conviction, if not to your satisfaction. As I said 
 above, I cannot advert to every minute allegation in your unfortunate letter, 
 but a few I may take up to use as specimens of the rest. 
 
 And first, you state that the boat which contained the party that attacked the 
 Caledonia had no communication with the other after starting. This is incor- 
 rect ; the boats started from the same place, at the same time. The boat in 
 which you were, was steered by mine, and if you did not see our boat, we dis- 
 tinguished yours quite plainly. Sailing Master Watts had his instructions to 
 keep near my boat, to board, carry, and bring over to Buffalo the brig Hunter, 
 which the Caledonia was supposed to be. Thus your inexperience in naval 
 proceedings but serves to expose your presumption. 
 
 You argue, for several pages, that it was impossible and improbable that you 
 acted as a private, and you declare that " no officer of the army who is n-orthy 
 to hold commission would consent to serve in the ranks with his own men, to 
 increase a naval command." Perhaps so. I difl!er from you; but I have proved 
 that you did that very thing — that is, that you cnnseiited, nay, offered. But you 
 say you violated your engagement ! This is hardly worth while, but it affords 
 occasion to notice the very elaborate argument by which you are made to sus- 
 
 * See letter of Capt. Myers in Appendix. 
 
21 
 
 tain your assertion that you went in command of the soldiers, and to remark 
 how completely the argument is overset by the simple fact that you did not go 
 thus. It would seem almost that you could not have even read that last letter 
 to which your name is signed, so extraordinary are the violations of truth, or 
 the lapses of memory which it develops. Here is a monstrous one that shows 
 your recollection is not good even from the 6th to the 18th of July — 12 days. 
 Under the latter date you tell me, in order to account for the long neglect of 
 this matter, that you did not know that such a statement (that wliich you im- 
 peach) had ever been made, or you certainly would not have been taunted with 
 twenty years' delay. You had forgotten that on the Gth you wrote that you 
 had been frequently advised to come out with a statement on the subject, but 
 that you thought it a small matter, not important enough to interest the public. 
 Controversialists should have their facts settled, or good memories, or not 
 change their amanuenses . 
 
 You are right, sir, in saying that a report may be amended by its author, 
 even alter it " becomes history ;" but then it must be upon ample evidence, 
 and full conviction of its inaccuracy — and never upon such testimony as yours 
 is proved in the case discussed. 
 
 Your distinction is quite right, also, between limitations in law and in honor • 
 but you see it does not apply here. What I said was, that it was too late to 
 alter a well proved report upon the appeal of "a single and not uninterested 
 witness," who had tacitly confirmed it at the time ; and the new evidence bears 
 me out. These are slisht points, and you will pardon the desultory character 
 of my notices — I take up the topics as I turn the leaves. 
 
 Your complaint about your prize ticket is answered by yourself in the record 
 that when you received the ticket, the regulations of the navy allowed me to 
 give you only a private's ticket ; but that when those were changed, I gave you 
 a captain's. By the way, you appear to make no account of the favor. I may 
 have done wrong in that case, and it is possible that in allowing private Tow- 
 son a captain's share, I did injustice to Mr. Watts and the rest, who, or their 
 representatives, may have a claim upon you or me for it. But I might plead 
 that I admired what I thought your gallantry in waving your rank to seek dan- 
 ger, and that my feelings influenced me, as when in my report I named you be- 
 fore even Prestman, whom your general made your real commander, and 
 Roach, who was in the boat with myself, both of whom have been presented 
 warmly to the War Department, who hold a high place in my recollection, whom 
 I am proud to claim as my personal friends, and who are now uncoupled with 
 the service.* You have shown me my error, but this might answer your ques- 
 tion as to my reason for changing your ticket. 
 
 B'.it I will give you the real explanation. You misunderstood, or misrepre- 
 sented me, as you have done in so many other cases. What I told you was, 
 that when I gave you a private's ticket, I understood the regulations to allow you 
 no other ; but that it afterwards occurred to me that a part of the pri?- money 
 belonged to grades of rank not represented, and I resolved, therelore, to allow 
 you an officer's ticket. You had no absolute right to it, but I was willing to do 
 you a favor. That is the real state of the case, yet from that favor has grown 
 one of your principal charges against me. 
 
 As to your alledged refusal once to take my hand, I have not the slightest re- 
 collection of aiiy such occurrence, and there is the best reason for placing little 
 coufidence in yours. * 
 
 * See letters of Ensign Prestman and Major Roach, in the Appendix, '' 
 4 
 
22 
 
 I do not believe the assertion. The only conversation between us that I re- 
 member on such a subject, was in Washington,- twelve or fifteen years ago, 
 when you requested a conference, spoke of my recent coldness, asked if it was 
 not on account of a then recent publication in a Pittsburg paper (stating in gene- 
 ral terms that justice had not been done you) and learning that it was, yon dis 
 avowed all agency or part in the matter. Upon that disavowal, I gave you my 
 hand, which you accepted eagerly, and, to my knowledge, nothing else of the 
 kind ever occurred between us. 
 
 You ask how I know that General Scott never reported concerning my expe- 
 dition. In two ways : the report was never seen, and General Scott would 
 never have done me such discourtesy as to report concerning my subordinates, 
 except as from me. The point was trivial and incidental, but with the fatality 
 which has marked your every step in this affair, it has flung more suspicion 
 upon you. 
 
 You say that he wrote a private letter of such a nature as to procure for you 
 the brevet by which you obtained your present rank. I am sorry to hear it. 
 There was thrift in view, then, if you withlield what you call your report from 
 the commander of the expedition! If you had confided your merits to him, 
 they would have been published under the correction of your companions, and 
 you would have received your exact share of glory, enhanced only by his par- 
 tiality. But you did better — you made a private report of your achievements to 
 General Scott that was never published, and which none could contradict ; and 
 believing you, as we did when we accepted you as a volunteer private, he so 
 represented it, of course upon your testimony, as to obtain for you the brevet 
 which has made you a general officer I It looks like a piece of skillful manage- 
 ment I 
 
 You compare the difliculties encountered by the two boats, and remark that 
 though mine undertook what seemed to be the more arduous and dangerous task, 
 it did not prove to be so ; and your reasons are, that I carried the Detroit with 
 slight loss, and speedily, while Mr. Watts had a hard fight, and incurred great 
 loss. I had the honor, sir, to explain, in my former letter, why a surprise in 
 such a case may succeed, or fail, and beg to refer you to the passage. You in- 
 timate that our enemy was commanded by a provincial officer, less skillful 
 than one of the line; true, but if you measure thus, remember that my fifty 
 men beat fifty-six, and took the heavily armed vessel with little loss, while the 
 fifty, of whom you were one, had but twelve antagonists — citizens commanded 
 by a citizen — in a merchant vessel, to make all the slaughter of which you com- 
 plain. 
 
 On another topic, which you bring in, I can scarcely speak calmly. Sir, do 
 you not perfectly know — have you not ever known — that, until after the cap- 
 ture of the Detroit was completely eflfected, and the sword of her commander 
 W^as yielded, both thatoflicer and myself were entirely ignorant of even each 
 other's existence ? and that, despite the distant connection by marriage between 
 my half brother and him, we had never met, nor seen each other, nor had the 
 slighftesit commimication ? Sir, you must have known all this well, and the na- 
 ture of yoitir reference to that accidental and unknown connection is one of the 
 least worthy features in your letter. 
 
 I remember, in a letter of Commodore Perry's, a. remark of this kind : '• I 
 would not allow myself to come to a decided opinion that an officer who had on 
 a former occasion so handsomely conducted himself (as I then, in common with 
 the public, had been led to f:iippose Captain EUiott had) could possibly be guilty," 
 
23 
 
 &c. It was a singular expression that ! Had " bee7t led to suppose ."' WTio had 
 flung the (Joicdt ? I have never found a clue. You tell me that you have been tam- 
 pered with by Commodore Perry's friends — i/oii now fling an impeachment of 
 my conduct on that " former occasion I" You tell me that you " always thought 
 it strange that the Detroit should have been captured so quickly," &c. You 
 kept it well from me I Were you, then, the incendiary that kindled dissension 
 between Perry and me ? — that turned our frank friendship into hatred on his 
 part ? Were you the viper that stung? — was it you that crept between us, and 
 embittered our kindly feelings ? Were you t/uis avenging the slight part which 
 only could be assigned you in that enterprize, which still haunts you? I can- 
 not believe it — it is impossible that one who possesses your reputation could be 
 guilty of this inconceivable baseness ! There was no cause, no sufiicient mo- 
 tive, for such tremendous wickedness. We do not expect such things from the 
 frank, gallant soldier. And yet the act was of a class to be done by the creep- 
 ing, sly, profit-making spirits who hang around commanders, and make private 
 reports of their own brave deeds, and get brevets for them. But no — it could 
 not be you. Yet I would give much to know who it was. The foul wrong has 
 clung to me to this day, and I am not patient under it. 
 
 One point escaped me, in your former communication, which can be here 
 answered. You say that "if Mr. Watts or the seamen had remained, or re- 
 turned after the cargo was landed, we should have been able to have brought 
 the vessel into port." Mr. Watts and his brave companions had a more noble 
 employment than removing furs; they were at the battery at Black Rock, un- 
 der my immediate direction, in desperate fight, and many of them left their 
 gory bodies there as testimonials of the desperate conflict of that morning. 
 
 But to have done with this. I consider, sir, that you are set on by my ene- 
 mies to bait me, or that your own vanity has instigated you to make yourself 
 gain at my expense, and that you pursue your aim in a spirit of determined hos- 
 tility. I thought so in reading your first letter ; but the hazard to yourself was 
 so fearful that I presumed you would have prudence enough to desist when that 
 was pointed out to you. I have observed less restraint now, as is natural 
 toward a determined foe, but I still think you will have caution enough to 
 avoid publication. If you have not, I shall simply publish this correspondence. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 On July 29th a letter was received from Genl. Towson, bearing his frank 
 and saal, which evidently was not such as it had been intimated to him would 
 only be received. It was, therefore, returned unopened with the following : 
 
 f. S. Ship Constitution, Harbor of / 
 New York, July 29, 1835. \ 
 
 To General Nathan Totfson, 
 
 Sir — I informed you in my letter of the 23d, that I should with that close 
 the correspondence. The tenor of that paper was such, that any further com- 
 munication from you must, to be received, be of that kind that is sent, not 
 through the post-office and sealed, but by a friend. Your letter, mailed on the 
 27th, is therefore returned unopened. 
 
 (Signed) J. D. ELLIOTT, 
 
2* 
 
 The following note was delivered on board the Constitution, August 17th. by 
 Dr. Macauly, M'ith the observation that he wished to make some remarks rela- 
 tive to it, and a request that Com. Elliott would appoint a friend with whom he 
 might confer. To this Com. Elliott replied, by introducing him to Col. Canonge, 
 who was waiting in his after cabin in readiness for such an emergency. Com. 
 Elliott had been, at that time, three days under sailing orders, and was lying 
 off Staten Island, 
 
 New York, August 17, 1835. 
 Sir — My friend, Doctor Macauly, waits on you with a proposition from me. 
 If you accede to it, he is authorized, on my part, to make the arrangements 
 for our meeting. 
 
 With due respect, &c. 
 (Signed) N. TOWSON. 
 
 Commodore J. D. Elliott. 
 
 The note below was sent by Col. Canonge as a reply to the above, in con- 
 formity with the advice of that gentleman, after his interview with Dr. Macauly, 
 who left the ship, it was understood, fully comprehending that a meeting was 
 arranged for the following morning at 6 o'clock; all preparations for which 
 had been made — place, distance, time and arms being specified. Col. Canonge 
 and Dr. Macauly went to town together to confer with Gen. Towson, 
 
 TJ. S. Ship Constitution, 
 August 17, 183-3. 
 
 } 
 
 Sir — The note which you presented to me to-day, I can only receive as a 
 challenge. If this is intended, you are referred to my friend, Col. Canonge, 
 for other necessary arrangements. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 (Signed) J. D, ELLIOTT. 
 
 Dr. Macmdy, present. 
 
 The affair was subsequently brought to an unexpected close by the following 
 reply, which was brought on board the frigate by Col. Canonge, after his inter- 
 view with Gen. Towson. 
 
 New York, August 17, 1835. 
 Sir — I was not authorized by General Towson to offer his note to you as a 
 challenge, but to make the following proposition ; " That you should select an 
 officer or other friend, who, with myself, should decide, under the existing 
 circumstances, the party who should send the challenge ; and further, should 
 he be the challenged party, that he waves any advantage from that circum- 
 stance." These propositions you rejected. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obed't serv't, 
 
 (Signed) C. MACAULY. 
 
 Commodore Elliott, U. S. Fri irate Con.ftitit.tioii. 
 
25 
 
 The letter to Dr. Holland was sent, as will be seen from the date, in the 
 interval between Com. Elliott's returning Genl. Towson's letter of July 29th, 
 and his receiving the message by Dr. Macauly on the 17th of August — an 
 interval so long as to warrant the opinion that Genl. Towson was inclined to 
 carry the matter no farther. 
 
 It may be well to observe, that Col. Canonge. on the receipt of Gen. Tow- 
 son's last note, returned on board the Constitution during the night, and ad- 
 vised Com. Elliott that, having done all in his power to bring the affair to an 
 issue, he had now only to go to sea, leaving the farther defence of his reputation 
 to Col. Canonge, 
 
 TJ. S. Ship Constitution, (^ 
 
 New York, Aug. 11, 1835. ^ 
 
 To William Holland, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir — About to sail on a cruise of some duration, I cannot depart with- 
 out expressing to you my high sens9 of the friendly zeal with which the New 
 York Times has repelled the attacks directed against me by a partisan press. 
 I concur with you in the ofMnion, that political feelings, if not political views, 
 have contributed, with private hostility, to prompt those attacks ; and the friends 
 of the administration will, I trust, note with approbation the able defence for 
 which personally I feel so grateful. 
 
 The numerous quarters whence these arrows were launched, and their simul- 
 taneous appearance, indicate a concert of action, which could only result from 
 some deliberate plan directed by concealed agents, and such I believe to have 
 existed. You will perceive from the correspondence, copies of which are en- 
 closed, that wliile your press was defending me against those whom my situa- 
 tion precluded my noticing in person, another branch of the scheme was in 
 operation which I could meet myself The application of General Towson 
 was so extraordinary, the claim so unfounded, that I cannot doubt his being 
 instigated by some of those who have banded themselves against me. The 
 strong suspicion that the recent public and private attacks upon me were 
 prompted from the same quarter, will probably appear to you to be well nigh 
 justified, if you compare a passage in General Towson's second letter, with a 
 passage in one of the articles of the Courier and Enquirer. I mean that, as- 
 serting that family connections of mine were engaged in that war on the side 
 of the enemy. My reply to General Towson will show you how idle is such 
 an assertion : but the facts, that the alledged connection has, never so far as I 
 know, and I .should be likely to know it, been stated or alluded to, in any 
 newspaper or publication whatever — that the empty gossip had probably been 
 heard by very few only — and that now, for the first time, it should be brought 
 up by General Towson, in a letter to me, almost simultaneously by the Cou- 
 rier and Enquirer in its columns — certainly afford plausible groimds for the 
 idea, that on that point at least, if not throughout, the same hand directed the 
 attack in both quarters. 
 
 As to the officer alluded to, although my enemy, I am bound to say that his 
 conduct, so far from being suspeeted by liis countrymen, was, I have heard, con- 
 sidered by them to deserve the compliment of a sword and a dinner, which 
 were paid him at Montreal. 
 
 You are welcome to show the correspondence to any of your friends, and in- 
 deed I know no reason on my part, for objecting to its publication, if that be 
 deemed advisable. I have now allowed General Towson twelve days since my 
 last note to him, for any ulterior steps he might choose to take ; and as he is 
 
26 
 
 silent, I presume he intends to go no lurther. For the rest, he certainly has 
 no right to claim the suppression of the correspondence, and he distinctly inti- 
 mates in liis last, an intention to make a statement on the subject of it ; whe- 
 ther he has thought better of it, and abandoned his purpose, or whether he 
 withholds it only until I shall have sailed, is of course matter for conjecture 
 alone. But, in any case, he certainly has no claims on my forbearance. I put 
 the correspondence in your hands, to be used as you shall judge proper. 
 
 With the reiteration of my grateful acknowledgments of your kindness, ac- 
 cept also assurances of the high respect and esteem with which I remain, 
 
 Yours truly, 
 (Signed) . J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 On Monday, the 19th, the day after Commodore Elliott's sailing for the Me- 
 diterranean, the following paragraph appeared in the New York Courier and 
 Enquirer : — 
 
 " Monday, 11, P. M. — We have just been informed, that a friend of General 
 Towson waited upon Elliott, on board the Constitution, yesterday afternoon, 
 and submitted the following proposition : — 
 
 '■ ' General Towson authorizes me to propose, that Commodore Elliott should 
 select an officer or other friend, who with myself shall decide, under existing 
 circumstances, which party shall challenge ; and further, should he (General 
 Towson.) be the challenged party, he agrees to wave any advantage arising 
 from that position.' 
 
 " This proposition, after an hour's deliberation, was peremptorily rejected." 
 
 In consequence of the above paragraph, Col. Canonge called (as Commodore 
 Elliott was subsequently informed,) on the Editor of the New York Courier 
 and Enquirer, and caused the following explanation to be inserted in the same : 
 
 Copied from the New York American. 
 
 " Sir : — I hasten to correct a statement which appears in the Courier and 
 Enquirer of tliis morning, which does injustice to Com. Elliott. I bore the 
 propositions from Gen. Towson to Com. Elliott, which, at the request of the 
 Commodore, were reduced to writing; upon a very short consultation with a 
 friend, they were returned by the Commodore, who declined receiving them, 
 but expressed his willingness to consider the note I had delivered as a challenge ; 
 a communication to which effect he made in writing. Having no authority from 
 Gen. Towson to proceed further in the matter, in case the propositions were 
 declined, an answer was given to the Commodore to that effect. Gen. Towson 
 has desired that the statement should be made, and requests its immediate pub- 
 lication, as an act of justice to Com. Elliott. 
 
 " Very respectfully, 
 
 " Your obedient servant, 
 
 " P. MACAULY. 
 
 ^'' Friday Morning., Aug.Vr^.'''' 
 
 " The following are the propositions referred to, in the above letter. 
 
 " ' Gen. Towson authorizes me to propose, that Com. Elliott should select an 
 officer, or other friend, who with myself shall decide, under existing circimi- 
 stances, which party shall challenge ; and further, should he (Gen. Towson.) be 
 the challenged party, he agrees to wave any advantage arising from that po- 
 sition.' " 
 
 This proposition was delivered, unopened by Commodore Elliott, to Colonel 
 Canonge, who directed the Commodore to reply to it by an unconditional ac- 
 ceptance of it, as a challenge, as shown by the correspondence above. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 Head Quarters, Lewistowjj, Sept. 25, 1812. 
 ,S(";-, — I have this moment received your letter of yesterday, stating Lieut. 
 Elliott has proposed to make an attempt to cut out one of the vessels at Erie, 
 and has requested your assistance by men, &c., for the enterprize. 
 
 You will please to furnish Lieut. Elliott immediately wdth men, arms, ammu- 
 nition, boats and implements of every kind to the uttermost of his wishes, and 
 the means you can possibly command to render the enterprize successful. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 S. VAN RENSSELAER. 
 Major Genl. Hall, Contmiand'uig Black Rock. 
 
 He.\d Quarters, Lewistown, Sept. 25, 1812. 
 Sir., — I enclose you a copy of a letter I have this day sent to Major-General 
 Hall, with my best wishes that success may crown your enterprize. 
 I am, sir, with great respect, 
 
 Your' most obedient servant, 
 
 Signed, S. VAN RENSSELAER, Major-General. 
 
 Lieut. Elliott, of the U. S. Navy, Buffalo. 
 
 • KiNDERHOOK, JuLY 15, 1835. 
 
 Dear Sir, — I think it was on the night of the 10th inst., that Col. Schuyler, 
 then commanding the brigade, and Cols. Mead and Stranahan's regiment of the 
 Militia were informed in my presence by the Militia patrols, that the British 
 were crossing the Niagara, both above and below us, in great numbers. The 
 colonel then requested me to take a few with me, and select a station of the 
 river where I could see all that passed on it. I posted myself on the bank a 
 little to the north of Genl. Porter's house, and immediately sent a man to camp 
 to inform the colonel that there was no movement on the river, in that direc- 
 tion, as far as the eye could see, it being a light night. I continued to despatch 
 a man with the like information every half hour until about 10 o'clock, when I 
 heard the movement of the troops on the road, challenged, and was answered by 
 the adjutant of the 1.3th infantry, whose voice I well knew, saying '-the enemy 
 has landed above and below us in great force, and we are on the retreat." 
 Having left my horse with Genl. Porter's servant the previous day, I hastened 
 there and gave the alarm to you and the general in the very words I had received 
 it from Adjutant Eldridge, and while in conversation with yourself and Gen'l 
 
28 
 
 Porter, neither of you believing the report to be true, a detachment of 
 my regiment, Capts. Spraul and Martin's Company passing, I was requested to 
 join them, which I did. ****** 
 
 Signed, M. MYERS, 
 
 Late Captain 13tk U. S. Lifantry. 
 
 October 8th. 
 ■StV, — Mr. Prestman will bring you the aid we can give ; he is a gallant young 
 man, and I request that he may be allowed to accompany you. 
 The God who protects the brave, guard you and give you success I 
 
 Signed, ALEXANDBR SMYTH. 
 
 Lievt. Elliott. 
 
 New Port, R. I., August 27, 1834. 
 
 Sir, — On the morning previous to the expedition, Capt. Elliott called at Head 
 Quarters, and stated to the general that a detachment of sailors had arrived at 
 Buffalo on the last evening, and that he thought he could capture the two British 
 vessels, then lying under Fort Erie, if the general would grant him the aid of 
 a small detachment of soldiers, to which the general acceded, and directed me 
 to detail the number of soldiers required. Capt. Elliott particularly requested 
 that no officer of the army might be detailed to accompany the soldiers, who 
 would, in virtue of his rank, co.mma^d any naval officer who might have 
 charge of either of the boats. This request was also acceded to, and in obedi- . 
 ence to orders, I selected from the infantry thirty or forty men. (I forget the 
 exact number,) and placed them under the command of Ensign Prest.man, of 
 the 5th Regiment of Infantry, who it was intended by me should be the only com- 
 missioned officer of the army sent with the troops. But on going to the camp of 
 the artillery, luider the command of Lieut. Col. Scott, to select a few men more, 
 I then met Captains Towson and Barker, of that corps, who, on hearing the 
 object of my visit, expressed a great desire to go with the expedition, and on 
 my stating to them that their rank necessarily precluded them, they, with their 
 characteristic solicitude to engage in any perilous adventure, volunteered to go 
 in any capacity whatever. Under these circumstances, I consented to take one 
 of them, and decided which of the two should go. by hazard, and it fell to the 
 ' lot of Towson to go. * * * * * * 
 
 One of the vessels grounded close on our side and was secured, the other 
 groimded on the side of Squaw Island, next to the enemy. Capt. Elliott caused 
 the detachment and all the prisoners to be landed, and on the ibllowing night 
 the vessel which had grounded on Squaw Island, was set on fire by Capt. Cham- 
 bers, of the 5th Infantry, and destroyed. * * * * 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 JAMES BANKHEAD. 
 
29 
 
 The following letters were written in reply to letters addressed to the authors 
 by Capt. Elliott :— 
 
 " New Castle, June 27, 1834. 
 
 " Dear Sir, — I have received your letter under date of the 19th of the pre- 
 sent month, and regret to learn that you have been assailed by the republica- 
 tion of certain offensive charges. The several high commands, and important 
 duties repeatedly assigned to you, are full evidence that the government and 
 countay place every confidence in your patriotism, talents and valor ; and if I 
 may take the liberty of offering a suggestion, it would be that it best comports 
 with your dignity and self-respect to rest your cause here. You particularly 
 call my attention to the capture of two English vessels under the guns of Fort 
 Erie in 1812, and say, ' as you were acting utider my imviediale command at 
 the tiine, will you be kind enough to state to me, as soo7i as possible, the matters 
 and things relative to that affair ?' 
 
 " The length of time that has elapsed, and the entire change which has taken 
 place in my habits and associations, render such reminiscences difficult. Ire- 
 collect that the attack was made at night, by two boats, in one of which I was 
 with you. The British vessels referred to were taken, one of them brought 
 over to the American shore, and the other, grounding on an island in the river, 
 was destroyed. It appears to me that the facts belonging to the affair speak for 
 themselves. The planning and conducting of the enterprise unquestionably 
 pertained to you, and by every rule of military service, the credit of it is your 
 due. 
 
 " Most respectfully, your ob't serv't, 
 
 " S. W. PRESTMAN." 
 
 " PniLADELrHiA, June 27, 1834. 
 " Capt. J. D. Elliott, U. S. N. 
 
 " Dear Sir, — I received your letter of the 19th inst. several days since, but 
 have been too much indisposed to reply to it. In allusion to ' la?ig?tage itsed 
 by the late Commodore Ferry, in 1818, relative to your conduct in the capture 
 of the British brigs Detroit and Caledonia, from under the guns of Fort Erie 
 in 1812,' you ask for my impressions of that affair. I never heard that any 
 one but yourself suggested or directed the expedition. It was undoubtedly ex- 
 ecuted with skill and bravery, or it could not have succeeded. As I was acting 
 under your immediate command, and taking the helm from your cockswain, 
 and laying your boat alongside the Detroit, boarding her side by side with you, 
 and during the fight and subsequent cannonade with the British forts, I was con- 
 stantly near you, I am authorized to, and cheerfully testify, sir, to your bra- 
 very on the occasion. 
 
 "If we had been defeated, the odium would have attached to you alone. 
 We were successful, and you received all the credit, and I regret that any po- 
 litical occurrence of the present day should tend to disparage your exertions in 
 the late war. 
 
 " With much respect and esteem, 
 
 '• I remain, sir, your ob't serv't, 
 
 ■' I. ROACH, 
 '.J . " Late Major U. S. Artillery." 
 
 5 
 
i W46 
 
 «« 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 > <^*,'-^\/ %-^-'%o^ *H.'^^\/ 
 
 900KBINOINC U 'f C" •!:f£:55S'Kl' ^ «i^ *x,n?P>^-' %-