wtxmvimmwsiiWMi 
 
 mmmm^jimmmimmmm 
 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 DDDD5Qfl2^5A 
 
 imi!iii;i:thH]Biwi,!;i:'i')i)wiit:!^<y:i:i'':;:in;i'ii., 
 
f*\A 
 
 
 
 n^. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .*'"'''» 
 
 '^bv^ 
 
 o « 
 
 ^i • ^o iV' ♦ ((C\8» A.* "^fv cl* 
 
 ' ^""^ 
 
 ^ :-'^^\ % S' .'-^ 
 
 
 
%^^ 
 
 y ♦ 
 
 
 , o 
 
 I X 
 
 o 
 
 
 • -"^^ ' 
 
 
 
 % '^ 
 
 .0 
 
 
 
 
 
 .•^^ 
 
 ^" ^^'^<^ -.'^^^. Z^"^- 
 
 ■s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 * • 
 
 ° ■^^^^i. •'WWW* c,^*^ - i"=?jiai^« A^' 
 
 
 
 v' V » ' " "' 
 
 r/ . ^' 
 
*^y^^e<f^^7<^ ^ 
 
 
 <p 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE, ^e. 
 
t < 
 
 i « 
 
 
 WASHINGTON CITY, 
 
 August IQth, 1835, 
 My friends will see, on reading the following 
 Correspondence, that I am compelled to make it 
 public. It was my wish that Commodore Elliott 
 should have done me justice, in correcting statements 
 that he knows do not correspond with facts ; but he 
 declines, and I am under the necessity of doing it 
 myself. 
 
 N. TOWSON. 
 
CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 Washington City, July 6, 1835. 
 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 
 from me a statement of the services performed by the artil- 
 lery, under my command, in the capture, of the brigs Detroit 
 and Caledonia ; and of the circumstances under which the 
 latter was saved from being burnt, to prevent re-capture. I un- 
 derstood the information was wanted for publication 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 un- 
 der 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, alto- 
 gether of an unfriendly character, and I thought that a publi- 
 cation, at that time, contradicting the article in the Courier, 
 which was intended to do you honor, would have the appear- 
 ance of taking an unfair advantage of the feeling 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 removes the 
 objection sooner than I anticipated. It occurs to me, how- 
 ever, that it will be most agreeable to you to make the cor- 
 rections yourself, and to give to my command the credit to 
 which it is entitled. The object of this communication is, 
 therefore, to ascertain from you which course you would 
 prefer. 
 
 Your official report, dated October 9, 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 circumstances 
 
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 previously prepared for the purpose. With these 
 boats, fifty men in each, and under circumstances very disad- 
 vantageous, my men having scarcely had time to refresh them- 
 selves after a fatiguing march of 500 miles, I put off from the 
 mouth of Buffalo creek, at one o'clock the following morning, 
 and at three I was along side the vessels. In the space of 
 ten minutes I had the prisoners secured, the topsails sheeted 
 home, and the vessels under way." 
 
 From tliis, 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, un- 
 der your superintendence and immediate orders, and that the 
 part performed by the volunteers from the amiy was not suf- 
 ficiently important to be particularly noticed ; Avhereas you 
 will recollect that the night was dark, and that the boats sepa- 
 rated immediately after leaving Buffalo creek, and did 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 ques- 
 tioned, 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 not having brought the' 
 boat nearer in shore. The pilot insisted on the practicability 
 of reaching the brig, notwithstanding the current and the time 
 lost in hesitating about making the attempt. It tlien became 
 necessary, to prevent an abandonment of the enterprise so far 
 as we were concerned, that I should take the responsibiUty 
 and command. We reached the brig with difficulty, and un- 
 der disadvantageous circumstances. After a sharp conflict we 
 succeeded in carrying 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 con- 
 sisted of twenty-nine artillerists, of whom one was killed and 
 nine wounded, making tlie aggregate as stated. 
 
 After mentioning the circumstances which compelled you 
 to anchor the Detroit under the fire of the enemy, and the 
 impracticability of getting her into harbor, you give the particu- 
 
5 
 
 lars 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 subsequent re-capture. 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 batteries 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, through 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 re- 
 mained 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, liad 
 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 combus- 
 tibles, 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 re-captured. 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 con- 
 sidered incorrect, or not sufficiently particular in its details, it 
 was not mentioned to you at the time, and why it has been 
 pemiitted to remain thus long without explanation or cor- 
 rection? 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, Lieutenant Colonel Scott, 
 and that I could not communicate officially with you on the 
 subject without disrespect to him. Having thus declined to 
 
6 
 
 rurnish you my statement of the facts, I had no right tocom- 
 jjlain of the omissions in your report, as you could have had 
 no personal knowledge of some of the most important cir- 
 cumstances 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 pro- 
 bably correct ; but as attention has recently been called to the 
 subject, hy 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 Schmuck, the only offi- 
 cer who shared with me the duty of making the statement, 
 and the responsibility of delaying it. 
 
 You are unquestionably entitled to all the credit due for 
 planning the enterprise, 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 
 seamen 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 thirteen wounded, (two mor- 
 tally) that she was captured ; while the Detroit permitted you 
 to get along side before you were discovered, and to board 
 her almost without resistance.* 
 
 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 
 quit the latter, and the British got temporary possession of 
 her, Mr. Watts left the former, taking with liim 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 re-capture ; but that 
 the person you sent was not permitted to execute your order; 
 
 *I have always thought it strange that the Detroit, a British vessel of 
 war, laying near an enemy, should have been captured by surprise, more 
 especially as she must have known from the firing of the Caledonia, the 
 hostile character of the boat she bad just hailed. It was certainly fortu- 
 nate for us that the person in command was a provincial, and not a regu- 
 lar officer of the British Navy, as I bad, until lately, believed. 
 
and that the brig thus saved, formed part of that gallant fleet 
 that achieved the glorious and important victory on Lake 
 Erie. 
 
 You will oblige nie by letting me hear from you as soon 
 after the receipt of this as your convenience will permit. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 N. TOWSON. 
 
 [ Duplicate. ] 
 
 U. S. Frigate Constitution, 
 
 New York Harbor, July 12, 1835. 
 To General Nathan Towson, 
 
 Sir : Your communication of the 6th instant was duly re- 
 ceived, and I have given it the careful examination to which 
 it was entitled, on account of its subject, and of the distin- 
 guished source from which it proceeds. I appreciate the deli- 
 cacy which restrained you from moving in the aftair during my 
 absence, and which offers me the option as to the mode in which 
 it shall be made public 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 pub- 
 lication, and it is not my practice, nor would it accord with my 
 feelings to force public attention, unnecessarily, to actions in 
 which I have been engaged, in the service of my country. — 
 Your position in this case is different from mine, and a publi- 
 cation by you will not be indelicate nor obtrusive. 
 
 Your letter complains that in my official report, dated Octo- 
 ber 9th, 1812, 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 ser- 
 vices of the party of artillerists which you accompanied, in 
 one of the boats, and you request that I will supply the defi- 
 ciency now. There is no man who more duly appreciates 
 your high services and reputation than myself, and no man 
 who would more reluctantly hold 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, 
 undertake upon the evidence of a single, and not disinterested 
 witness, to alter an official report, made upon the testimony, 
 and under the correction, of all the actors in the affafr ; — a re- 
 
8 
 
 port thus made, and that lias stood so long unquestioned, car- 
 ries authority, which 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 J 
 now hear for the first time, though twenty-three years have 
 passed since the occurrence, and my repetition of your state- 
 ment would add nothing to its intrinsic weight. Besides, if my 
 intervention had any influence whatever, it might rather tend 
 to diminish that weight, because I should feel bound to speak 
 as the defender of the fame of the gallant dead, which your 
 statement in effect impeaches. 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 his 
 old commander ; — it is late now for any to tarnish it. It ap- 
 pears then to me that if you continue to desire the publica- 
 tion of your statement, it will proceed most properly from 
 yourself, and I will cheerfully ofibr here such comments as 
 occur to me upon its contents. 
 
 There seems throughout your letter, and especially the lat- 
 ter portion of it, a disposition to depreciate the merit of the 
 enterprise referred to, and to decry the part taken by the con- 
 ductor. I am reluctant to suppose 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 gal- 
 lant services ; that I did so in your ovm case, that official re- 
 port itself bears witness. You are 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, until 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, Presstman, and 
 others, besides that of your commander, Mr. Watts, who so 
 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 there sufficient fame, and invite me to amend the defective 
 report of the action, you expressly defend me fi:om any pos- 
 sible imputation of injustice. You say, that when 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, you declined to make 
 iiny, except to your superior officer, then Lieutenant Colonel 
 Scott, and that you have tlierefore 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 mv 
 part ; the admission is the more generous as, (you will paroon 
 the observation,) it developes, not merely a misappreliension 
 of your duty, but an act of insubordination, the consequences 
 of which, to yourself, and your corps, you are now, after 
 twenty-three years, endeavoring to remedy. Had you report- 
 ed 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 myself; 
 you went to obey, and to report to me ; and your refusal' 
 where the latter was required, w^as as much a breach of duty 
 as would disobedience have been. Were it not for that step, 
 your present communication would have been unnecessary! 
 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 militmy duty, to 
 ascribe his 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 admission of your having refused to report 
 to me, w^hile it must completely exonerate me from any cen- 
 sure on account of the omission alleged, does not so clerj-Iy 
 effect the object for which it was designed. You offer it as 
 the answer to two questions, thus stated by yourself: " You 
 will probably ask why, if you official report was considered 
 mcorrect, or not sufficiently particular in its details, it was not 
 mentioned to you at the time ; and why it has been permitted 
 to remam thus long without explanation or correction ?" It 
 would certainly be very natural to ask those questions; and 
 impartial observers 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 Avho alone was to make the report which you now seek 
 
to correct. Your withholding the report may accsunt well 
 enough for the alleged 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 h 
 a "sacred duty" to your companions to adjust it now. 
 
 As to the second of the two questions, the answer seems 
 particularly defective, nor do the further explanations ojSered, 
 appear less so. It seemed a small matter, you say, not worth 
 public attention. Has the death of Captain Schmuck 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 nothing of the details of the 
 action, nor of the subordinates in the enterprise ; 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 have been before the world all that time, 
 and open all that time to notice and animadversion. The an- 
 swer to the second question will appear to the reader, quite as 
 unsatisfactory as the answer to the first. I have always respect- 
 ed, 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 
 siurprised, 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, that of capturing a trading vessel, defended by 
 twelve men, including officers, with two small guns, and smal) 
 arms, only ; while I chose for my own object, a public armed 
 vessel, mounting six guns, with a crew of fifty-six men, direct- 
 ed by naval discipline. How long your boat was occupiecf 
 by her task you can best tell. That both boats succeeded . 
 the public know ; but that our effecting a surprise implies the 
 absence of resistence, is very far from the fact. I was myself 
 assailed by three men aimed with cutlasses at the moment 
 when I sprang on the deck. 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.. 
 
11 
 
 nor attempting to refute your communication, but merely 
 touching here and there, upon such points as appear singular, 
 or prominent, and I do not therefore attempt 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 stand- 
 ing and character, with whom I have been associated in youth- 
 ful enterprise ; and I trust that no real cause will ever occur, 
 to cloud the friendly relations which have so long, as I flatter- 
 ed myself, 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 accme to you, from 
 bringing it before the public. But of that I am not to be the 
 judge, nor will I obtrude aiiy advice on the subject. As I 
 remarked in the commencement, these observations are entirely 
 at your disposal. 
 
 I have the honor to be, respectfully. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 Washington City, July 18, 1835. 
 To Commodore J. D. Elliott, New York: 
 
 Sir: I have received your letter of the 12th, in answer to 
 mine of the 6th instant. I regret that you should have mis- 
 understood my object in addressing you. It was not to com- 
 plain of your official report, and request you to supply the de- 
 ficiency now It was, simply, to offer you the opportunity of 
 correcting, yourself, 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 the 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 the lan- 
 guage 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 
 
12 
 
 would it accord with your feelings, to force public attention, 
 unnecessarily, to actions, in which you have been engaged, 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 ano- 
 ther) in your saying, it is none of mine. Some unknown 
 person has recently sent me a newspaper, printed in Ohio, in 
 which there is a paragraph or two relating to this very sub* 
 ject, giving me credit that belongs to you. This I intend to 
 correct, believing it would be as dishonorable in me to wear 
 your iionors, as it would be 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 ; be- 
 lieving you would prefer communicatmg, yourself, such of 
 them to the public, as you knciv to he correct. You knew, 
 for instance, that you did not communicate with our boat after 
 we separated on leaving Buffalo Creek. You knew our boat 
 boarded and carried the Caledonia, after a sharp conflict, be- 
 fore 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 slie would have been burnt, if I had permit- 
 ted your order to be executed. Tliese 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 accoimt of the current, could not 
 have been known to you, unless communicated by Mr. Watts, 
 and it was not, therefore, expected you would say any thing 
 about it. You knew the credit for commanding, in person, 
 th3 boarders that captured that vessel, belonged either to Mr. 
 Watts or myself, and not to you ; and this was all it was ex- 
 pected you would state. I have no wish to do Mr. Watts in- 
 justice ; — it was his opinion the brig could not be approached, 
 and, although the event proved he was wrong, the difticulty 
 in doing it, sho\\'ed tliat he had good grounds for his belief. 
 
 In your " comments" on my letter, you say: " It here 
 
13 
 
 seems throughout your letter, and especially the latter portion 
 of [it,] a disposition to depreciate the merits of the enter- 
 prise referred to, and to decry the part taken by its conductor. 
 I am reluctant to suppose this is prompted by any feelings a 
 kin to hospitality, [hostility?] and I regret to observe it."'' 1 
 will be candid with you on this 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 t1ie 
 circumstances under which 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 exe- 
 cute so hazardous an enterprise, as the boarding with an in- 
 ferior force, and capturing " a public armed brig, mountin^r 
 six guns, with a crew of fifty-six men, directed bv naval discip- 
 line." ' ^ 
 
 Some years past I was applied to by a personal friend of 
 Commodore PeiTy, for a statement of the facts contained in 
 the last paragraph, to be used to your prejudice in the contro- 
 versy then pending between you; but I refused to crive it 
 informing him that I had no " official claim on you,'' as he 
 supposed, for neglecting me in your report ; and that the fact 
 of your planning and undertaking so hazardous an enterprise, 
 removed from my mind all suspicion of what many of Com- 
 modore Perry's friends seemed to suppose had prevented your 
 aiding him in the action on Lake Erie, as he expected. Can- 
 dour requires me to say, that I then, and until lately, did 
 believe, the Detroit was commanded by a regular officer of 
 the British navy. If such was not the fact, and that the 
 commander was your relative, as I am informed, the enter- 
 prise, m my judgment, loses much of its daring character. 
 
 I did not expect, nor did 1 wisli any thing to be said in 
 correctmg the article of which I complain, that would detract 
 from the credit the public have awarded 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, althoucrh you 
 undertook that which appeared 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. Ii 
 was not your fault, but your good fortune, that your adversary 
 vvas not more vigilant— that he permitted you to make a prize 
 of him at the cost of one man " lost" and " one officer wound- 
 ed," mstead of annihilating you, as he had the power to do, 
 
14 
 
 with his superior force and advantages, and as 1 behave would 
 have done, had he been a regular officer of the British navy, 
 especially, after knowing, by what occurred to our boat, that 
 an enemy was near him. 
 
 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 altered 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 the merit 
 in relation to this matter, some of which, I think, belongs to 
 others. You think it too late to relinquish it, as the writer 
 has said nothing new of you, " he merely quoted from an ar- 
 ticle 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 account of time, by legisla- 
 tive enactments, but I believe there is no limitation known to 
 the moral code, or to courts of honor. Until I saw the pub- 
 lication, 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 although 
 1 deprived myself of the right to complain of the official in- 
 justice of the omissions in your report, I never 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 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 his 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." 
 
 How have you, sir, arrived at the certainty " that he 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 
 this distinguished officer was captured, he had no time to 
 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, [referring to a previous one,] I informed 
 
 "to' 
 
15 
 
 you of a conversation had with the Secretary upoB the sub- 
 ject of the capture of the British vessels from luider Fort 
 Erie, and of the distinguished part which you bore in that en- 
 terprise. He thought you entitled to a brevet. This was on 
 the way fi-om Philadelphia to Baltimore. At Washinoton 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 bv 
 which I obtained my present rank. 
 
 I must now call your attention to the charge of officers of 
 the army having served w ith 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 mv 
 pocket, and we separated. When I came to examine theni, 
 I found my rank was not recognised 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 Gen. 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, re- 
 marking at the same time, that when I embarked in the ex- 
 pedition, 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 complement of the wliole — offering you the ticket ; 
 but that before I could hold friendly intercourse witli 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 re- 
 cognising my rank in another ticket, which you soon after 
 sent to me. You will recollect that at a subsequent meeting, 
 I refused to receive your oifered hand, and to hold intercourse 
 with you, until I ascertained by enquiry at the Navy Depart- 
 ment, 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^, think this a full jus- 
 tification of your course ; for although you were not express- 
 ly directed to give to the officers of the army, tickets corres- 
 ponding with their rank, you were not prohibited from doins; 
 
16 
 
 so; and, at least, it was due to them as an act of courtesy, tc 
 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 offi- 
 cers of the navy? If there had been marines, whose ser- 
 vices you could command, would you liave 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 liis command, without accompanying it, on sucli 
 ■d service ? As the detachment of artillery required on that 
 occasion, was less than a Captain's command, Gen. Scott sug- 
 gested that it should be furnislied by tlie two companies i)i 
 (iqual proportions, and the command be given to the Adjutant 
 of the detachment — the gallant and afterwards, eminently dis- 
 tinguished Major Roach, against which Captain Barker and 
 myself remonstrated in the most decided terms, notwithstand- 
 ing- the entire confidence we had in that officer, and the stronji 
 tiiendship (not to say brotlierly affection) we entertained for 
 him : nay, so tenacious were Captain Barker and myself on 
 that point, that had the rank been settled between us, we 
 should have considered it derogatory to have waved 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 rahJ{s with his own men, for the 
 ]iurpose of increasing a naval command ; such a supposition 
 is too absurd to require refutation. My understanding was, 
 that the command of the seamen, and every thing relating to 
 the management 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 offices of the army, who had com- 
 mands, volunteered, why 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 command, it is true, performed a subordinate 
 duty ; but if it deserved praise or censure, it was to be receiv- 
 ed from our military superiors. It was proper that our con- 
 duct 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 
 
n 
 
 i had no official claim on you for more notice than you be- 
 stowed on my command, 1 should have felt deeply mortified 
 at having dealt as sparingly with you, had I been in your place, 
 and made a report with ttie same knowledge of facts. 
 
 I have tommented at great length on your letter, and with 
 plainness, under the belief that between gentlemen of our 
 professions, there should be perfect frankness. I deprecate 
 controversy as much as you can, and regretted heretofore, as 
 I do now, the suspension of our friendly intercourse. You 
 seem to think it never was suspended ; whether it is to be 
 renewed hereafter, must depend on yourself. 
 
 It is my present intention to claim for my command wliat I 
 think belongs to it, by a brief statement in the public prints, 
 and to disclaim what has been improperly taken from you and 
 given to me. I have no wish to trouble the public with this 
 correspondence, unless circumstances should make it necessa- 
 ry ; 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 Harbor, July 23, 1835. 
 To General Nathan Towson, 
 
 Sir: Your letter of the 18th instant, 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 manner, and I felt sur- 
 prised, 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 Ibrce me to exhibit you thus, to the public. 
 
 Your reputation ascribes intelligence to you at least ; and I feel 
 astonished, that after my letter of the 12th, you should per- 
 severe in advancing the absurd claims, for which ycu opened 
 this correspondence. Whether yoiu' demand was prompted by 
 restless vanity alone, or you fancied that you might regain pub- 
 lic 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 verv strange, that after reading mv letter, vou did not per- 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 ceive, that it would be prudent for you to let the affair rest un- 
 noticed ; I showed you as delicately as I could, how fatal the 
 discussion upon the claims you advanced, must be to your re- 
 jMtation, and intimated my willingness to leave you sale in its 
 oblivion. You appear to have been either incapable of com- 
 prehending 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 
 tone of your letters, especially the last, point to the latter. Be 
 it which it may , 1 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 1 would ever call friend, 
 You must pardon my plainness. Sir, I write frankly, and em- 
 ploy no attornies, for 1 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 pleadings : 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 affirmed that you commanded the 
 soldiers — and on this, and one other point, turns the discussion. 
 1 will not cloud it by circumlocation, but will meet your asser- 
 tion by a direct contradiction, and by indisputable evidence. 
 
 1 need not copy your statement, and the explanations given 
 to support it : mine is this. By the copy of a letter from 
 Genenal Van Rensselaer to Major General Hall and myself, 
 which are annexed, you will perceive that I could have had 
 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, without offi- 
 cers, who could rank my subordinates, as I designed the latter 
 to retain the command. The General acceeded to my request, 
 and directed his Brigade Major to detail the troops, which 
 were placed under En'^ignPrestman, and ivere commanded by 
 him ; I subjoin 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 
 
19 
 
 volunteered as privates ; one only was accepted, and the loi 
 fell upon 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, 1 have no 
 other testimony, save my own word, in my possession ; but it 
 must — it is irrefragable. You dare not contradict Major Bank- 
 head ; you cannot contradict 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 yov. 
 stand ! After you were reminded of these facts, and had am- 
 ple opportunity to consult records, as well as your memory, 
 you deliberately assert, and through pages endeavor to prove, 
 that you went in command of the troops ! and all for the pur- 
 pose of effecting the poor scheme, prompted by some design- 
 ing knaves, or your own vanity, of getting a dispute with me, 
 or some additional credit for yourself. You stand, sir, in the 
 attitude of one who has made a well considered deliberate as- 
 sertion to his own profit, and the injury of others, and then 
 lias the utter incorrectness of his assertion, proved by the 
 clearest evidence. It is an unpleasant attitude for an officer 
 and a gentleman. I would, if I could, suppose that you believed 
 your statement yourself, but the facts do not warrant the as- 
 sumption ; they are not of the kind, about which one could 
 mistake. 
 
 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 aiise, 
 why have twenty-three years been suffered to pass, without 
 one effort from you to claim what you say was due to you. 
 But you were then a private, and your assertion of the con- 
 trary now, is as unworthy and unfortunate, as it is foreign from 
 truth. I must place this point strongly, unwillingly, as I am 
 to see General Towson 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 in- 
 timated clearly enough, though delicately, that my real rea- 
 son for declining the step you proposed, was my knowledge 
 that your statement was not true, and it is unlucky that you 
 did not understand me ; you are ]:)roved now to have stated de- 
 
20 
 
 lil^erately and repeatedly what was untrue. But there is 
 more in it, and the degree of stohdity 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 your honor was 
 pledged, but you were guilty of insubordination and mu- 
 tiny, for which you might even now, be brought to a court 
 martial. You were accepted only as a private ; by offering 
 yourself as such, you virtually pledged your honor, that 
 you would act as such, and would not exert your authority 
 with the soldiers, to take the command. You tell me you did 
 take the command ; we were \\Tong then in trusting you, and 
 you broke your word of honor to us ; to your General ; to his 
 Brigade Major, and to your brave, but I hope more trust 
 worthy competitor, Captain Barker. All this. results, if we 
 believe vour 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 constitutes mutiny: 
 and your moral crime was quite as great as though you owned 
 no commission, and cannot be atoned for, if it can ever be pal- 
 liated, by the result of the expedition. You have had the credh. 
 sir, of volunteering on a dangerous enterprise, as a private, 
 when you could not go as an officer, and your vanity, or your 
 manao-ers, have prompted you to reject that, and to claim what 
 did not belong to you, and even is not merit, though you deem- 
 ed 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 I was not, and to snatch then by fraud from the gallant 
 Prestman, the honor of commanding a portion of the vic- 
 torious party ; and your tale would, also, rob the heroic 
 Watts of his honors. But that, sir, it shall not effect. 
 I step with you into this sepulchre to defend what you would 
 wrench away ; and I do defend his rights by proving your tale 
 untrue. I rescue even you also, by restoring the credit which 
 you would discard — of having volunteered as a private under 
 a subordinate officer. It was well done sir, and well has it 
 been rewarded. Another principal point is as to the preser- 
 vation 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 disposed of in a few words. You mistake 
 
•21 
 
 entirely my reason for burning the Detroit. 1 had not and 
 could not have any fear that the enemy 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 1 
 burned her to save the guns in her hold, which were invalu- 
 able to us, having had almost the whole battery at Detroit 
 surrendered. Had her masts been left the enemy might have 
 raised and carried them ofi"; they were prevented, and subse- 
 quently we erected shears and got out the guns. In relation 
 to the other brig also, you are entirely wrong. I never had a 
 ihouo-ht of burainji her. There was no occasion for it, as at 
 the time of which you speak she lay m safety at the nav}- 
 yard, under protection of oin- battery. Besides, naval officei-s 
 do not send a nameless sailor with combustibles, and a verbal 
 order, as you allege, to burn valuable vessels that are lying in 
 perfect safety. The Detroit was burned by Captain Cham- 
 bers, of the 5th infantry, at my particular request. Your 
 recollection is quite as unfortunate on this point as it was rela- 
 tive 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 al- 
 most every thing you allege respecting the closing incident of 
 the enterprise; 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 opposing 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 the 13th infantry. [See appendix.] 
 
 I have thus noticed the two principal subjects at issue be- 
 tween 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 Cal- 
 edonia, had no communication with the other, after starting. 
 This is incorrect — the boats started from the same place, at the 
 same time ; the boat in which you were, was steered by mine ; 
 if you did not see our boat, we distinguished yours quite plainly. 
 Sailing-master Watts had his instructions to keep near my boat, 
 to board, carry and bring over to Buft'aloe, the brig Hunter, 
 which the Caledonia ^vas supposed to be. Thus your inexperi- 
 
•22 
 
 ence in naval warfare, but barely equals your presumption. 
 You then aro;ue for several pages that it was impossible and im- 
 probable that you acted as a private, and you declare that " no 
 officer of the army, who is worthy to hold a commission, would 
 consent to serve in the ranks with his own men to increase a 
 naval command." Perhaps so. 1 differ from you, but I have 
 proved that you did that very thing ; that is, that you consent- 
 ed, nay, offered. But you say you violated your engagements. 
 This is hardly worth while : but it affords occasion to notice the 
 very elaborate argument by which you are made to sustain 
 vour assertion, that vou went in command of the soldiers, and 
 to remark how completely the argument is overset by the sim- 
 ple 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 developes. Here is a monster- 
 ous one, that shews your recollection is not good even from the 
 6th to the 18th of July, twelve days. Under the latter date you 
 tell me, in order to account for the long neglect of this matter, 
 that you did not learn that such a statement (that which you 
 impeach) had ever been made, or you certainly would not have 
 been taunted with twenty years delay. You had forgotten. 
 that on the 6th you wrote that you had been frequently advis- 
 ed 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 amanuensis. 
 
 You are right sir, in saying that a report may be amended by 
 its author even after 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 dis- 
 cussed. Your distinction is perfectly right, also, between limita- 
 tions 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 re- 
 port upon the appeal of " a single and not uninterested wit- 
 ness," who had tacitly confirmed it at the time ; and the new 
 evidence bears me out. These are slight 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 re- 
 ceived the ticket, the regulations of the navy allowed me to 
 give you only a private's ticket; but that when those were chang- 
 ed, I gave you a captain's. By the way, you appear to make 
 
•23 
 
 no account of the favor. I may have done wrong in that case, 
 and it is possible that in allowing private Towson a captain's 
 share, I did injustice to Mr. Watts and the rest, who, or their 
 representatives, may have aclaim upon you or me tor it now. 
 But I might plead that I admired what I thought your gallant- 
 ry, in waving your rank to seek danger, and that my feelings 
 influenced me, as when in my report, I named you before even 
 Prestman, whom your General made your real commander, 
 and Lt. 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, and whom I have the 
 honor to claim as my warm personal friends. Both now" are 
 uncoupled with the service. You have shown me my error ; 
 but this might answer your question as to my reason for chang- 
 ing your ticket. But I will give the real explanation. You 
 misunderstood or misrepresent me, as you have done in so many 
 other cases. What I told you, was, that when I gave you a pri- 
 vate's ticket, I understood the regulations to allow you no other, 
 but that it afterwards occurred to me that a part of the prize 
 money belonged to grades of rank not represented, and I re- 
 solved therefore 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 alleged retlisal once to take my hand, I have not 
 the slightest recollection of any such occurrence, and there is 
 the best reason for placing little confidence in yours. I do not 
 believe the assertion. The only conversation between us that 
 I remember 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 Pittsburgh paper, stating in general 
 terms that justice had not been done you ; and learning that it 
 was you disavowed 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 expedition. In two ways : the report 
 was never seen, and General Scott would never liave done 
 such a discourtesy to me as to report concerning my subordi- 
 nates except as from me. The point was trivial and incidental, 
 but with the fatality that has marked your every step in this af- 
 fair, it has flung more suspicion upon you. 
 
24 
 
 You say that he wrote a private letter of such a nature as to 
 procure for you the brevet by which you obtain your present 
 rank. I am sorry to hear it. There was thrift in view then if you 
 withheld 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 com- 
 panions, and you would have received your exact share ol 
 glory, enhanced only by his partiality. But you did better ; 
 you made a private report of your acheivements to General 
 Scott, that was never published, and which none could con- 
 tradict; 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 ! It looks like a piece of skilful management. 
 You compare the difficulties 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 surprize in such a case may succeed or fail, and beg to 
 refer you to the passage. You intimate that our enemy was 
 commanded by a provincial officer ; less skillfiil 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 antago- 
 nists — citizens commanded by a citizen, in a merchant vessel — to 
 make all the slaughter of which you complain. 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 capture of the Detroit was completely effected, 
 and the sword of her commander was yielded, both that offi- 
 cer and myself were entirely ignorant of even each others ex- 
 istence ! 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 slightest communication ? Sir, you 
 must have known all this well, and the nature of your refer- 
 ence 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 opi- 
 nion that an officer who had on a former occasion so hand- 
 somely conducted himself (as I then, in common with the pub- 
 
2^ 
 
 lie, had been led to swppose Captain Elliott had) could possibly 
 be guilty, k,c. It was a singular expression that ; " been led to 
 suppose r' Who had flung the doubt! I have never found 
 a clue. You tell me that ijou have been tampered with by 
 Commodore Perry's friends. — You now fling an impeach- 
 ment of my conduct on that " former occasion." You 
 tell me that you always thought it strange, that the De- 
 troit should have been captured so quickly, he. ; you kept it 
 well from me. Were you, then, the incendiary that kindled 
 dissension between Perry and me ; that turned our frank friend- 
 ship 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 thus avenging the slight part, which only 
 could be assigned you in that enterprise, wb.ich still haunts me? 
 I cannot believe it ; it is impossible, that one who possesses 
 your reputation, could be guilty of this inconceivable base- 
 ness. There was no cause — no suflicient motive, for such 
 tremendous wickedness. We do not expect such thmgs from 
 the frank gallant soldier. And, yet the act was of a class to 
 be done by the creeping, 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 returned after the cargo was landed, 
 we should have been able to have brought the vessel into 
 port." Mr. Watts, and his brave companions, had more noble 
 employment, than that of removing furs from a grounded ship ; 
 they were at the battery at Black Rock, under my immediate 
 command, in desperate fight, and many of them left their 
 gory bodies there, as testimonials of their desperate conflict 
 on that morning. 
 
 But to have done vvith this. I consider, sir, that you are 
 set on by my enemies 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 detemiined hostility. I 
 thought so, in reading your first letter, but the hazard to your- 
 self 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 Jiatural towards a detennined 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 foe ; but I still think you will have caution enough to aeoid 
 publication. If you have not, I shall simply publish this cor- 
 respondence. 
 
 Your obedient ser\^ant, 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 To this letter the following answer was sent, and returned ; 
 the Commodore thinking, perhaps, it contained fulminating 
 matter, that would explode on breaking the seal. 
 
 Washington, July 27, 1835. 
 To CoMMODOKE J. D. Elliott, New York : 
 
 Sir : I have received your communication of the 23d instant 
 in answer to mine of the 18th. If my letter deserves the 
 character you give it, it should have received from an officer 
 of the navy, who claims to he a gentleman, a different notice ; 
 in fact, the only one a man of honor could return to a commu- 
 nication, of such a character as you describe it, proceeding 
 from such a source. It confirms what I have often heard, but 
 did not, until now, fully credit, that you have, by appropri- 
 ating to yourself what belongs to others, obtained credit for 
 much more bravery than you are entitled to, 
 
 I would return your communication as one that, for the 
 credit of the navy, ought to be suppressed ; but knowing you 
 as I now do, my own safety requires that I should not part 
 with a document, which is a tissue of false statements through- 
 out ; and which exhibits you in your true character of blus- 
 terer. So far as it relates to myself, I consider it altogether con- 
 temptible. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 N. TOWSON^. 
 
 U. S. Ship Constitution, 
 
 Harbor of New York, July 29, 1835. 
 To General Nathan Towson, 
 
 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 communication from you must, to be 
 received, be of the kind that is sent, not through the post 
 
27 
 
 office, and sealed, but by a friend. Your letter mailed on the 
 •27th is, therefore, returned unopened. 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 Tlie Commodore says, '•' I informed you in my letter of the 
 •23d that I should with that close the correspondence." The 
 leader is requested to examine that letter and see whether it 
 contains such information. .Perhaps, like the valiant Commo- 
 dore's resolution to challenge' the lamented Perry, it may have 
 '• evaporated ;'' it certainly is" not in the letter now. The 
 truth is, the construction he put on my letter of the 18th, ad- 
 mitted of but one coui-se for a man of honor, who does not 
 profess religious scruples in such matters ; and that is the one 
 he recommends to me. He knew this, but preferred the stale 
 device, often resorted to by men of weak nerves, to conceal 
 their infirmity. My immediate reply convinced him / in- 
 tended the correspondence should take a different course ; he 
 wished to be beforehand with me ; but not having taken the 
 preparatory step, by notifying me, he is reduced to the necessity 
 of asserting that he had done so, maugre the fact. The Com- 
 modore evidently wishes to exchange positions. The person 
 entitled to receive the unsealed note bij a friend, might have 
 advantages in the arranojements that would follow. I assure 
 him it is not my intention to claim or receive any, on that ac- 
 count, believing it would be dishonorable to do so. 
 
 Having given the Commodore the benefit of his letter of 
 ihe 23d, by publishing it, I claim the privilege of commenting 
 on some of its prominent points. I am indebted to him for 
 the pains he took to prevent my being placed " in a predica- 
 ment so unfortunate, that no gentleman or officer ever incurred 
 the like." The Commodore, it appears, can '•' speak daggers" 
 if he does not use them. Did not the reader, in following 
 him through the tremendous paragraph from which the quota- 
 tion is made, believe that I was to be annihilated? I am sure 
 he must have admired the merciful forbearance that so long 
 delayed to crush me, and, no doubt, was both astonished and 
 indignant at the vanity that led me into the " predicament" of 
 denying that a Captain of artillery was to serve under an En- 
 sign of infantry ; and that too after a Commodore had asserted 
 the contrary ! Before i am condemned, I ask tlie reading of 
 the following : 
 
 "The bearer, Nathan Towson, Captain United States' 
 
28 
 
 army, was with me on the 8tli October, 1812, in captming 
 his Brittannic Majesty's brig Detroit and brig Caledonia ; yon 
 will, therefore, agreeable to the precedent established by D. 
 Marshall, pay him his portion of" prize money, as Captain 
 marines. 
 
 JESSE D. ELLIOTT. 
 
 Buffalo, May 4, 1814. 
 Messrs. Cox and Montaudevert, Ncjv YorA:." 
 
 In addition to his own contraction, on this point, the Com- 
 modore offers letters from Generals Van Rensselaer and 
 Smyth, and a statement from Colonel Bankhead, which are 
 appended. General Van Rensselear's letter has no bearing 
 on the subject ; General Smyth's only introduces Ensign 
 Presstman as the officer commanding the ivfantry furnished 
 from head-quarters — these were to accompany Lieutenant 
 Elliott in his boat. Lieutenant Colonel Scott was to furnish 
 the second boat, under Sailing master Watts, with troops from 
 the artillery. If General Symth intended Ensign Presstman 
 should command the whole, why was not the whole detailed 
 from the infantry to which he belonged ? The infantry was 
 most numerous, and could have furnished ten times the num- 
 ber of privates required. It is absurd to suppose one officer was 
 to command both artillery and infantry. They were to serve 
 in different boats, and to act at a distance from each other ; 
 which rendered it impossible for the same person to command 
 both. I am confident, Ensign Presstman did not feel author- 
 ized to command a Captain of artillery, under such circum- 
 stances. The truth is, it was intended Adjutant Roach should 
 have the command of the artillery ; and, if I am not mistaken, 
 such was the request of Lieutenant Elliott or Mr. Watts. 
 
 The Commodore relies much on the statement of Colonel 
 Bankhead. I do not recollect that the Colonel spoke to Cap- 
 tain Barker and myself on the subject — lie conferred with 
 General Scott, who directed us to furnish Adjutant Roach fif- 
 teen men from each company ; we remonstrated and claimed 
 the right to lead our own men. AVe agreed to wave our rank 
 so far as not to interfere with Mr. Watts, or clami control over 
 him in his nautical duty. This removed the objections, and 
 was all that was necessary to concede. If we were to be con- 
 sidered privates, where was the necessity of lots, to decide 
 which should go ? I suppose we could at least have been ac- 
 cepted as two of the thirty required. 
 
29 
 
 It should be noticed that Colonel Baiikhead's' statement, 
 (of which I am only furnished an extract,) is given from 
 memory, after a lapse of more tlian twenty years. It is dated 
 at New Port, Rhode Island, 27th August, 1834 ; months 
 before the publication which led to our correspondence, and 
 was probably obtained in anticipation of that pubhcation, 
 which the Commodore knew would be liable to attack. It 
 was probably drawn out in answer to leading questions. 
 
 Let us now see the conditions on which General Scott 
 understood I was to serve. He was present, and had personal 
 knowledge of all that Colonel Bankhead's statement relates 
 to ; and in three months after, writes the following account 
 of it: 
 
 "Philadelphia, February 17, 1813. 
 
 Dear Sir, I have to reproach myself for seeming, even for 
 a moment, to neglect our friend, Captain Towson, whose 
 merits I mentioned to you in a general way, when I had the 
 honor to see you in Washington. But for my capture at 
 Queenstown, and the constant bustle in which I was engaged 
 for the three or four days preceding, I should have made an 
 official report of the affair of the 9th October, at Black Rock, 
 in which Captain T. bore a conspicuous part, both in board- 
 ing the two vessels, and in the events which followed. The 
 expedition was suggested and fitted out under the auspices of 
 Lieutenant EUiott, of the navy, but not having a sufficient 
 number of seamen to effect the object, he applied to me for 
 assistance. I turned out my detachment, and called for volun- 
 teers — every man offered his services. A ballot was then 
 ordered between Captains Towson and Barker, when it fell 
 to the lot of the former, to go on this service. With thirty 
 men, aided by some seamen, Captain Towson had the prin- 
 cipal share in boarding and carrying the Caledonia, with the 
 loss of six men, in killed and wounded. There was, in the 
 same boat with him, a naval officer, who had the principal 
 direction as to the manner in which the enemy should be ap- 
 proached ; but it was acknowledged by all hands, that the artil- 
 lerists were most effective in the capture. This is not so fully 
 stated in Lieutenant Elliott's report of that affair, as I could 
 _ have wished ; but it is, nevertheless the fact. Captain Towson 
 was one of the first on board, and behaved throughout, with 
 the most exemplary gallantry. The vessels were cut out 
 from under Fort Erie. At day-light, they had dropped down 
 the Niagara, to a point opposite to Black Rock, when the 
 
30 
 
 ..Britisii commenced a heavy fire upon them. For tlie want 
 of wind, they both got aground, and the Caledonia was aban- 
 doned by the seamen : Captain T. remained by his prize, 
 and, under a heavy cannonade, succeeded in taking out of 
 the vessel, a valuable cargo of peltry and furs. 
 
 The conduct of this officer was, on all occasions, zealous 
 and indefatigable. The part he bore in the action of Queens- 
 town is mentioned in my report of that affair. 
 
 Supposing that this statement might be of some little ser- 
 vice to a man now distant from his home, in the service of 
 liis country ; or, at least, that it might afford some small por- 
 tion of pleasure to one, who is his neighbour and representa- 
 tive, I have taken the liberty of giving it your address, sir. 
 imd have the honor to be, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 W. SCOTT. 
 
 The Hon. A. McKim, M. Congress:' 
 
 When I wrote to Commodore Elliott, on the 6th July, I 
 did not know of this letter, which has been made a public 
 document, by placmg it on the files of the Adjutant General's 
 office. My statement may be tested by comparing it with 
 the letter. It will be found that they differ only in the num- 
 ber of killed and wounded of my command. General Scott 
 states it at six, and I, at ten. My statement is taken from an 
 official paper in my possession. 
 
 I have said, that when Mr. Watts applied for my report for 
 Commodore E., I replied, that I would make it to my com.- 
 manding officer, Lieutenant Colonel Scott ; and I so intended ; 
 but the events that followed in rapid succession, left me no 
 time to do so before that distinguished officer was captured at 
 Queenstown, from which time we had no intercourse, until 
 he joined the army, after the date of his letter. I will en- 
 quire of Commodore E. if it is customary for naval officers 
 to apply to privates for reports ? 
 
 On the long lecture, the Cominodore reads me about vio- 
 lating my pledge, mutiny, he, I will only remark, that under 
 similar circumstances, I would commit similar offences. I 
 volunteered to accompany Mr. Watts, to aid in capturing an 
 enemy's vessels; until he succeeded or failed in the attempt, 
 1 was bound to adhere to the conditions on which my services 
 were accepted ; but when he determined, against the judg- 
 ment of the pilot, not to make the attempt, for fear the cur- 
 
31 
 
 lent would prevent our reaching the brig, I felt released from 
 my pledges, so far as not to submit to an order, which I 
 believed would disgrace us. I acted on the impulse of the 
 moment, under feelings I could not control, and am willing to 
 abide the consequences. 
 
 The Commodore says, " on this, (whether I went as officer 
 or private) depends, really, the whole controversy, for it is the 
 foundadon of it. If your" (my) "word is good on this point, 
 against the clearest evidence, it is good for all the rest also; but 
 not otherwise." The parties have now submitted their evidence, 
 and the reader will determine which is entitled to his verdict. 
 
 The Commodore's second " principal point" is the preserva- 
 tion of the Caledonia and the burning of the Detroit, on both 
 of which he says I am in error. He first attempts to show 
 that the Detroit was not worth saving ; " for she was riddled 
 with shot and unable to float ; she had already sunk and was 
 grounded, full of water." The Commodore grounds her in his 
 official report without sinking, and I do not see how she could 
 well sink after. Her masts were all standing and her hull as 
 far out of water as when she was first captured. This is 
 known to all who were at Black Rock at that time. The 
 tmth is, she could and ought to have been saved. She was 
 almost within cable's length of the navy yard, near Squaw 
 island, where she could have been repaired, notwithstanding 
 the shot "in her bends" and her "riddling," all of which is- 
 said for effect. The Commodore says he " did not believe the 
 enemy had landed" to attack us. Why then burn the vessel ? 
 He says to save the guns in her hold ; but if there was to be 
 no attack the guns were safe without. The truth is he wishes 
 to show a necessity for burning the Detroit, that will not apply 
 to the Caledonia, to justify the act. Unfortunately for him if 
 it was necessary in one case it was in both. The event proved 
 it was not so in either. He says, at the time of which I speak, 
 the Caledonia "lay safe at the navy yard, under protection of 
 our battery." The Commodore is mistaken — she ought to 
 have been, and would have been there if the seamen had not 
 deserted her ; but she was laying above Squaw island, farther 
 from the navy yard than the Detroit. This fact is too well 
 known to be contradicted. The Commodore says, "naval 
 officers do not send a nameless sailor, and verbal orders to 
 burn valuable vessels." This I believe fully; but he has 
 shewn that he requested a captain of infantry to perform that 
 service when there was danger attending it. I said the pei- 
 son sent was a seaman. I believed him to be a petty officer. 
 
?i^^ 
 
 but did not question him, having determined not to comply 
 with the instructions. . 
 
 It is strantre that the Commodore did not mention the de- 
 struction of the Detroit in his official report, and show how it 
 was that the Caledonia was saved from the hke fate. Ihese 
 were facts of all others most important to the government, yel 
 not one word is said on the subject in that report. 1 ams are 
 taken to show that the Detroit was not worth saving. He 
 savs "before Heft her she had several shot o( large size m her 
 bends her sails in ribbons, and rigging all cut to pieces. Yet 
 durin^^ all this havock in hull, sails and rigging, not one per- 
 son on board, it appears, was injured and according to his 
 biographer, there were 130 prisoners 40 of his ^nu. country- 
 men, which added to his boat crew ol 50, makes 220 ! _ 
 
 The next alleged misstatement the Commodore reviews, is 
 that of the boats having no communication with each other 
 after startlncr. He savs the boat, in which I was, steered by his ; 
 that Mr. Watts had orders to keep near the Commodore s boat, 
 ercro, the boats must have communicated. 1 md not before 
 ki^ow that when two bodies move in the same hne the orie 
 that follows may arrive at the god before that which precedes 
 f now, as our boat passed the Detroit and earned the Cale- 
 donia before the Cornmodore^s boat reached the former, this 
 must have been the case, and it clearly proves my mexpe- 
 
 "^S.^ iiS:"^'the prize tickets. The explanation 
 aiven to me in General Scott's presence, it seems was not the 
 ^^ real one."— That now given, is the true one. Ihe Commo- 
 dore does not show his usual tact in extricating himself from 
 thTs dnemma; unfortunately for him General Scott was pre- 
 sent at the first explanation; and he cannot so conveniently 
 call assertion and denial to his aid ; but as no person was pre- 
 sent when 1 refused to take his hand, he indemnifies himselt, 
 by an unrestrained use of both, in relation to that occurrence. 
 It is playing a hazardous game to deny a well recollected fact, be- 
 cause it^is kno^vn only to one other person. The flushed coun- 
 tenance of the Commodore at the time I refused his hand, put- 
 tin. my own behind me, and saying " no sir, we do not shake 
 hands,'' convinced me the impression was too strong to be 
 easily forgotten. I see it can be denied; and he may hmk 
 tha will answer his purpose ; but there is no one circumstance 
 thft^ivesme more advantage ; it unmasks his character, and 
 he knows that /, at least, now understand him thoroughly. 
 In the next p?ragraph 1 am misquoted, and made to say 
 
33 
 
 that General Scott told me "he wrote a private letter" of such 
 nature, as procured for me my brevet. I said no such thing ; 
 as will be seen on turning to my letter. I understood the 
 statement made to the Secretary by General Scott, was offi- 
 cial, — of a public, and not of a private character. 
 
 I am asked, "sir, do you not perfectly know, have you not 
 ever known, that until after the capture of the Detroit was 
 completely effected, and the sword of her commander was 
 yielded, both that officer and myself were entirely ignorant of 
 each other's existence?" I will inquire how I was to know 
 this ? I did not know the name of the commander of the 
 Detroit, until lately, when I heard it accidentally. The Com- 
 modore carefully omits naming him in his official report; a 
 thing, I believe, unprecedented. A person reading this offi- 
 , cial statement would suppose the vessels did not anive in the 
 Commodore's vicinity until the 8th of October, the day of their 
 capture; but if he will turn to General Van Rensselaer's 
 letter, which is appended, he will see that on the 24th of Sep- 
 tember, application was made for aid to assist Lieutenant EI- 
 Hott in capturing them. I must confess these facts created a 
 suspicion that Lieutenant E. might have known the character 
 of his enemy, and the degree of hazard he ran in attacking 
 hmi. 
 
 The next question is, whether I was " the incendiary that 
 kindled dissension between Perry and Commodore E.; the 
 viper that stung, &;c.?" I answer, no sir, no. The friend 
 of the gallant Perry, who "tampered" with me, is still living, 
 and will, I have no doubt, if the Commodore wishes it, inform 
 him that I defended him against the imputation of cowardice, 
 and asserted that notwithstanding the suspicious circumstances 
 on Lake Ei'ie, it was impossible a person who could attempt 
 what appeared to be so daring an enterpiise as the capture of 
 the Detroit, could be deficient in courage. But, as I have 
 just shown, I did not then know all the circumstances, and 
 who was the commander: if Commodore E. did, it alters the 
 case, in my judgment, materially. 
 
 The Commodore thinks I may, and may not, have been the 
 •• viper." After admitting it was impossible, he says "we do 
 not expect such things from the frank, gallant soldier, and yet, 
 the act was of a class to be done by the creeping, sly profit- 
 making spirits who hang around commanders ! " The Com- 
 modore may think the characters just described belong to the 
 parties in this controversy. Which does he claim? 
 
34 
 
 ••' Mr. Watts and his brave companions" are said to have had 
 " nobler employment than that of removing furs from a ground- 
 ed ship ; they were at the battery at Black-rock, under my 
 command." I do not know what the Commodore thinks no- 
 ble ; it was certainly Jiut so hazardous behind a parapet ot 
 earth, out of point blank range of the enemy's guns, as it was 
 on board a " grounded" vessel, at little more than half the dis- 
 tance. If it had been, I am confident, Mr. Watts would have 
 had all the honor, of commanding the battery, to himself. 
 Landing furs, I admit, if unattended with danger, would have 
 been an ignoble employment at such a time. But it will be 
 seen from the Commodore's biography, and from his official re- 
 port, that the great inducement, to attempt the capture, was 
 " the consideration that, with these two vessels" and those he 
 purchased, he would " be enabled to meet the remainder ol" 
 the British force on the upper lakes, and save an incalculable 
 expense and labor to the Government." Now as it was ne- 
 cessary to save the brigs as well as to capture them, in order 
 to accomplish his patriotic intentions, with all due defierence, 
 I do not think " landing furs" so ignoble an employment ; that 
 being the surest way to save the Caledonia. I am proud to 
 think, that by so doing she was preserved ; and rejoice that 
 she rendered more service on Lake Erie, although but a 
 "cock-boat," than the " Niagara", while the latter was under 
 command of this gallant officer. 
 
 The Commodore is at a loss to know wliether I am set on 
 by his enemies to "bait" him, or instigated by my own vanity. 
 I think his bitterest enemies must be satisfied with the baiting 
 he has received from others, and be ready to " cry, hold — 
 enough." I must be blind if it Is vanity that instigates me. 
 The puljlic have already given me more credit in this affair 
 than I desire ; some of which I wish to restore to the Commo- 
 dore as belonging to him. In the following article, published 
 in an Ohio paper, it will be seen that the writer gives me all 
 the credit of originating the expedition ; blends Lieutenant 
 Elliott with Sailing master Watts ; ascribes to the former the 
 conduct of the latter, and gives me the credit of counteract- 
 ing it. 
 
 " A late number of the National Intelligencer, " contains a 
 notice of the death of Captain Jacob Schmuck, who, it ap- 
 pears, was associated with the brave Towson, in the daring 
 and successful exploit of cutting out the two British brigs, 
 Caledonia and Detroit, which were riding at anchor under the 
 
35 
 
 guns of a British fortress, during the late war. A merited 
 Jribute is paid by the editors to the deceased. So should it 
 ever be. The memory of the brave should be kept ahve 
 though the body perish. 
 
 We delight in reminiscences of this sort. The affair was 
 planned by General Towson, now Paymaster General of the 
 army ; at that time a captain of artillery. He obtained the 
 co-operation of Commodore Elliott of the navy. In the 
 darkness of the night, the boats moved slowly, with muffled 
 oars ; ere they had reached the point proposed, Elliott com- 
 municated his wish to return. Towson replied, that he should 
 persevere, if he went alone. The vessels were carried, and 
 the credit due to the gallant, but modest Towson, was usurp- 
 ed by the naval officer, who was more skillful in the important 
 art of making a report." 
 
 This is more than even my vanity covets, and I cannot ac- 
 cept. Commodore Elliott, so far as I am infomied, is entitled 
 to all the credit of planning the enterprise; to so much as is 
 due for commanding in person, the boat that captured the De- 
 troit, and to the full share, which belongs to a commander for 
 planning the capture of the Caledonia. The writer of the ar- 
 ticle, confounds Lieutenant Elliott with Watts ; and gives me 
 the credit of saving the Commodore from disgrace. I do not 
 know how he obtained his information ; but in this particular, 
 it is incorrect ; it goes, however, to establish the fact, as it oc- 
 curred, between IMr. Watts and myself. 
 
 I believe I have commented on every point, in the Com- 
 modore's bombastic letter, that requires notice, unless it be his 
 insinuation, that I had aid from others in conducting our corres- 
 pondence. I do not know, that I ought to complain of this. It is 
 probably placing me on an equality witli himself, in that parti- 
 cular. It is, however, a little strange, that he should have made 
 it, after sending me a letter, that would disgrace a school-boy, on 
 account of its grammatical blunders, and then furnishing a " du- 
 plicate'' to correct them, underthe pretext, that the first might 
 not have reached me, as it was sent by mail. I cannot prove 
 a negative ; but, if the Commodore will prove that I received 
 the aid he intimates, I will acknowledge him to be entitled to 
 all the "merit he claims in this controversy. 
 
36 
 
 ^ New- York, Aiigust Uth, 1835. 
 
 1 did not expect, when I commenced this correspondence, 
 that It would be pubhshed. It was my intention, if Commo- 
 dore E. declined to correct the misstatement m the Boston 
 paper, to do so myself, by publishing a short history of the 
 capture and preservation of the Caledonia, and the part my 
 conimand took in the afEur. Tao Commodore's last letter 
 made a publication ot the correspondence on my part unavoid- 
 able, as he cliose to substitute abuse for the more honorable 
 but more dangerous course marked out for gentlemen in such 
 cases, expectmg t..at 1 would prefer silence to the publication 
 01 his abusive epithets. 
 
 It was my intention to delay the publication until I obtained 
 documents t'jat would prevent doubt on any point in the con- 
 troversy ; but the announcement in the official paper, that the 
 Commodore was about to sail Immediately in the Constitution, 
 compelled me to publish witjiout them. To avoid the suspi- 
 cion that I purposely delayed to act, until the eve of his de- 
 parture I concluded to repair to New-York and send him this 
 pamplilet. On my way I met with Major B.aker, the intel- 
 ligent, nigli-mmded, gallant officer, who claimed with me, the 
 right to ead tne artillery. I handed him one of the pamph- 
 lets, and requested him to state bis recollections of the con- 
 ditions on whicli he understood we were to serve: he returned 
 It witn the followini; endorsed on the back : 
 
 ,, „ . „ , " Philadelphia, Auo^ust 11, 1835. 
 
 Beina called upon by Gen. Towson for my recollections, 
 so tar as I was concerned, of the incident at Black Rock, of 
 the 8th Ortooer, 1812, refei-red to in his letter to Commodore 
 Elliott, of July 18th, 1835, (page 16 of this pamphlet,) I 
 have to state, that in volunteering upon the service, altho' 
 willing to waive my rank as Captain of Artillery, so far as 
 that rank might interfere with the naval service, I should have 
 expected, nad I been so fortunate as to have won the privi- 
 lege of going, to lead my own men and those of Capt. Tow- 
 son, as an officer of marines, under the general direction of the 
 Naval officer commanding the boat, whatever might have 
 been his relative rank to mine. 
 
 J. N. BARKER." 
 
37 
 
 Since my arrival in New York, I have received the follow- 
 mv letter from Col. Bankhead, from which it will be seen, 
 that he denies the construction which the Commodore put on 
 the crarbled extract he sent me from the Colonel's statement. 
 In my previous remarks on that paper, 1 expressed my belief, 
 that it was obtained in anticipation of the publication tl.at led 
 to this correspondence: 1 now have proof of tlie fact. The 
 Commodore knew the misstatements he was getting prepared 
 to bolster up his sinking reputation, were liable to exposure, 
 and would require some show of evidence to support them; 
 this he expected to obtain from the Colonel by leading ques- 
 tions. 
 
 Washington, August lOth, 1835. 
 
 General: 
 
 I have, since my arrival here to day, and since you left the 
 city, been placed in the possession of a copy of your letter 
 of yesterday's date, directed to me at Fort Monroe. 
 
 I am extremely sorry that I have not a copy of the com- 
 munication, which I made last August on the subject of the 
 capture of the two British vessels under Fort Erie, by Cap- 
 tain Elliott, in which you participated, that 1 mi'^ht send it to 
 you ; as I do not think the inference can be drawn from it 
 that you "volunteered, and was accepted, as a private, to serve 
 under ensi^m Prestman " — or that I could have intended to 
 have conveyed such an idea. 
 
 I believe I have stated in that communication (or it was 
 so intended by me) that you volunteered to waive your rank. 
 with any naval officer who might be in the expedition, or in 
 the boat in which you might e;o. I certainly could not have 
 conveyed the idea that you went in the capacity of a pri- 
 vate soldier." In this case it was understood by me that 
 the detachment of troops sent on this expedition were un- 
 der the command of the officers of their resjiective corps 
 sent with them, but subject to the orders ol the naval 
 officer commanding the expedition, or of the officers of the 
 navy, in command of the boats, in which they might be 
 embarked. 
 
 1 did not know, until now, that there was any controvei*sy 
 or difference of opinion, between you and Com. Elliott. I 
 have never seen a printed account of this affair, nor have I 
 ever had any conversation on the subject, before I made the 
 communication which has been referred to. I made it from 
 my best recollection of it, and with a view of giving full ere- 
 
38 
 
 lirt to all, and detracting nothing from any one who participa- 
 ted in an exploit, Lonorahle to the one who projected it, and 
 to all who participated in it. 
 
 I am, General, very respectfully 
 
 Your most obedient servant, 
 
 JAMES BANKHEAD. 
 Gen. Towson. 
 
 I have written the above in haste, and at a late hour, as I 
 have to leave the city early to-morrow morning. 
 
 J. B. 
 
 I am aware, that military men will think it strange I should 
 take pains to refute tlie absurl assertion, that a captain was 
 to act as a private under an ensign; but they must recol- 
 lect that all who read, are not military men; that he who 
 asserts it, holds high rank in a service familiar with such sub- 
 jects ; and that so far as official station goes, he is the peer, 
 if not the associate, of as honorable, as high minded, and 
 as gallant a class of men, as ti.is or any country can boast. 
 They must bear in mind that this is the point on which, he 
 says, the whole controversy rests. Hence the necessity of 
 removing all doubt on t!ie subject. 
 
 I flatter myself tnat I have succeeded in establishing the 
 following points: 
 
 1st. That tiie Detroit was captured with but little or no 
 resistence. (Tc.e Commodore says he vanquished three per- 
 sons in a "hand to liand fight.") It appears, without blood- 
 shed, and I believe, without a ^\^tness. 
 
 2nd. That after tiie capture of tie D^^troit she was aban- 
 doned without proper effort to bring her into the harbor. And 
 that she was burnt on an idle rumour, that the enemy was 
 •approaching to attack; when the hiterest and honor of the 
 country and the reputation of the navy, required that she 
 should have been preserved. 
 
 31. That he did not participate in the conflict which 
 resuhed in th6 capture of the Caledonia, for which (in part) 
 Congress passed a vote of thanks, and gave him a sword. 
 
 4th. That if his orders had been obeyed, tlie Caledonia 
 would have been burnt, and her service lost to the gallant 
 Perry, in the action on Lake Erie. 
 
 5th. That for the selfish purpose of appropriating all ere?"- 
 
39 
 
 dJt toliimself, he ungenerously suppressed Important facts in 
 his official report of the transactions. 
 
 6th T! at to prevent an officer of the army receivmg the 
 small* share of credit he was emitled to, for assistmg to 
 capture the vessels, he descended to the dishonorable and 
 desperate expedient of affectin. to consider him a ^.va e 
 notwithstanding his own written acknovv edgement to the 
 contrary, which that officer forced Irom him in the presence 
 
 ""^ Theirfacts place the Commodore (to use his own expres- 
 sions ) "in a predicament so unfortunate, that I believe no 
 gentleman or ^officer ever incured the like," and there I will 
 Lve liim with one remark. The Commodore has been so 
 frequently disgraced in controversies of this kmd, that, Hi 
 we?e to send "him "a communication by a friend " he would 
 dexterously avoid the consequences that should ^11°^; and I. 
 would be liable to the charge of havmg trampled on an tm- 
 lecih whom others had prostrated. 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 The four preceding pages were printed after I arrived in 
 New York. Before 1 could obtain such testimony as I wished, 
 1 was precipitated into the pubhcation by the announcement 
 that the Commodore was about to sail. Had I waited lono-er, 
 or not been in New York when he received a copy of 
 this pamphlet, he would have charged the delay of its publi- 
 cation to a dread of meeting the consequences of its ex- 
 posures. 
 
 The Commodore makes a parade of having waited eighteen 
 days to receive a challenge from me. If he did intend to 
 give me the opportunity he boasts, why did he leave New 
 York the moment I arrived? Such was the fact; and the 
 manner in which he left and returned is at variance with a 
 desire to afford such an opportunity. I have every reason to 
 believe he knew I was in the city when he left it. I directed 
 a copy of the pamphlet to him through the Post Office, with 
 my card, informing him where I could be found ; and at the 
 sanie time, placed another copy in the hands of a friend, to 
 deliver to him immediately after his return. It was reported 
 and believed in New York that his visit was to this place, or 
 south of it, and not to Carlisle ; that he would be absent sev- 
 eral days ; and that the Constitution would sail between the 
 20th and 25th of the month. He left the ship on Wednes- 
 day ; on Saturday following, my friend enquired of the offi- 
 cers on board when he was to return, and was informed, not be- 
 fore Monday, if then. Contrary to expectation, he came back 
 before the time he had named ; went on board immediately, 
 and had the ship dropped down to a distance from the city, 
 that made it difficult to communicate with her. The Com- 
 modore says he expected a challenge from me ; if so, he must 
 have supposed my business in New York was to send him 
 
41 
 
 one. Why then leave the moment I arrived? Why con- 
 ceal the place to which he was going, and name another? 
 And why all the haste in getting on board immediately after 
 his return, and hm-rying his preparations for sea ? All who 
 know him will not be at a loss to answer the question — it 
 was to avoid receiving a challenge. He was, no doubt; 
 greatly relieved when he found a copy of this pamphlet, 
 instead of an " unsealed note." I did not intend to part with 
 any copies, except tliose sent to the Commodore, until after 
 my return to Washington. I did not wish the officers of his 
 ship to know of the controversy between us before they sailed. 
 The Commodore knew the advantages of first impressions, 
 and sent so much of the correspondence as suited his purpose, 
 to the Editor of the Times, whose brother is his clerk. The 
 first intimation I had of the Commodore's return, was that 
 publication. I immediately applied at the office of the 
 Times, to obtain an insertion of what he chose to omit ; but 
 could get no decisive answer. I then applied to the Editor 
 of the American ; who, on perceiving the justice of the case, 
 obhgingly, at great inconvenience, offered me the use of his 
 paper, for which I tender him my sincere and grateful thanks. 
 It was not my intention, from the commencement, to resort 
 to a challenge. I doubted the propriety of placing myself 
 in a situation to accept one from a man, who, if not pre- 
 viously disgraced, I knew would be, before the correspon- 
 dence termmated. I knew I should prove that he had know- 
 ingly asserted what was incorrect, for the purpose of robbing 
 me of the small share of credit I was entitled to for tlie cap- 
 ture of the brigs. Why should I be the challenger? I had 
 nothing to gain by it, but much to lose. If Commodore 
 Elliott refused to correct the misstatements he procured to 
 be published, I could obtain a correction from a higher and 
 better source — from Major General Scott, who was present, 
 and who stated to me the terms on which I was to serve : ) 
 could procure a statement from him that would not only 
 restore to me what the Commodore wished to appropriate to 
 himself, but would convict him of denying what he knew to 
 be the fact, that I was entitled to the credit of an officer, and 
 not of a private, in the capture of the brigs. Let any one com- 
 pare the following letter, with the Commodore's shameless 
 assertions on the subject of which it treats, and see if I could 
 have triumplicd so completely in any other A^-ay. The point 
 on which we differed, the General says, was "amicably 
 
4-4 
 
 discussed" between him and the Commodore ; and as will be 
 seen, was settled as I have represented it. 1 was therefore 
 under no necessity to challenge in order to obtain justice.— 
 
 TVT J r^ White Sulphur Springs, Aug. lo, 1835. 
 
 My dear General, I have received your communication of 
 tlie 3d mst., enclosing an extract of a letter from Col. Bank- 
 Jiead to Commodore Elliott, dated August 27, 1834 and a 
 copy of one from me to the Hon. A. McKim, then a mem- 
 ber of Congress, dated February 17, 1813; all relative to the 
 capture ol the two armed British vessels in October, 1813 
 
 In my letter to Mr. McKim, it did not fall in my way to 
 enter much into details, I shall now add such particulais as 
 my memory may supply. 
 
 Whilst there can be no doubt that the whole merit of con- 
 ceiving and planning the exterprise in question, is due to 
 Commodore Elliott, then a lieutenant of the navy, I am as- 
 tonished that any uncertainty should exist as to the 'important 
 part borne by you in its execution. 
 
 I think it was in the night of the 7th, the vessels came 
 down the Lake, and anchored under the guns of Fort Erie 
 General Smyth, with his brigade, was then encamped at Flat 
 Hill, and J had been despatched by him a few days before 
 with your company and that of Captain Barker's of our reo-i- 
 ment of artillery, for the protection of certain lake-craft 
 which Commodore Elliott was engaged in fitting for naval pur- 
 poses. The distance between General Smvth's camp and 
 mine was a little more than three miles. 
 
 Early in the morning of the 8th the Commodore perceived 
 the enemy's vessels, but having but a few seamen with him 
 he immediately applied to me for a detachment of soldiers' 
 and probably at the same time sent a like request to General 
 bmyth s camp. Col. Bankhead, then the brigade major of 
 the General, came down to my camp in the forenoon, and 
 was present when I called for volunteers from my reoimenf I 
 presume he brought me permission from General Smyth 'to 
 lurnish the detachment. The brigade major did not remain 
 long with us, but m his presence there was, 1 rememl)er, some 
 conversation on the question of rank and command between 
 navy and army officers, (always a difficult matter to arrange ) 
 and 1 also remember that so eager were you and Captain Bar- 
 ker for hazardous service that each declared his willincme'^s 
 ro go as a private under the othei-, in case he lost by tlie lot- 
 
43 
 
 tery to be drawn, the command of the detachment. You drew 
 the prize, and I would not pennit any other officer except 
 Lieut. Roach, my adjutant, to accompany the expedition. 
 
 I think Colonel Bankhead is mistaken in supposing that he 
 selected the men of my regiment who composed the detach- 
 ment ; I am pretty confident that he brought me no orders 
 from General Smyth to that eftect, and I remember distinct- 
 ly, that when I called for good oarsmen, that nearly the 
 whole, if not the entire two companies, professed themselves 
 skilful in tlie use of the oar, which obliged us, of the regi- 
 ment, to discriminate as well as we could, between the preten- 
 sions of individuals. 
 
 The same question of rank, alluded to above, was several 
 times amicably discussed, in the course of the day, between 
 Commodore Elliott and myself, after the departure of the 
 brigade major, and possibly once in his presence. All being 
 anxious for the capture of the vessels, we finally came to an 
 understandins; to this effect : 
 
 The expedition was to be embarked in two boats — of course 
 under the general command of the Commodore, and one of 
 the boats under his immediate orders. The detachment from 
 my regunent, with you at its head, was, by the same arrange- 
 ment, to be embarked in the other boat. In respect to winds, 
 currents, and the manner of laying her alongside of the Cal- 
 edonia — all nautical matters — this second boat was to be di- 
 rected by a sailing master or midshipman (I forget which) 
 who was not to be commanded by you, and who, of course, was 
 not to command you ; in short, you and your detachment were 
 to be considered as his passengers merely up to the point of 
 attack. 
 
 According to this understanding, the expedition put oft" 
 fi-om our shore in my presence, (and not in that of eilher the 
 General or his Brigade Major,) about 2 o'clock in the morning 
 of the 9th. A little before day break, within my hearing, be- 
 ing on the watch, both vessels were gallantly boarded and 
 carried — the Detroit by Commodore Elliott m person, and 
 the Caledonia by yourself. 
 
 The Detroit soon got aground a little below, and the Cal- 
 edonia a little above the village of Black Rock. The Cal- 
 edonia, as I partly saw, and as I understood from all, was 
 saved by your extraordinary courage and perseverance, and 
 afterwards bore her part in the great victory of Lake Erie. 
 
 As to the detachment of infantry under Ensign Presstman, 
 
44 
 
 Irom General Smyth s camp, I only know that it was embark- 
 ed m the boat with Com. Elliott, and was therefore wholly 
 distmct from the detachment of artillerists under your com- 
 mand, m the other boat. Lieut. Roach also embarked in the 
 Commodore s boat. 
 
 The foregoing is written without any paper before me other 
 than the two enclosed in your letter. 
 
 I remain with the greatest esteem, yours tiidy, 
 
 WINFIELd' SCOTT. 
 
 • 
 If my reputation requires a challenge to redeem it from 
 the loul charge ol cowardice, the Commodore is the last 
 person on earth to whom it should be sent, to roho^ai 
 mn . t j tf^m i -< i He has become proverbial for getting into 
 difliculties, and then extricating himself by trickery and cun- 
 nmg Would It not be a proof of the reverse of bravery to 
 challenge a man whom every braggart may beard with impu- 
 nity.^ Ihis correspondence alone is sufficient to silence 
 forever all his pretensions on that point. The Commodore 
 stands charged before the public, on the oaths of his compeers 
 with the most shameful cov\ ardice in action— with purposely 
 keeping out of the fight, while both fleets were marvelling at 
 his conduct thereby jeopardizing the safety of his comrades 
 disgracing the flag under which he served, and fixin^ a foul 
 spot on the purest page of his country's naval history. He 
 is shewn to have received and submitted to the severest remarks 
 on this very subject, that his heroic commander, whom he had 
 nearly sacrificed, could pen, and that without seeking redress, 
 rhus situated,-his courage called in question,-reminded that 
 he had submitted to rebuke and contempt from me, and offer- 
 ed redress on terms of equality, if he would ask it, he 
 affects to think the point had not been reached in the cor- 
 respondence, which called for a challenge, until he had 
 written his abusive letter of the 23d of July. I will ven- 
 ture to assert, there Is not another officer of the navy 
 of any grade, who will not say, he had passed the point 
 before that letter was written; and if he were a brave man 
 it would have been superfluous to have reminded him of 
 the course he ought to have taken. Suppose I had chal- 
 enged him under such circumstances, and he had " screwed 
 his courage up to meeting me, and it had teminated fatally 
 ivould I not have been charged, to use his own language, wilh 
 ■ baiting him to desperation ? and had he fallen, have been 
 
45 
 
 y 
 
 considered bui little better than a murderer? 1 went as far a 
 I possibly could, in offering to meet him : this I felt bound to 
 do on account of his rank and profession, and the provocation 
 given him. Would not any other officer, so situated, have 
 seized upon it as the most fortunate proposition that could be 
 oifered to him ; but the Commodore must not be judged by 
 others. — There are degrees of degradation, and the public 
 will, after reading this, know where to place him. 
 
 The following notes will show how the affair terminated : — 
 
 * 
 New York, August 17, 1835. 
 Sir, My friend, Doctor Macauley, waits on you with a pro- 
 position from me. If you accede to it, he is authorised, on 
 iny part, to make the arrangements for our meetil^^• 
 
 With due respect, ^c, 
 (Signed,) N. TOWSON. 
 
 Commodore J. D. Elliott. 
 
 U. S. Ship Constitution, Aug. 17, 1835. 
 Sir, The note which you presented me to day 1 can receive 
 only 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. Macauley — ^Present. 
 
 New York, August 17, 1835. 
 Sir, I was not authorised by General Towson to offer his 
 note to you as a challenge, but to make the following proposi- 
 tion, "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 waives any advantage from 
 that circumstance." These propositions you rejected. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 (Signed,) P. MACAULEY. 
 
 Commodore Elliott, 
 
 U. S. Frigate Constitution. 
 
 The Commodore being apprized that I should not leave the 
 city until after the Constitution sailed, I had nothing further 
 to do until that event took place, when I returned to Washing- 
 ton. 
 
46 
 
 1 he Commodore and his personal friends are endeavorincr to 
 
 Sive his correspondence a political character. They are avvlre 
 
 that il he IS judged by its real merits, he is a ruined man T 
 
 do not suppose It possible the subject can be so perverted- it 
 
 las no connexion with the passing events of the day, but're- 
 
 them The intimation that I am urged by others to perse- 
 cute him, gives him more importance than he is entitled to 
 He IS more dangerous as a friend than an enemy; and if I 
 were a partizan, as I am not. and never intend to b^ I v^ould 
 so^oner multiply the lives of such opponents than tike dieln 
 
 the* ColS^''' u 1 ^°'' '° '""J"'^^"''' ^^^'^^ «f h'^ ^"^"^ies 
 
 assur^m ^ ft' ''^ "' "'S'"« "^^ ^° P«'^^^"^« l"""^- 
 tion of th h' tT '^' "^^^^^^^^^^ent to the termina- 
 
 tion of this busmess, I have acted for myself and by myself- 
 
 N. TOWSON. 
 
 ^ 
 
 

 
APPENDIX 
 
 [Documents furnished by Commodore Elliott.] 
 
 [Doc. No. 1.] 
 
 Head Quarters, Lewiston, Sept. 25, 1812, 
 Sir : I have this moment received your letter of yesterday. 
 Stating that Lt. Elliott, has proposed to make an attempt to 
 cut out one of the vessels at Erie, and has requested your as- 
 sistance by men &;c., for the enterprise. 
 
 You will please to furnish Lt. Elliott immediately with men, 
 arms and ammunition, boats and implements of any kind to the 
 utmost of his wishes, and the means you can possibly com- 
 mand to render the enterprise successful. 
 
 ,_ . ^ , S. V. RENSSELAER. 
 
 Major General Hall, commanding at Black Rock. 
 
 [Doc. No. 2.] 
 
 Head Quarters, Lewiston, 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 enterprise. I am Sir, with gi-eat respect, your 
 most obedient servant, 
 
 S. V. RENSSELAER, 
 
 T r /• , TT r, ^. Major General. 
 
 Lt. Elliott, of the U. S. Navy, Buffaloe. 
 
 [Doc. No. 3.] 
 
 „ , Newport R. L August 27, 1834 
 
 Un theraornmg previous to the expedition. Captain Ell'iott 
 called at Head Quarters, and stated to the General that a de- 
 
as 
 
 taclnnent of Sailors had an-ivcd at. Buflliloe, oiulie 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 
 acceeded, and directed me to detail the number of soldiers re- 
 quired. Captain Elliott particularly requested that no officer 
 of the army might be detailed to accompany the soldiers who 
 would in virtue of his rank, command any naval officer, 
 who might have charge of either of the boats. This request tvas 
 also acceeded to: and in obedience to orders, I selected from 
 the infantry 30 or 40 men, (I forget the exact number,) and 
 
 PLACED THEM UNDER THE COMMAND OF EnsIGN PreSTMAN, 
 
 of the regiment of infantry, who it was intended by me should 
 be the only commissioned officer of the army sent with the 
 troops; but on going to the camp of the artillery under 
 the command of Lt. Col. Scott, to select a few men more, I 
 there 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 solici- 
 tude to engage in any perilous adventure, volunteered to go in 
 any capacity whatever. Under these circumstances I consent- 
 ed 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, fand was se- 
 cured; the other grounded on the side of Squaw Island next to 
 the enemy. Captain Elliott caused the detachment, and all 
 the prisoners to be landed ; and on the following night the ves- 
 sel which had grounded on Squaw Island, was set on fire by 
 Captain Chambers of the fifth infantry and destroyed. 
 Respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JAS. BANKHEAD. 
 
 [Doc. No. 4.] 
 
 October 8th. 
 Sir: Mr. Pressman will bring you the aid we can give. 
 He is a gallant young man, and I request that he may be al- 
 lowed to accompany you. 
 
 The God who protects the brave, guard you and give you 
 success 
 
 ALEXANDER SMYTH. 
 
 Lt. Elliott. 
 
I Doc. No. 5.] 
 
 KiNDEBHooK, July iotli, 1835. 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 * * # * I think it was on the night of the 
 10th inst. that Colonel Schuyler, then commanding the bri- 
 srade, and Colonel's Mead and Stranahan's regiments of the 
 militia, were informed, in my presence, by the militia patrols, 
 that the British were crossing the iSiagara, both above and 
 below us, in great forces. The colonel then requested me to 
 a [ ? ] few with me, and select a station on the bank of the river, 
 where I could see all that passed on it. I posted myself on 
 the bank, a little to the north of General Porter's house, and 
 immediately sent a man to camp to inform the colonel that 
 there was no movement on the river, in that direction, as far 
 as the eye could see, it being a light night. I continued to 
 despatch a man with the like infomiation 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 ad- 
 jutant of the 13th infantry, whose voice I well knew, "say- 
 ing, the enemy lias landed above and below us in great num- 
 bers, and we are on the retreat." Having left my horse with 
 General Porter's servant, the previous day, 1 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 con- 
 versation with yourself and General Porter, neither of you 
 BELIEVING the REPORT TO BE TRUE, a detachment of my 
 regiment. Captain Sprawls and Martin's company passing, [ 
 was requested to join them, which I did." 
 
 M. MYERS, 
 Late Captain ISt/i Infantry. 
 
 [Doc. No. 6.] 
 U. S. Frigate, Constitution, 
 
 New York, July 15, 1835. 
 Sir : As I had forgotten the address of the gentleman who 
 handed me your letter of the 6th inst. I was compelled to 
 send my answer of the 12th, through the Post Office; but 
 fearing least it might not come safe to your hand, or be delay- 
 ed by accident, I have thought proper to enclose you a dupli- 
 cate of the same. 
 
 I am, sir, very respectfully, your most obedient servant, 
 
 J. D. ELLIOTT. 
 Gen. Nathan Towson, Washington^ D. C. 
 
4d 
 
 [ Documents furnished by General Towson. ] 
 
 Black Rock, October 9, 18l5i. 
 
 Sir, I have the honour to inform you that on the morning 
 of the 8th instant, two British vessels, which I was informed 
 were his Britannic majesty's brig Detroit, late the United States' 
 brig Adams, and the brig Hunter, mounting 14 guns, but 
 Avhich afterwards proved to be the brig Caledonia, both said to 
 be well armed and manned, came down to the lake and an- 
 chored under the protection of Fort Erie. Having been on 
 the lines for some time, and in a measure inactively employed, 
 I determined to make an attack, and if possible to get posses- 
 sion of them. A strong inducement to this attempt arose from 
 a consideration that with these two vessels and to those which 
 I have purchased and am fitting out, I should be enabled to 
 meet the remainder of the British force on the upper lakes, 
 and save an incalculable expense and labour to the govern- 
 ment. On the morning of their arrival I heard that our sea- 
 men were but a short distance from this place, and immediately 
 despatched an express to the officers, directing them to use all 
 possible despatch in getting their men to this place, as I had 
 an important service to perform. On their arrival, which was 
 about 12 o'clock, I discovered that they had only 20 pistols, 
 and neither cutlasses nor battle axes. But on application to 
 Generals Smyth and Hall of the regulars and militia,! was sup- 
 plied with a few amis, and General Smyth was so good on my 
 recpest, as immediately to detach 50 men from the regulars, 
 armed with muskets. 
 
 By 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I had my men selected and 
 stationed in two boats, which I had previously prepared for the 
 purpose. With these boats, 50 men in each, and under cir- 
 cumstances very disadvantageous, my men having scarcely had 
 time to refresh themselves after a fatiguing march of 500 miles, 
 I put ofi' from the mouth of BufFaloe creek, at 1 o'clock the 
 following morning, and at 3 I was along side the vessels. In 
 the space of about 10 minutes, I had the prisoners all secured, 
 the top-sails sheeted home, and the vessels under way. Un- 
 fortunately the wind was not sufficiently strong to get me up 
 against a rapid current into the lake, where 1 had understood 
 another armed vessel lay at anchor, and I was obliged to nm 
 down the river, by the forts, under a heav}^ fire of round, grape, 
 and canister, from a number of pieces of heavy ordnance, and 
 several pieces of flying artillery, v/as compelled to anchor at a 
 
41 
 
 distance of about 400 yards from two of their batteries. Aftej" 
 the discharge of the first gun, from the flying artillery, I hailed 
 the shore, and observed to the officer, that if another gun was 
 fired I would bring the prisoners on deck, and expose them to 
 the same fate we would all share ; but notwitlistanding, they' 
 disregarded the caution and continued a constant and destruc- 
 tive fire. One single moment's reflection determined me not 
 to commit an act that would subject me to the imputation of 
 barbarity. The Caledonia had been beached, in as safe a 
 position as the circumstances would admit of, under one of our 
 batteries at the Black Rock. I now brought all the guns of 
 the Detroit on one side next the enemy, stationed the men at 
 them, and directed a fire, which was continued as long as our 
 ammunition lasted and circumstances permitted. During the 
 contest I endeavoured to get the Detroit on our side by sending 
 a line, there being no wind, on shore, with all the line I could 
 muster ; but the current being so strong, the boat could not 
 j-each the shore. I then hailed our shore, and requested that 
 warps should be made fast on land, and sent on board : the 
 attempt to all which again proved useless. As the fire waS 
 such as would, in all probability, sink the vessel in a short 
 time, I determined to drift down the river out of the reach of 
 the batteries, and make a stand against the flying artillery. I 
 accordingly cut the cable, made sail with very light airs, and at 
 that instant discovered that the pilot had abandoned me. I 
 dropped astern for about 10 minutes, when I was brought up 
 on our shore on Squaw island — got the boarding boat ready, 
 had the prisoners put in and sent on shore, with directions for 
 the officer to return for me and what property we could get 
 from the brig. He did not return owing to the difficulty in 
 the boat's getting on shore. Discovering a skiff" under the 
 counter, I put the four remaining prisoners in the boat, and 
 with my officers I went on shore to bring the boat off". I asked 
 for piotection to the brig of lieutenant colonel Scott, who 
 readily gave it. At this moment I discovered a boat with 
 about 40 soldiers from the British side, making for the brig. 
 They got on board, but were soon compelled to abandon her, 
 with the loss of nearly all their men. During the whole of 
 this morning both sides of the river kept up alternately a con- 
 tinual fire on the brig, and so much injured her that it was 
 impossible to have floated her. Before I left her, she had 
 several shot of large size in her bends, her sails in ribbons, 
 Jmd rigging all cut to pieces. 
 
 6 
 
42 
 
 To my officers and men I feel under great obligation. To 
 captain Towson and lieutenant Roach of the 2d regiment of 
 artillery, ensign Prestman of the infantry, captain Chapin, Mr. 
 John M'Comb, Messrs. Jol)n Town, Thomas Dain, Peter 
 Overstocks, and James Sloan, resident gentlemen of BufFaloe, 
 for their soldier and sailor-like conduct. In a word, sir, every 
 man fought as if with their hearts animated only by the inte- 
 rest and honour of their country. 
 
 The prisoners I have turned over to the military. The 
 Detroit mounted 6 six pound long guns, a commanding lieu- 
 tenant of marines, a boatswain and gunner, and 56 men — about 
 30 American prisoners on board, muskets, pistols, cutlasses, 
 and battle-axes. In boarding her I lost one man, one officer 
 wounded, Mr. John C. Cummings, acting midshipman, a bayo- 
 net through the leg ; his conduct was correct and deserves 
 the notice of the department. The Caledonia mounted two 
 small guns, blunderbusses, pistols, muskets, cutlasses, and 
 boarding pikes, 12 men including officers, 10 prisoners on 
 board. The boat boarding her was commanded by sailing 
 master George Watts, who performed his duty in a masterly 
 style. But one man killed, and four wounded bad, I am 
 afraid mortally. I enclose you a list of the officers and men 
 engaged in the enterprise, and also a view of the lake and 
 river in the dift'erent situations of attack. In a day or two I 
 shall forward the names of the prisoners. The Caledonia 
 belongs to the N. W. company, loaded with furs, worth I un- 
 derstand ^'200,000. 
 
 I have the honour to be yours, he. 
 
 JESSE D. ELLIOTT, 
 The Hon. Paul Hamilton. 
 Secretary U. iS. Navy. 
 
 From the Boston Courier. 
 The same authority, p. 330, adds — "Lieutenant Elliott 
 knew the vast importance of the command of the lakes in 
 our war against Canada, and the difficulty and delay which 
 would attend the building of the vessels, and the expense. 
 He had, in pursuance of his orders, purchased some vessels, 
 but was embarrassed witli 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 fonned the 
 heroic resolution of capturing two British brigs of war, that 
 
43 
 
 lay under the protection of the cannon of Fort Erie, (which 
 fortress we took from them since that period.) Elliott accor- 
 dingly 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 under the protection of the fort. He 
 boarded, sword in Jiand, the two vessels of war, and carried 
 them in ten minutes. He made one hundred and thirty pri- 
 soners with their officers, and released forty of his own coun- 
 trymen from captivity. They belonged to the 4th United 
 States 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 came 
 I not ever to hear of this brilliant deed before ?" I answer, 
 because heroic men never brag ; modesty and bravery go to- 
 gether, hand in hand. If individuals were silent. Congress 
 were not — who passed the following resolve: "That the Pre- 
 sident of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized to 
 have distributed as prize money to Lieutenant Elliott, his offi- 
 cers and companions, or to their widows and children, twelve 
 thousand dollars, for the capture and destruction of the Bri- 
 tish 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 De- 
 troit and Caledonia, while anchored under the protection of 
 Fort Erie.:' 
 
 The Hon. Henry Clay, when the new army bill was dis- 
 cussed in the House or Representatives, January, 1813, said 
 "The capture of the Detroit, and the destruction of the Cale- 
 donia, (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, Febmary 6, 1813, No. 1932. 
 
S9 
 

 
 
 P/k^ ^^. c-?^^ ^*^*?43»^* ^ 
 
 ^ ^ ♦Ass A*" '^o <^^ ^ 
 
 ♦O^T* A <, "0,1:* ,0^ 
 
 
 '=^..*^ 
 
 ^°.-ai>- .//i-ii^'X >°'.-;a^->- ./.•• 
 
 '^" <*^ C^ ♦' 
 
 
 
 
 O II 
 
 ..•* A 
 
 0* 6 ^1 " f 
 
 
 
 
 * ^ 
 
 • » 
 
 
 
 .-4-^ * 
 
 
 
 
 o • 
 
 
 V*«^\<?>^' . .Z^^/*"^^"'- V ... V*^'*A^' 
 
 
 ^.^ *: 
 
 "^A. * 
 
 A^V 
 
 
 • < 
 

 
 
 
 
 ,*.....-»-„ /..-^^.^ co^ia^^% /.c;, 
 
 r. °- 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^0 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ :^^o ^O^ ^;»^ ^-7^- t.*^^-^^^^" -*^^- - 
 
 <?^ * o H o ' .■^^ 
 
 
 
 
 .?^ 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 ^^^^v ►-— ^ - 
 
 
iiiliii^^^^^