The Hard Road back to Fort Loudoun - some don't return
Sick. Dying. Cold. Shivering. No warm clothing. No pay. They all want to go home. Who is going home? Most of the whole army will be going home. Going home. Christmas coming. Maybe not in a Charles Dickens kind of way yet, but it was still observed.
The 2nd Virgina Regiment has to leave by law.They've already overstayed their term limit. The House of Burgesses never rescinded the deadline of 1 Dec 1758 to disband that group.
No one wants to stay here at what is now called Pittsburgh, officially as of 1 Dec 1758. Too cold. No shelter. The French and Indians burned the place down.
Most of the whole army departed the reduced Fort Duquesne on 3 Dec 1758, leaving under 250 men to garrison
the forks of the Ohio and to rebuild.
Forbes himself left for Philly 4 Dec 1758, leaving Bouquet to meet the area Indians later that day.
And that "meet and greet" was a necessity. There's still a lot of Indians around.. They didn't go home. They were already home. They were enough to overwhelm that 250 or less garrison ordered to stay.
Who Stays?
One Hundred (or 200?) of the 1st Virginia Regiment had to stay at the forks of the Ohio. See discrepancy in orders. Colonel George Washington at Loyalhanna wrote VA Lt Gov Fauquier 2 Dec 1758, that he would not have chosen to leave one Virginian behind, that the King's troops should guard the forks of the Ohio. Hugh Mercer becomes commander of the captured rubble of Fort Duquesne for the next 9 months. Lt Colonel Adam Stephen of the 1st Virginia leaves but then comes back. Captain Thomas Waggener of the 1st Virginia stays.
The Sick and the Dead and captive:
There were casualties and hostages just building the road. There was Smallpox. There were casualties in in Grant's Defeat 14 Sept 1758. Of the killed in that battle notably was Colby Chew of the 1st VA Regiment. Many hostages were taken in that battle. The French held James Grant, and Andrew Lewis. The Indians of the Great Lakes area took Thomas Gist and Kirkwood who published a diary of their captivity. And the dead from that battle were still lying above the rock cold hard ground waiting for burial 28 Nov 1758. So too were the 3 year old remains of Braddock's Defeat needing burial 27 Nov 1758. There were casualites in the attack on Loyalhannon 12 Oct 1758 and the Friendly Fire incident 12 Nov 1758. More were sick and dying in this hard, cold month of December would never make it home.
Who Goes Home?
The rest of the 1st VA Regiment and all of the 2nd Virginia Regiment leave the forks of Ohio 3 Dec 1758. And as noted before, the 2nd Virginia Regiment has to return. The House of Burgesses never undid that December 1st deadline to disband them.
They return by way of Forbes Road instead of the old Braddock's Road because their supplies were left at Loyalhanna (now Fort Ligonier) and Raystown (now Fort Bedford).
They then leave Raystown on 7 Dec 1758, writes Quartermaster John St Clair, still not adopting Forbes order of 1 Dec 1758 to call Raystown - Fort Bedford.
Colonel George Washington arrives 8 Dec 1758.
Captain Robert Stewart of the Light Hourse arrives 10 Dec 1758.
Dr James Craik arrives 16 Dec 1758.
Lt Colonel Adam Stephen arrives 20 Dec 1758. He's not sure sure if he is going to be a Lt Colonel anymore.
Who is there to greet them?
Lt Charles Smith, designated foreman of building Fort Loudoun, designated the role since 14 Nov 1756.
The Sick, The Needs
Robert Stewart, Captain of a company of the Light Horse, whose name adorns a street name of Winchester to this day, has arrived at Fort Loudoun. He writes a lot to Colonel George Washington 12 Dec 1758. Here's some of it:
"There’s no place to receive the Sick and that there should be no Surgeon or Nurses to take care of the Sick & wounded appears shockingly Barbarous.
Mr Smith [ Lt Charles Smith ] says there’s no materials to finish the Barracks & no money to procure them, those that stays in the Fort must suffer greatly for want of Wood & water—as the men are in great want of necessaries would you think proper to have the Shirts and Stockgs in the Store Issued to them.
Mr Boyd got here last night, he parted with our Troops at Reas Town and says that before he left them eight or nine had Parish’d with Cold, and that the Sick Encreasd fast . . ."
That is the way it is.
After all they went through,
cutting down forest,
building road through
impenetrable rocks
and stream
and mountain
nonstop for almost 6 months,
with little pay,
few supplies,
insufficient clothing and food,
threat of attack in a Halloween Primal Forest ---
that description of what they met at the end of the road
is the way it is.
That's it.
That's our lead story.
There's always more.
Read bits and pieces.
Skip around.
Compiled and authored by Jim Moyer 12/17/2022, 12/18/22, 12/19/22, 12/20/22, 12/21/22, 12/22/22, last update 12/23/2022, 12/25/2022, 1/1/2023
Table of Contents
Who came home
Who stayed
Garrison staying at Fort DuQuesne
Forbes ordered on 29 Nov 1758:
It is General Forbes' Orders that one Field Officer 2 Captains 6 Subs 8 Serjeants 2 Drums 200 Rank & File be left here to Garrison this Place & that half this Detachment be composed of the first Virginia Regiment & the other half of the two first Battalions of Pennsylvania . . . The Garrison of this place is to be completed with good Arms & thirty six round of Ammunition for each Man . . . . . The Troops who are to remain here to be free of duty and to be employed in erecting their Barracks for which they will be paid.
Page 175 of The British Defeat of the French in Pennsylvania, 1758: A Military History of the Forbes Campaign Against Fort Duquesne: by Douglas R. Cubbison. Footnote 60 of Chapter 10, Quote cited from Shippen Orderly Book, November 29, 1758.
Discrepancy?
Reading the above, one would interpret that to mean only 100 of the Virginia Regiment be kept at the newly dubbed "Pittsburgh"
But this letter of Washington's and the Council Minutes of the House of Burgesses indicate 200 men to remain there:
The General has in his letters told you what Garrison he proposed to leave at Fort du Quesne: but the want of Provisions rendered it impossible to leave more than 2,00 men in all there: These, without peculiar exertion, must, I fear, abandon the place—or perish. To prevent as far as possible either of these events happening, I have, by this conveyance, wrote a circular Letter to the back inhabitants of virginia; setting forth the great advantages of keeping that place—the improbability of doing it without their immediate assistance—that they may travel safely out while we hold that Post—and will be allowed good prices for such species of Provisions as they shall carry.
Founders Online Footnote:
The enclosed undoubtedly was GW’s letter to Fauquier of 28 November. Forbes’s express, or courier, probably was being sent to Williamsburg with Forbes’s (missing) letter of 26 Nov. telling Fauquier of the fall of Fort Duquesne. GW’s two letters, Forbes’s letter, and a letter from William Byrd to Fauquier were read to the council on 13 December.
Forbes’s letter is summarized in the council minutes of that date. After giving an account of the French evacuation of Fort Duquesne, probably in the same words that he used in his letter to William Denny of 26 Nov. (James, Writings of Forbes, 264–65), Forbes, according to the council minutes, went on to say “that he shall send off the Virginia Troops as soon as he can give them four Days Provisions, to set them on their March . . . hoping the Colony of Virginia will contribute, with other adjoining Provinces to enable him to fix a proper Fort, and maintain a suitable Garrison for the Defence of the Country, to establish an equitable and just Traffick with the Indians, and to allow them proper hunting Boundaries—giving an Account of the infamous Behaviour of the Little Carpenter . . . that the rest of his Nation leave him the next Day, all well satisfied—that he shall be obliged to keep about Two Hundred of Col. Washington’s Battalion, as a Part of the Troops necessary there this Winter” (Exec. Journals of Virginia Council, 6:121–24).
Source:
Kings Troops to Stay
In that same letter, GW states to Lt Gov Fauquier:
I endeavoured to shew that the Kings Troops ought to garrison it;
but he told me, as he had no instructions from the ministry relative thereto, he could not order it—and our men that are left there, are in such a miserable situation, having hardly rags to cover their nakedness—exposed to the inclemency of the weather in this rigorous season, that, unless provision is made by the country for supplying them immediately, they must inevitably perish! and, if the First V. Regiment is to be kept up any longer, or any services are expected therefrom, they should forthwith be clothed; as they are, by their present shameful nakedness—the advanced season—and the inconceivable fatigues of an uncommonly long and laborious campaign, rendered totally incapable of any kind of Service: and sickness, death and desertion must, if not speedily supplied, greatly reduce its numbers; and, to replace them with equally good men will, perhaps, be found impossible.
Source:
The name changes
A quote from Cubbison's book on the Forbes Expedition:
On December 1 [1758],
Forbes issued those orders that remain today as his most enduring legacy in North America. Specifically, he named the posts upon which he had expended so much labor and effort:
"General Forbes is please to name the different Posts as follows & all Officers serving in the Army are desired to give them their several appelations either in Writing or otherwise;
Late Fort Duquesne = Pittsburgh
Loyal Hannon = Fort Ligonier
Ray's Town = Fort Bedford "
Source:
Page 179, The British Defeat of the French in Pennsylvania, 1758: A Military History of the Forbes Campaign Against Fort Duquesne: by Douglas R. Cubbison. More on this author here. And a review here.
The letters by all the top officers --
all refer to Reastown (Raystown) and to Loyalhanna -- not Fort Bedford, not Fort Ligonier until after the French abandoned Fort Duquesne
There are some letters even after this decree still referencing the old names. Only the ones referring to old Fort Duqesne often datelined their letters with the new name of Pittsburgh.
Meeting with the Indians
Cubbison in his book on the Forbes Expedition writes:
Immediate feelers out to area Indians
Immediately upon capturing Fort Duqesne [Forbes] sent out feelers to the various Indian communities and leaders, requesting that a council be held at the first opportunity at the point of the three rivers. Unfortunately Forbes' health was so precarious, and the living conditions in the field so austere, that he could not remain until the Indians were able to reach him. Instead he deputized Bouquet to remain in his stead to confer with the Indians upon their arrival.
The Opening of the Talks
On December 4, Bouquet met with various Delaware chiefs in the camp. The council followed the traditional mores of such events, with the presentations of presents, in this case, gunpowder and lead, from Bouquet to the Indians to validate his earnestness. Once the presents were dispensed with, the conference continued with various greetings, lengthy oratory, and the exchange of strings or belts of wampum to serve as a record of the discussions, Bouquet told the Indians that the English had come merely to expel the French from the country, they would only maintain a small garrison to protect a trading post that they would erect at the point, and they intended to immeidately begin active trading with the Delawares.
At this point the British government and army had made no firm decision to construct a massive fortification at the Forks of the Ohio, so possibly Bouquet even believed that he was telling the truth.
Indians' feelings
The Delaware attested to their intent to abide by the provisions of the Treaty of Easton, and promised to assist the British garrison at the point, but stated they could not guarantee their safety. The Delaware also promised to meet with other Indian nations regarding recent events in the Ohio country.
Apparently Bouquet impressed the Indians, for one noted,
"[W]e were taken to the commander's house; officers marched before us to keep back the crowd . . . We found a fine man, who, after the most agreeable of receptions, remained standing as he spoke to us . . . during the four days we were among them, we did not hear a single word which did not tend toward good."
The council was never intended to do anything more than open a dialogue between the British and the Natives living west of the Alleghenies, and it succeeded admirably in this regard.
The modern concept of civil-military affairs did not then exist, nor had the great Prussian General Von Clausewitz yet written,"War Does Not Consist of a Single Short Blow."
GOALS OF FORBES
GARRISON
Yet, Forbes clearly comprehended that simply conquering Fort Duquesne would accomplish litte, and that only the lodgement of a secure garrison at the site of the French fort would ensure possession of the Ohio country.
PEACE WITH INDIANS
And Forbes realized that for the English garrison to retain such possession, they would have to first establish and maintain healthy relationships with tNative inhabitants who had until a short time previously been their armed and hostile opponents, and who great outnumbered them. . . . . .
Hiring the Indians and supporting their families:
The English garrison provided warriors with employment throughout the winter by paying them liberally for fresh meat they brought into the fort; helped the Natives' families survive the harsh northeastern winter by issuing the Indians with provisions; and earned their respect by requesting their assistance in monitoring the French. . . . .
Why it goes bad again
Later, after the English had constructed a massive fortification at this site without the Natives' permission, and permitted a settlement to grow upon the slopes of the hill fertilized by Grant's dead, this relationship would again disintegrate into conflict. . . . .
More Indian Talks
. . . another council was held between Lieutenant Colonel Hugh Mercer and nine chiefs of the Delawares, Shawnees, and Six Nations (Mingos) early in January.
Source:
Page 177-179, The British Defeat of the French in Pennsylvania, 1758: A Military History of the Forbes Campaign Against Fort Duquesne: by Douglas R. Cubbison. More on this author here. And a review here.
Forbes leaves for Philly
Cubbison in his book on the Forbes Expedition writes:
" . . .on December 3 the return march began. By this time Forbes was almost certainly terminally ill, and our friend Sergeant Lindenmuth recorded:
"As General Forbes was a sickly man, he did not stay long, but immediately gave orders to build barracks, most of the sick sent to Raystown [still not calling Fort Bedford yet], as most of the teamsters were going back there. December the [2nd] Captain Morgan received orders to take a command of 40 men to march on the [3rd] one day ahead of the General to build a schonsten [the precise meaning of this term is uncertain; presumably it meant a "lean-to" or section of a wall with chimney] to put up his tent against them because of the cold weather where it was necessary, under which command I was included."
Sometim early in the morning of Monday, December 4, 1758, Brigadier General John Forbes departed his newly named Pittsburgh.
The look back:
He headed east into the rising sun whose glowing rays warmed his emaciated body, and offered him hope that he might yet survive to see the rugged green shores of his native land. Just to the east of the forks, as he ascended the first pinnacle that would soon swell and join with its brothers to become the endless ridges of the Allegheny Mountains, Forbes had his litter stopped and turned around. He gazed for the last time upon a crude encampment that was already being transformed into a substantial fortification. Forbes had just written Pitt of his earnest belief that "these dreary deserts will soon be the richest and most fertile of any possessed by the British in North America." It was his reward, and Forbes heart must have swelled. He now knew that he had conquered.
Source:
Page 180, The British Defeat of the French in Pennsylvania, 1758: A Military History of the Forbes Campaign Against Fort Duquesne: by Douglas R. Cubbison. More on this author here. And a review here.
Returning by way of Forbes Road, not Braddock's Road
From George Washington
To Henry Bouquet [Pittsburgh] 29th Novr 1758.
Dr Sir
It has been represented to the Genl that it will be very inconvenient for the Virginia Troops to March along Genl Braddocks Road as their necessaries of every kind are at Loyal hannon (Men as well as Officer’s)
and that the advantages proposd in pursuing the old Road; viz. that of opening it, are very trivial; as this can always be done faster than a Body of Men can March (a little repair being wanted only)
The General from these considerations seems now Inclind to Order us down by Loyal hannon.1 I thought it expedient to inform you of this—being Sir Yr Most Obedt Hble Servt Go: Washington
ALS, British Museum: Add. MSS 21641 (Bouquet Papers). 1. GW wrote to Fauquier from Loyalhanna on 2 December.
Source:
GW time in Pittsburgh?
Since most of the army left Fort Duquesne 3 Dec 1758, and GW is already at Loyalhanna on 3 Dec 1758 the question arises: When was he at Fort Duquesne and when did he depart it? According to this letter shown above, GW datelines it Pittsburgh on 29 Nov 1758.
Just the day before, the dead of Grant's Defeat were being buried - 28 Dec 1758.
And the day before that, the 3 year old unburied of Braddock's Defeat were being buried - 27 Dec 1758.
There are no letters between 29 Nov 1758 and 3 Dec 1758 by GW.
Source:
Source:
Page 174-175, The British Defeat of the French in Pennsylvania, 1758: A Military History of the Forbes Campaign Against Fort Duquesne: by Douglas R. Cubbison. More on this author here. And a review here. Cubbison's footnote cites from Shippen's Order Book.
Capt Joseph Shippen letters
Relation of Joseph Shippen to Burd
Colonel George Washington
To The Honble Governor Fauquer. Winchester, the 9th Dec. 1758
Sir,
I arrived at this place last night, [8 Nov 1758] and was just setting out (tho’ very much indisposed) for my own House, when I was honored with your obliging favour of the 3d instant.1
My last letters would fully inform your Honor of the success of His Majesty’s arms under General Forbes—of the march of the Virginia Troops to Winchester—and the condition (the very distressed condition) the 1st Regiment is in. It is needless therefore, to recapitulate facts, or to trouble your Honor further on this head.
Reason, nay, common humanity itself points out that some respite should be granted to Troops returning from every toil and hardship that cold, hunger & fatigue can inflict: and I hope your honors sentiments correspond therein.
If I easily get the better of my present Disorder, I shall hope for the honor of kissing your hand, about the 25th instant. The want of almost every necessary for the journey—and a still greater inducemt if possible, the want of my Papers, requisite to a full and final settlement with the Country oblige me to take my own house in the way down.
Those matters which your honor has glanced at in your letters, have been fully communicated to me—That you had not the least share in causing it, I am equally well satisfied of;2 and shall think myself honored with your Esteem: Being, with the greatest Respect, your most obedient, and most oblig’d Humble Servant, G:W.
LB (recopied), DLC:GW.
1. The letter has not been found. GW left Winchester with an escort for Belvoir and Mount Vernon either this day or the next (Robert Stewart to GW, 12 Dec.; General Ledger A, folio 52; Stewart to Forbes, 14 Jan. 1759, Scottish Record Office: Dalhousie Muniments). He was in Williamsburg by 27 Dec. (General Ledger A, folio 53).
2. For what Fauquier may have “glanced at,” or alluded to, in his letters, see William Ramsay to GW, 17 Oct. 1758. Fauquier may have feared that GW might blame him for the provision in the defense bill that he signed on 12 Oct. stipulating that there would be no chaplain, adjutant, quartermaster, or fort major in GW’s regiment and that he as colonel would no longer have allowance for his table (7 Hening 171–79). When writing to Forbes on 19 Nov. in response to Forbes’s inquiry about getting a little more money from the Virginia assembly, Fauquier responded that this was not a good time for him to ask it. “Some young Members chose into the Assembly,” he explained, “promised great Things to their Constituents, and set out on this principle; so that it was judged expedient by all sober minded Men not to mention many things, that the great One of keeping the Regiments in pay might not receive any Obstructions” (Reese, Fauquier, 1:107–9).
(Reese, Fauquierdescription beginsGeorge Reese, ed. The Official Papers of Francis Fauquier, Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, 1758–1768. 3 vols. Charlottesville, Va., 1980–83.description ends, 1:107–9).
Source:
Capt Robert Stewart
To George Washington
From Robert Stewart Winchester Decemb. 12th 1758
Dear Sir The Baggage arriv’d here the night before last [16 Dec 1758] but the horses so low and Jaded as they could not proceed before this day I have sent Keating & two others to see it safe to the Quarter.1
There’s no place to receive the Sick and that there should be no Surgeon or Nurses to take care of the Sick & wounded appears shockingly Barbarous.
Mr Smith says there’s no materials to finish the Barracks & no money to procure them, those that stays in the Fort must suffer greatly for want of Wood & water—as the men are in great want of necessaries would you think proper to have the Shirts and Stockgs in the Store Issued to them.
Mr Boyd got here last night, he parted with our Troops at Reas Town and says that before he left them eight or nine had Parish’d with Cold, and that the Sick Encreasd fast.2
My Fever still continues and nobody here that can give me the smallest Releif nor is it diminishd by the Intelligence we had of the Assemblys Determination about our Regt (if it now may be call’d one). the very name of Ranger is horrible. its Duty if well executed insupportable by at least 9/10ths of the Human Species, it’s nature inconsistent with order & Discipline and that Brave Corps equally Distinguish’d by their Discipline and Intrepidity before the Enemy will too probably soon dwindle to a Licentious Crowd3—
as I would willingly make every effort to secure some kind of Retreat from what I so much dislike I would (if it should not appear like an abuse of that good nature & disinterested Friendship so often Demonstrated in my behalf) Beg you would be so good as to use your Interest with the Governor to make me an Adjutant to the Militia this the late Governor often told me should be a back door for me in case I should be disappointed in my military expectations which (he added) could not well happen[.] I am told there is a vacancy and a total ignorance of the Service must render some of those that enjoy them very unequal to the office—I know how disagreeable it is to ask a favour of a great man and nothing but dire necessity could induce me to beg your doing it—from the present Circumstances of Affairs and your Situation in Life I’m perswaded such a favour at this juncture would not be refus’d you. I am really asham’d at my giving such great & frequent trouble indeed it seems odd I should give you the most who is best dispos’d to do for me, tho’ that its natural cause.4
I shall ever retain the most grateful sense of the manifold Friendly & obliging offices you have been pleas’d to do me, to merit which will always comprehend a large share of his ambition who is with the most perfect & unalterable Esteem My Dear Colo. Your most Affecte & most obliged hble Servant
Robert Stewart
my present Situation will I hope render an appology for my writing &ca badly unnecessary. ALS, DLC:GW.
1. For the “Baggage” sent to “the Quarter,” GW’s Bullskin plantation, see Christopher Hardwick to GW, this date. Hardwick’s letter to GW, which is in fact a receipt, may be the “memorandum” that the cover sheet indicates was enclosed in Stewart’s letter. Keating was probably John Keating, a soldier in Robert Stewart’s company.
2. See Charles Smith to GW, 2 Dec. 1758, and note 3 of that document. The Virginia troops seem to have arrived in Winchester after the baggage got there on 10 December. On 7 Dec. John St. Clair wrote Forbes from Raystown: “The two Virginia Regts march from this to morrow” (Scottish Record Office: Dalhousie Muniments).
3. “An Act for the defence of the Frontiers of this Colony . . .,” passed 12 Oct. 1758, provided among other things for the stationing of the men in the 1st Virginia Regiment “in small parties or detachments upon the frontiers of this colony, and be employed in ranging thereon” (7 Hening 171–79).
4. Although there is some evidence from their correspondence that GW urged and Fauquier looked with some favor upon Stewart’s appointment as an adjutant in the Virginia militia, he was never given the position. Stewart continued in the Virginia Regiment until the end of the war, and beginning in January 1759 he also held a lieutenant’s commission in the Royal American Regiment (see Stewart to GW, 16 Jan. 1759, n.7). Most of his numerous letters to GW during the next five years have as their theme Stewart’s pressing need for military preferment.
Source:
.
.
To George Washington
From Robert Stewart Fort Loudoun Decembr 20th 1758
Dear Sir Inclos’d are Returns of the First V. Regt and the Stores here, the former left for you to Sign the other sign’d by Mr Smith1
I likewise take the liberty of Inclosing you a Copy of my accots relative to the Troop, if any thing can be done I hope you will Please remind the Governor and Assembly that I nor my Officers have never received any Pay, allowance for Horses, Bat or Forrage Money and the high Pay and Emoluments the Pensylvania Horse Officers receiv’d tho’ each of them Drew Pay in the Foot agreeable to the different Ranks, they therein held—Your placing the manifold Essential Services the Horse perform’d in the Course of the Campaign of which the Foot were incapable in a Just point of view to the Assembly might probably alter their Sentiments and produce the desir’d Effect.2
The wretched Situation want of Cloathing, necessaries, a long Series of uncommon hardships severe Duty and even want of needfull Food & rest has reduc’d your Regiment to makes no small addition to the horrible Impression the last Campaign has given the 2d V. Regt of a Military Life, and as yet render’d our utmost Efforts in Recruiting any of them abortive—I humbly conceive that if any Recruits can be got it must be where they are Strangers to the melancholy Condition our men are in We yesterday had them under Arms and the miserable and shameful appearance they made was really moving It certainly would be for the Interest of the Country either to have them immediatly Cloath’d, properly equip’t as Soldiers and render’d fit for Service or Disbanded as in their present deplorable Situation, they are an Expence and can be of no real use, and Dejection, murmurs and Desertion must be the inevitable consequences of this unaccountable Neglect.
I long till I know what you have or can do in that affair I sollicited you for in my last by Miles, as the very thoughts of being a Ranger is insupportable, tho’ I am creditably inform’d that these Compys are very benificial and that some of the Ranging Capts. make more money than ever you did by the Regt. But surely he that wou’d for the sake of money swerve from the Principles of Honr does not merit the Title of Officer and for my own part I solemnly Declare I would rather Serve in the Ranks than deviate from my Honr. But as you are perfectly acquainted with my Sentiments, the Circumstances I am under and am fully satisfied with your Inclination towards me will add no more on this Subject.
If the Assembly sits soon I should be extremely glad to get Liberty to go down for a few days and in the mean time I beg leave to Subscribe myself With the most perfect Esteem My Dear Colo. Your Most Affecte & Most Obliged hble Servt Robert Stewart
ALS, DLC:GW.
1. Neither of these returns has been found. See Stewart to GW, 12 Dec. 1758, n.3.
2. GW might well have noted that it was the light horsemen that Forbes sent ahead on 24 Nov. who discovered that the French were gone from Fort Duquesne. See Orderly Book, 24 Nov. 1758.
Source
.
.
Dr James Craik
.
.
To George Washington
From James Craik Winchester Decr 20th 1758
Dear Sir We arrived on saturday last after a fatigueing & most severe march—The men & officers both suffer’d very much from hunger & cold—Many of our men were obliged to be left at Raes Town & other places on the road through sickness; numbers of which, I fear will never see this place—Great numbers are dayly flocking to the Hospital; and what is still more dreadfull not one medecine to give them for their relief. I heard when I came down the Surgn was broke yet rather than let brave fellows suffer—I have dispatched an Express to Fridricksburg for some most material things; at my own risk.1
If The Troops are keept up medecines must be had for them—Therefore have inclosed a list of the most necssary Articles, And those will be immediatly wanted. for what I sent for; were but few, & I doubt much if they can be got at Fredricksburg2—
As you are present; Remonstrating the hardships the men ly under when sick for want of proper Accomodations, such as beding, Barley, Oatmeal, Sugar &c. probably they might be redress’d—
We are very anxious here to know the fate of the Troops, and who will be Commander.
When the Regiment meets with that irrepareable lose, loseing you—The very thoughts of this lyes heavy on the whole whenever they think of it—and dread the consequences of your resigning3—
I would gladly be advised by you whether or not you think, I had better continue,
if they choose to keep me untill my Medecines come from England, or whether I had better resign directly—for I am resolved not to stay in the service when you quit it—The Inhabitants of this place press me much to settle here—I likewise would crave your advise whether or not you think I had better except of their importunities—or settle in Fairfax where you was so kind as to offer me your most friendly assistance4—I hope you’l pardon my freedom in giving you this trouble—For as I have experienced so much of your friendship and received so much friendly countenance from you—I cannot help consulting you on this occasion as my most sincere freind.
I am extremly sorry to hear your bad state of health
remain’d with you when here—However I flatter my self with the hopes that you are well—And that as the fatigues of war are now mostly over, you will recover dayly.
By Mr Boyd I have sent down all my Accots that were not settled, & hope now to clear of all old scores—If you don’t expect to be up soon, would beg the favour of a line from you—I ever am with the greatest Respect & Sincerity Dr Sir Your most obliged & obedt hume Sert Jas Craik
ALS, DLC:GW.
1. For other references to sickness and lack of medical care for the soldiers, see Charles Smith to GW, 2 Dec., and Robert Stewart to GW, 12 December. “Saturday last” was 16 December.
2. The list of medicines needed has not been found. Craik was not able to get what he wanted from Fredericksburg. See Craik to GW, 29 Dec. 1758.
3. This is the first reference in GW’s surviving correspondence to his impending departure from the regiment that he had commanded since September 1755.
4. Craik seems to have remained in Winchester at least until early 1760 and in the Virginia Regiment as well. At the end of the war he settled in Port Tobacco, Maryland. In the ensuing years Craik was a frequent visitor to Mount Vernon and attended GW in his final illness.
But in Craik's letter to GW 29 Dec 1758, Craik asks to resign soon: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/02-06-02-0144
Source:
.
.
.
.
CHARLES SMITH
Meet Lt Charles Smith:
GW’s campaign finance manager,
personal accountant,
overseer of building Fort Loudoun
.
Compiled by Jim Moyer 11/26/2016, 11/8/2018
The Nook.
The Berryville Connection
John Hite sold in 1765 the area that was to become Berryville to his son-in-law, Charles Smith, whose son in 1797 sold to Benjamin Berry. Charles Smith’s house, The Nook, still stands at 106 E Main St Berryville VA. Navigate Google car to see Charles Smith’s house: https://goo.gl/maps/U8dPR3Zj4sG2
Berryville could’ve been named Smithville or Smithton – after Charles Smith. Benjamin Berry, plat designer of Berryville, could have named it after Charles Smith just like Lt Col Adam Stephen, plat designer of Martinsburg, named it after Thos Bryan Martin.
See picture of house in this link:
.
When Charles Smith died, he left the parcel to his wife, and eventually it was divided among their four children, Charles, John, Elizabeth Morton, and Sarah Easten.1John sold a portion of his land to Benjamin Berry, the town of Berryville’s
.
Wikipedia Berryville VA:
Earlier in the 18th century the area was the site of an 800-acre estate of the same name owned by Charles Smith, The Battletown estate’s main residence, known today as the Nook, was built between 1755 and 1765 and still survives at 106 E. Main Street.
.
When Charles Smith died, he left the parcel to his wife, and eventually it was divided among their four children, Charles, John, Elizabeth Morton, and Sarah Easten. John sold a portion of his land to Benjamin Berry, the town of Berryville’s founder.
.
He is treasurer who paid for all the alcohol for the July 24, 1758 election win of Colonel George Washington. He supervised building of Fort Loudoun 1756-1758. The year before, Lt Charles Smith killed a man with one punch. He was exonerated. See story. He was personal accountant to George Washington’s private financial matters as well. Charles Smith managed accounts of GW’s Bullskin Plantation near Charles Town. He was with George Washington at Fort Necessity. See all letters between Charles Smith and George Washington.
The Punch that Killed
[Fredericksburg, 15 September 1757] Thursday ½ after 3 oClock
.
Lieutt Charles Smith
about ½ an Hour since
unfortunately killed a Man
(to whom he was intire Stranger)
by a slight Stroke on the Nose without any Malice,
his Freinds here will enter into Bond
as the Majistrates think him Intitd traditur in Ballium
Mrs Smith is very desirous of seeing you &
desired me to write to you to come immediately here.
in haste I am with my Love to Lucy yr Br
.
Source:
CHRONOLOGY
Battle of Fort Necessity
He was with George Washington at the Battle of Fort Necessity in 1754.
Ctrl F, type his name to find in the list. See link: https://www.nps.gov/fone/learn/historyculture/roster.htm
Promoted to Ensign
17 September 1755
Source:
.
Ensign Charles Smith learns to build forts
under Captain Thomas Waggener on the South Branch of the Potomac River:
.
Charles Smith, who was made an ensign in the new Virginia Regiment in September 1755, spent the summer of 1756 as an officer in Waggener’s company working on forts on the South Branch. After his return to Winchester, he became, on 14 Nov. 1756, the overseer of the construction of Fort Loudoun there. See GW’s Orders, 18 Sept. 1755, n.5.
.
Source:
.
9 January 1756
Ensign [Charles] Smith is under the comand of 6th Company Captain John Savage, Lieutenant John Blagg
12 July 1756
A lot of detail on who was in which company, their rank, enlist dates, physical descriptions.
.
.
7 October 1756
Skirmish
On 7 Oct. 1756 the Pennsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia) printed an “Extract of a Letter from Captain Waggoner, of the Virginia Regiment, commanding on the South Branch of Potowmack,” which reported: “Last Week as Ensign Smith was coming from Sibley’s Mill with 12 Men, he was fired upon by a Party of Indians, which he, after a pretty smart Fire of 10 or 15 Minutes, put to Flight, and brought off 16 Matchcoats, 12 or 14 Pair of Moccasons, several Scalping Knives, and 4 very neat French Fuzees [light muskets], half mounted with silver. The Bones of an Indian were found near the Place a Day or two after, his Body being destroyed by the Wolves, &c. It was thought there were 20 or 30 Indians.”
.
Founders Online footnote:
.
.
.
9 October 1756
Ensign Charles Smith is STILL assigned to under Captain Waggener who was assigned to build forts on the South Branch of the Potomac River.
.
Ensign Charles Smith gained experience building those forts. He then became the Foreman of building Fort Loudoun Winchester VA.
.
.
November 14, 1756
PROMOTED FOREMAN.
Overseer of Construction at Fort Loudoun
Ensign Smith duties is now the top Foreman, supervising the construction workers of the fort.
.
.
The Officers are no longer to take their tour of Duty in overlooking the workmen—Ensign Smith is appointed for that purpose, and to be exempt from all other duty.1 No orders upon the Commissary, Quarter-master or any other person or persons for necessaries for the work or work-men to be given by an officer commanding here in my absence, without such order is first signed by Mr Smith; who is to be careful in seeing that such thing or things as he shall require, be really wanted, before he draws for them. He is to give constant attendance on the work-men; to be present always at calling the Rolls; and to observe all such orders as have hitherto been issued, for keeping the men to their duty. The Adjutant for this purpose, is to give him a copy of these orders. The Quarter-master is to give in early in the morning, an exact Return of all the public Stores at this place; distinguishing those that are come from Fort-Cumberland, from those here, before: and such as have been brought from Fredericksburgh & Alexandria.2 To this Return he must add those Stores which are now on the way from Fort Cumberland; if he has got a list of the particulars.
.
Supervised work at Fort Loudoun. The exact date of Ensign Charles Smith being Foreman of Construction is 14 November 1756. Founders Online Footnote: For GW’s plans and specifications for the construction of the fort, seeWilliam Fairfax to GW, 10 July 1756, n.3. John Christopher Heintz, a German, was the well digger. More about that Well and the Well digger? See link.
.
.
.
.
Promoted to Lieutenant
12 June 1757
September 1757.
The Punch that Killed.
Charles Smith punched Thomas Frazier, a postman rider in a tavern in a dispute. Frazier died half an hour later. Charles Smith turned himself in and was exonerated. P42, Norman Baker’s Fort Loudoun. And see this link: http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/02-04-02-0266-0002
.
1758 election
Campaign Finance Manager
campaign manager for GW, buying alcohol for the voters.
.
.
and 2 Dec. 1758.
.
More on the 24 July 1758 election itself.
12 October 1758
Paid the Miner digging the Well
handled disbursements to the “miner” of the well which lasts to this day.
.
.
.
SUMMARY OF LIFE:
The Founders Online footnote mentions Charles Smith’s “long career.”
.
Doesn’t seem “long” if it was only from 1754 Fort Necessity to 1761 Fort Loudoun. But when you read all the letters and follow the trail of Charles Smith, you end up feeling like it was a long career. Much happened. Much accomplished.
.
Founders Online Footnote:
.
Charles Smith (d. 1776) spent most of his
long career in the Virginia Regiment,
from his appointment as ensign on 17 Sept. 1755
until taking his first leave in Sept. 1761,
at Fort Loudoun near Winchester.
After Smith spent the winter of 1755–56 recruiting
and the following summer with
Capt. Thomas Waggener’s company
on the South Branch of the Potomac,
GW brought him back to Winchester
and in Nov. 1756 put him in sole charge
of the construction of the fort being built there.
GW secured for Smith a lieutenancy
in the summer of 1757
and the command of the garrison at Fort Loudoun in June 1758.
.
While at the fort, Smith also served GW in less official ways,
among other things forwarding his mail,
keeping an eye on GW’s nearby Bullskin plantation,
and in the summer of 1758 supervising
the dispersal of funds for
GW’s election to the House of Burgesses from Frederick County.
See particularly
Smith to GW, 23 Feb.; 1, 20, 24, 26,
and 2 Dec. 1758.
After he left the regiment,
Smith became a vestryman and a member of the
county court in Frederick County.
He was married to the daughter of GW’s friend Col. John Hite of Frederick County.
.
.
.
All Letters in 1758
Died 1776
No more info on exact date
Location and Date Not confirmed yet:
He passed away on 1776 in Kentucky, USA.
1780
.
BY an act of the General Assembly of Virginia of October 3, 1780, the old vestries were dissolved and the severance between the Church and State was effected. . IN addition to the vestrymen already named it will be of interest to give the names of a few others who served in that capacity prior to 1780. They are Isaac Hite, John Hite, Jacob Hite, John Neville, Charles Smith, James Wood (afterwards a General in the Continental Army, and Governor of Virginia about 1816) [“Old Churches,” &c, page 284], Angus McDonald, Philip Bush, Marquis Calmes, John McDonald, Warner Washington, Edmund Taylor, &c.
.
.
.
.
1785
WIFE DIED
.
Rebecca Eltinge Smith (Hite)
Birthdate:
1740
Birthplace:
Red Bud, Frederick, Virginia, United States
Death:
Died August 6, 1785 in Berryville, Clarke, Virginia, United States
Immediate Family:
Daughter of John I. Hite, Colonel and Sarah Zara Hite Wife of Charles Marshall Smith Mother of John Smith; Charles Marshall Hite Marshall Smith; Elizabeth Hite Morton and Sarah Hite Eastin Sister of Anne Maria Taylor (Hite); Elizabeth Hite; John Hite, Jr; Eleanor Hough; Margaret Brown and 2 others; Sarah Hite and Rebecca Hite « less Half sister of Christopher Hite
.
Source:
.
.
.
SOLD 1797
.
Major Smith’s son, John Smith, in 1797 sold 20 acres (81,000 m2) of his inheritance to Benjamin Berry and Sarah (Berry) Stribling, who divided it into lots for a town. It was established as the town of Berryville on January 15, 1798. By 1810, the town had at least 25 homes, three stores, an apothecary (pharmacy), two taverns, and an academy (school). It was not much larger when it became the county seat of newly-formed Clarke County in 1836.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
RELATED LINKS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Letter from John Smith in Hancock Maryland to Charles Smith, near Battletown, Frederick County, Virginia dated May 12, 1808. Letter details safe arrival in Maryland and further travel plans via boat to Cincinnati, OH.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
House of Burgess 2nd VA Regiment Deadline
Virginia Session closes
On the same day of that attack, not yet known by the legislature, October 12, 1758 Lt Gov Fauquier announces the last day of this session of the House of Burgessess:
That you may have a proper Time for the Discharge of your private Functions, it is convenient you should now be prorogued,
and you are accordingly prorogued to the Third Thursday in December next.
Porogued meant closing down. This session was ending. Next Session? Third Thursday in December next? That meant December 21, 1758.
Source:
That was going to be way too late.
1 December 1758 was the ending date of service for the 2nd Virginia Regiment. This would have been okay if the Forbes expedition was going to sit out the Winter and resume the campaign in the Spring.
But reports emerged 12 Nov 1758 from captured enemy indicating Fort Duquesne was vulnerable. This meant the expedition needed to move forward towards the enemy Fort Duquesne. This might involve a long seige. This might take longer than the 1st of December.
So, the House of Burgesses was asked by Lt Gov Fauquier to come back into session to extend date of service past 1 Dec 1758.
November 9, 1758
Lt Gov Fauquier opens an emergency session of the House of Burgesses.
Fauquier asks for an extension.
I am very sensible that one of our Regiments
[meaning the 2nd Virginia Regiment]
cannot be continued beyond the first of December,
. . .
for if your Resolves are not known to the Army before the first of December,
all will be frustrated:
. . .
Mr Speaker also reported,
that the Governor had delivered to him a Letter of the 22d of October last, from General Forbes, also a Letter from Colonel Byrd, of the 21st of October, which he had desired him to lay before this House; and he accordingly delivered them in at the Table, where they were read, and ordered to lye on the Table.
Upon a Motion made,Resolved, That this House will resolve itself into a Committee, to consider of the Governor’s Speech immediately.
Source:
Somehow, the House of Burgesses changes what the Lt Gov Fauquier asked them to do. He asked for an extension of the troops to stay with the Forbes Expedition. The House of Burgesses avoid addressing the question of extending the 2nd VA regiment deadline past 1 Dec 1758. Instead they look at extending only the 1st Va Regiment's stay outside the colony. And is that not interesting that this implies the Virginia Regiments are acting in an area outside of the colony of Virginia?
Here's the actual statute. Hennings Volume 7, Chapter 1, pages 251-253:
Here is House of Burgesses Journal discussing the Lt Governor's request and stating they are acting on it.
Again notice the last line. Does this clearly state that the Virginia Regiments are acting in an area outside of the colony of Virginia?
Resolved, That the Speaker be directed (when the Houfe fliall be commanded by the Governor to attend him with the inrolled Bill for his Assent to return his Honor the Thanks of this House for waving the Ceremony of an Address due to him at the Opening of this Session, for the Sake of Dispatch, and to assure him we have done every Thing, as far as in our Power, to co-operate with his Honor's Ardency for the common Cause ; and to desire that his Honor will be pleased to signify to General Forbes, That the Expediation of Success from his Conduct has been
the sole Motive of agreeing to poftpone the March of the first Regiment to the Frontiers of this Colony.
Source:
Now back to the last part of the statute.
Their solution? The 2nd Virgina Regiment will still disband 1 Dec 1758. And the 1st Vrginia Regiment must come back to the colony to defend it or else its pay will discontinue. But !! Loophole. If a higher authority requires the 1st Virginia Regiment to stay helping then such a request is allowed.
.
Footnote for letter
From George Washington to Francis Fauquier,
9 December 1758
2. For what Fauquier may have “glanced at,” or alluded to, in his letters, see William Ramsay to GW, 17 Oct. 1758. Fauquier may have feared that GW might blame him for the provision in the defense bill that he signed on 12 Oct. stipulating that there would be no chaplain, adjutant, quartermaster, or fort major in GW’s regiment and that he as colonel would no longer have allowance for his table (7 Hening 171–79).
When writing to Forbes on 19 Nov. in response to Forbes’s inquiry about getting a little more money from the Virginia assembly,
Fauquier responded that this was not a good time for him to ask it. “Some young Members chose into the Assembly,” he explained, “promised great Things to their Constituents, and set out on this principle; so that it was judged expedient by all sober minded Men not to mention many things, that the great One of keeping the Regiments in pay might not receive any Obstructions” (Reese, Fauquierdescription beginsGeorge Reese, ed. The Official Papers of Francis Fauquier, Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, 1758–1768. 3 vols. Charlottesville, Va., 1980–83.description ends, 1:107–9).
Source:
Hugh Mercer
In charge of the Point for 9 months:
As the French and Indian War progressed, he was appointed a Captain in 1756, commanding a company in the colony’s provincial armed forces. Captain Mercer participated in the Kittanning Expedition in September 1756, where he was wounded. By September of 1758, he had been promoted to Lieutenant Colonel and was preparing for the Forbes Expedition to capture Fort Duquesne, which brought him into contact with Colonel George Washington. Once the post was taken, Mercer was selected to command “the point” for nine tenuous months until construction on Fort Pitt could begin. The Commander-in-Chief of the British Army in North America, Sir Jeffrey Amherst, commended Colonel Mercer’s professionalism by writing, “Some such men as Col Mercer amongst the Provincials would be of great Service…”
Hugh Mercer Assumes Control:
Even though Hugh Mercer was assigned as commander of the garrison building a fort, he did not arrive on the Point, the Forks of the Ohio until 17 Dec 1758.
Founders Online footnote to a letter Robt Stewart wrote to GW 31 Dec 1758:
Footnote 5. Col. Hugh Mercer wrote Bouquet from Pittsburgh on 19 Dec.:
“On my arrival here the 17th I found the works carrying on with great expedition, the Barracks being raisd & roofed & the Bastions almost inclosd. In a few days more the heaviest parts of our Work will be finish’d”
(Stevens, Bouquet Papersdescription beginsDonald H. Kent et al., eds. The Papers of Henry Bouquet. 6 vols. Harrisburg, Pa., 1951-94.description ends, 2:635–36).
Source
Adam Stephen
Here's one proof Adam Stephen stayed.
He was Colonel George Washington, second in command, ranked Lt Colonel. And Forbes had ordered half of the garrison to stay at the Point, on the Forks of the Ohio had to come from the 1st Virginia Regiment. The other half was to be pulled from the Pennsylvania Battalions.
Although this shows Adam Stephen at Fort Ligonier instead of at the Forks of Ohio under fort commander Hugh Mercer, we know that Adam Stephen became Lt Colonel under Colonel Byrd who took over the 1st Va Regiment when George Washington resigned and the 2nd Virginia Regiment was entirely disbanded.
THE PENNSYLVANIA MAGAZINE OF HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY Vol. CXXX, No. 1 ( January 2006)
Soldiers and civilians were often cold and hungry, but they seldom starved. Commanders worked hard to provide for everyone they deemed necessary to operations and troop welfare. Making that determination, however, meant that they had to try to get rid of some followers, especially before the exigencies of winter.
Bouquet ordered Colonel John Armstrong of the First Battalion, Pennsylvania Regiment, to reduce the number of women at Ligonier when he arrived there in September 1759. Armstrong passed on the order to Lieutenant Colonel Adam Stephen of the Virginia forces that were already at the fort. Stephen then sputtered back to Bouquet that he had read his directions “about the fair, I may Say, the foul Sex,” and that he was not part of the problem but that Armstrong was. He has brought up a mere Seraglio with him, and among the Rest, three of our Cast offs, Sent down some time ago. If a person of his Rank and Gravity, a person whose example is so much respected, Connive at these things I fancy the thing will soon gain ground. All the women I wanted to get rid off, claim his patronage, and I have been obliged to Confine a Groupe of them, for pretending to go down, and then fetching a Compass, and Returning in the night to the Suburbs of Ligonier again.
Caught between Stephen’s disapproval and Bouquet’s orders, Armstrong did try to push some women back east—and found success as difficult to achieve as Stephen had. Armstrong admitted to Bouquet that “as No Orders, are Obey’d by the Females I’m beginning to Duck & Drum Out, but nothing less than force will persuade them to Visit their Old friend Capt Ourry, . . . they are in short the Bane of any Army, the Devil & two Sticks.”
This was the same man who later, in 1761, wondered how Bouquet could live so long in the wilderness without a wife; but, of course, there was a difference between officers’ consorts and soldiers’ women. Most of the women followers were not troublemakers, but those few who were colored the perceptions of observers. For instance, there was Sergeant John Coulton’s wife, who had been staying at Fort Pitt while her husband served at Venango. But then Mrs. Coulton eloped with the sutler Thomas Spencer in January 1761 and took off with money that was not her own. Sergeant Angus McDonald stopped her and her companion at Fort Burd when she could not produce a pass and, upon learning that they were not at liberty to leave, returned the two to Pittsburgh. Resolution was not a simple matter, however, for it appears that Mrs. Jacobs, a resident at Fort Burd, had, in turn, robbed Mrs. Coulton. McDonald found the money but could not get Jacobs to account for the other goods taken. As Jacobs was “in a condition not to be Ruffely dealt with,” the harassed sergeant sent her up with the others for Bouquet’s judgment. He also requested that Bouquet “not suffer Mrs Jacobs to Come to this garrison any more as She is a notorious thief and a common disturber of the garrison and is of no service Here.” Note that additional
.
.
Sources:
Footnote 66
Armstrong to Bouquet, Fort Ligonier, Sept. 14, 1759;
Stephen to Bouquet, Fort Ligonier, Sept. 16, 1759;
and Armstrong to Bouquet, Sept. 23, 1759;
in Bouquet Papers, 4:94, 114, 136.
THE PENNSYLVANIA MAGAZINE OF HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY Vol. CXXX, No. 1 ( January 2006)
But this shows Adam Stephen did leave Pittsburgh. He does come back after he finds out he will be 2nd in comand to Byrd of the new reconstituted Virginia Regiment.
Captain Robert Stewart writes from Fort Loudoun, Decembr 29th 1758 his take on Lt Col Adam Stephen’s behavior:
.
About 9 days ago Lt Colo. Stephens arrived here. I immediatly waited on him, shew’d him your Orders and offer’d to give them up to him as Commanding Officer
.
but he before several Officers said that as he understood that the assembly had voted away the Lt Colo. he would no further be concern’d with the Command,2
.
only to Sign the Discharges of the Drafts upon which I retain’d the Command till yesterday
.
he without giving me the least notice, order’d the Adjutant to make him a Return of the Regiment, and that Jenkins might be got ready to go to Williamsbg—
.
as I knew him, was at no loss to account for this extraordinary Behaviour,
.
and plainly saw his Intentions by Signing the Discharges and Transmitting the Returns was to make it appear to the Governor and you that he Commanded while I did the Duty,
.
therefore I desir’d he would either take the Sole Command or no part of it, the former he made choice off, as his being reduc’d was not given out in Orders,
.
and I suppose till then he will be entitled to his Pay—should be vastly glad to know from you what is done in that affair and whether he is an officer in your Regiment or not? or if he is what his Rank is?
.
.
Capt Thomas Waggener
Founders Online footnote to a letter Robt Stewart wrote to GW 31 Dec 1758:
Footnote 4. GW used Lt. Nathaniel Gist of the 1st Virginia Regiment as a scout in his march from Loyalhanna to Fort Duquesne. Francis Austin, a 42–year-old Englishman, was a sergeant in Capt. Thomas Waggener’s company in the 1st Virginia Regiment, which at this time was stationed at Pittsburgh.
Source
Christmas Past 1750s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Comments