Martinsburgh gazette. [volume] (Martinsburgh, Va. [W. Va.]) 1810-1825, 1814-08-25

court, and submit to my trial, when it was in nv
power so easily to have avoided III Why after the
trial, did / return alone and unattended to my re-
sldence IN Massachusetts,, and there wait the SEN
tence OF the court martial ! / do presume your an
swer must be, that this conduct only could have
resulted from a consciousness of innocence, and
afull conviction that | had done my duty.
| now ask you to consider the conduct of the
government, in relation to me ibid they believe
the black catalogue of charges they exhibited a
gainst me was true If they did, could the adj
mlnlstration have been justified in leaving me at
perfect liberty, for more than n year after | had
been furnished with a copy of these charges /!
Did the members OF the court martial, who pro-
nounced the sentence, in their consciences believe
| was guilty and deserved punishment If they
did, they acted improperly, in directing a4, to re-
turn to my home in Ma 'chusctts, without any
kind of restraint, and without requiring any Sc
curity tor my appearance to receive the execu-
ton of my sentenced This direction was given
the day after the sentence was passed. Can 1t
be presumed there was a concert bstween the
President and the court, and he had directed the
court to adopt this measure previous to the SEN
tence Is it possible it was understood between
the President and the court, previous to the con-
clusion of the trial, what the sentence should be,
and that it should be RENTED by hint And if
both the President and the court had believed in
their consciences, had been guilty OF the crimes
with which l was charged, could it be reconcil-
ed to their duty to leave me in a situation, where
l could so easily avoid the punishment which was
to have been inflicted
have stated these facts, and made these OBJ.
servations, to convince You what my whole con.
duct has manifested, l myself was conscious of
no crime, and it was not the intention either OF
the President or the court martial, that | should
receive the punishment that had been ordered.
now ask you, my fellow citizens, to decide
tnp O.trcalyaa u. L,,~ 49, H. -,k-ra ~ h.
administration in this business /! With respect to
2.3d's of the members of the court they have
ordered a sentence which in their consciences
they believed ought not to be executed.
The court in justification of their conduct, in
recommending me to the mercy of the President,
can appeal to no precedent, not even the pro-
ceedings in the trial of Admiral Byng. After
the court had found him guilty of a particular
charge, there was nothing left to their discretion
The articles of war provided that the punishment
should be death. In my case the articles OF war
provided death, or such other punishment as the
court should think proper to order. Why then
did not the court order such punishment as they
believed ought to have been inflicted
From these facts and observations, I do think
the motives of the administration must be appa-
rent. And indeed, | presume it will not be in
your power to reconcile the conduct of the Pre-
sident of the United States and the conduct OF
the court martial, without believing there was
a concert and understanding how this business
was to be conducted.
With respect to the lenity of the court, I in
formed them l did not ask it ! and | requested no
other mercy from them than that of a decision i;
that they would decide on my case, and keep me
no longer in suspense.
In regard to the pardon of the President, l
had no opportunity of requesting it because it
was granted before l had any knowledge of the
sentence. Ingratitude, l hope, is no part of my
character. But l do submit to your considera-
ton whether l ought to feel grateful to him,
when the National Intelligencer, a paper publish
ed at his door, and under his auspices, in giving
an account of the trial and announcing the
sentence, states, that the punishment is more pro-
tracted and terrible, in consequence OF a remls-
sion of the sentence. If his object was to agra
uate and increase the punishment, it cannot be cal
led an act of mercy.
There are two very important facts relating to
my situation, as commander of the north western
army, not noticed in my defence.
One, the armistice agreed to by Gen. Dear
born from which my army was expressly exclud-
ed. The other, the Presidents message to Con-
gress, the first session after the caritulation-
With regard to the first, the following are the
facts
This was an arrangement of Sir Geo. Provost,
for the sole purpose of employing all his forces
against the army | commanded. Having received
Information that the orders in council were re-
pealed, on the Cd day of August, 1872, he des-
patched Col. Baynes. his Adj. Gen. to the head
quarters OF Gen. Dearborn, at Greenbush, near
Albany, with authority to conclude an armistice
on the 9th of August, it was concluded between
Col. Baynes and Gen. Dearborn, and my army
way excluded.
Immediately after the departure of Col. Baynes
on his mission, Major Gen. Sheaffe, was ordered
to Lake Erie, with a large part of the British
force from Montreal, TO be placed under the COM
mand OF major gen. Brock. From the nature OF
the transaction, it is certain, that gen. Brock was
made acquainted with these circumstances, and
informed that he might, with safety to his posts
at Kingston, York and forts George and Erie,
march his whole fore against my army, which
had invaded the province of which Brock was
governor and commander in chief. Calculating
the distances, and the CELEBRITY with which the
British convey information, there was full time
for the purpose. Of this important arrangement
in which the army / commanded had SO much
interest, l never received any information from
( g. III n--~l- 4AAt~ L.n x-hA Ale