The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1852-04-21
Sparks's Writings of Washington. I"


Post-in reply TO the charges made against
him by that paper, as well as by Lord Ma
hon, in his history, Of mutilating and alter
ing the manuscript letters of Washington,
with the intention Of improving their style.
The vindication Of DIR. SPARKS is complete,
and shows how very superficial and shallow
we're the criticisms Of his nsSalnnis. The
following quotations. which he makes from
the Preface 20 the work in question, sufli.
ciently indicate the nature of bis defence.
1t ought 10 be promised here, that, in
preparing the manuscripts FOR the press,
have been obliged sometimes TO use a lati-
tude Of discretion, rendered unavoidable by
the mode in which the papers have been
preserved. They are uniformly copied
into volumes and this task appears 10 have
been performed, except in the revolutionary
correspondence, by incompetent, or very
cal eess trahscribcrs. Gross blundcrs con :.
Iantly occur, which not unfrequenly de-
stroy the sense, and which never could h ave
existed in the original drafts. In these ca
ses, have, Of course, considered it duty,
appcrtaning 10 the functions of faithful
editor, to hazard such corrections as the
construction Of the sentence manifestly wars
ranied, or a cool Judgment dictated. On
some occasions, the writer himself, through
haste or inadverlence, may have fallen into
an awkward use OF words, faults of grammar,
or inaccuracies OF style, ahd when such oc-
cur from this source, havo equally felt
bound TO correct them. 1t would be an act
OF objectionable inju.icc TO any author, af>
ter his death, 10 bring forth compositions,
and particularly letters written with no de-
sign 10 their publication,a commit them 10
the press without previously subjecling them
to careful revision. This exercise of an
editors duty, however, have thought il al
lowablo to extend only TO verbal and grams
maical mistakes or inaccuracies, maintaining
a scrurulous caution that the authors mean>
ing and purpose should thereby in no degree
be changed or affected"
I'm regard 10 the text also, il is proper
here to repeat what has been said in anoth-
or place, that frequent embsrrassments have
occurred. 1t was Washington's custom, il
all his letters of Importance, first to write
drafts which he transcribed. In making
the transcripts he sometimes deviated from
the drafts, emitting, inserting and altering
parts Of sentences nor did he always cor,
rect the drafts, so as 10 make them accord
with the letters rs sent to his correspondents
These imperfect drafts were laid aside and
from time TO time copied by an amanuensis
into the letter. books. Hence The drafts, as
now recorded, do not in all cases agree
precisely with the originals that were sent
away. My researches have brought under
my inspection many of these original letters
Regarding them a, containing the genuine
text, have preferred it to that in the letter.
books, and il has accordingly been adopted
wherever ii could be done.
"But the discrepancies are Of little mo-
ment, relating to the style, and not 10 the
substance. For the most part have been
obliged to rely on the letter-books and,
for the reasons here mentioned. it is proba-
bic that the printed text may not in every
particular be the same as in The originals,
that is, the corrected copies, which were sent
TO his correspondents. These remarks APP
ply chiefly TO private e tiers, written when
Washington was at Mount Vernon, and TO
those written during the French war. In
the periods of the Revolution aud the Presi.
dency, much more exac:ness was observed,
and, as far as my observation has extended,
there is generally .itera! accordance be.
tween the original letters and the transcripts
in the lelter-books."
We subjoin one of the instances cited
IN illustration of these statements
As an Illustration of the above statement
and as an evidence of the facility with which
hasty criticism may deceive itself and run
to false conclusions, we may recur TO prom
inent passage selected by the writer in the
Evening Post, in support of his charge Of
alteration and peryersion of the text. He
quotes the following extract from one Of
Washingtons letters as printed in the Life
Of Joseph Reed" dated December l2th,
l77s:
"What did or could prompt the knight (Sir
Henry Clinlon) to this expedition, is beyond
The reach of my conception, considering the
unseasonableness Of it. Three things only
appeared TO me probable; rescue Of The
Convention troops, stroke at the rear CT
our army, or a surprise of lie posts in The
Highlands. The two first had seen per-
fectly out OF his reach before left the North
River, and not conceiving that he could
miss il so much in point Of intelligence as to
mislime matters so egregious!y, III either Of
! the other tco was his objeci,) il followed oi
consequence, that the last must be his aim
and though had left him, as thought, in a
state Of security, and in TIE hands OF a good
officer, McDougall, could not help being
uneasy, lest some disaster nigh, befal them
| | posted back from Elizubetblown on the
morning Of the 9th, and got within twelve oil
fifteen miles of Kings Ferry, when wa.
met By an express informing me that the en-
emy had landed at that place, sci fire 10 het
small iog'd houses destroyed nine barrels 0
spoiled behring's and had SET sail for New
York"
In contrast with this passage, the writei
produces the following as printed in "Wash
ington's Writings
f" What did or could prompt the knigh