The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-08-05
Patrick Henry and the Truth Q
HktOry.

History.
We publish In another column letter from
William Writ Henry, of Richmond, Va, il
reference to the story embodied in the
HERALD's review of the ''AIemoirs of Johr
Quincy Adams" Our readers will rememba
that Mr. Adams in his diary related story ia
the effect thar, in o conversation with JohI
Taylo-, of Caroline, which took place on ths
2lst of March, 1924, Taylor told Adams tina;
in the Revolutionary campaign of 1871
Patrick Henry had proposed that Virgins
should be the first to submit to Great Britain
in order to obtain the most favorable terms
and, furthermore, that he supported this mo-
tion in an eloquent speech, and that, in the
opinion of Taylor, Henry chad much less
efficient agency in the Revolution than many
others.
Mr.. Henry favors us with an elaborate and
interesting discussion of the probable truth
of this narrative. He shows that Colonel
Taylor at the time he told the story was
seventy-two years of age, and that he was al
the point of dying and did die within si1
months; that the story he told was In refer.
ence TO an event that had taken place forty
three years antecedent, when Taylor was q
young man, and that it was inconsistent with
the character of Patrick Henry He further
more reminds us that John Taylor during the
life OF Patrick Henry was his political oppo-
nent belonging to the aristocratic party in
Virginia, which Henry opposed; that they
differed on the adoption of the federal consti-
tuition, Taylor avowing himself disunionist
while Henry, although opposed to the consti-
tuition, Loyalty accepted its provisions; that
the passage of the famous resolutions of 1893,
as they are known, by the Legislature OF Vir-
GINA was owing to Mr.. Taylor, and so
alarmed Henry that he resolved to return to
public life, but died before he could take his
seat in the Legislature. He reminds us that
Henry was assaulted with peculiar bitterness
by Taylor and his party, and that, therefore,
any testimony against the character of the
great orator of the Revolution from even SO
eminent man as Taylor should be weighed
scrupulously.
The period when Patrick Henry is said to
have proposed submission to Great Britain
was just before the surrender of Cornwallis,
ined closely the journal of the House and
finds no trace of the motion which Colonel
Taylor attributed to Patrick Henry. There
was no motion to go into secret session what
ever and in this essential point the story Of
Taylor is contradicted. Nor is there any sign
of faltering. ''The joarnal," writes Mr.
Henry "shows the most determined spirit OF
-, 1I,o
adopted, and Mr.. Henry appears foremost in
them all" Our correspondent makes strong
point when he shows that if Patrick Henry
had committed the blunder charged by Taylor
it would have been used against him during
his life, and especially in 1873, when he led
the opposition to the federal constitution and
it became all important to break his
influence Although he was assaled By lead
ers as competent and well informed on Revo-
lntionary matters as Henry Lee and Edmund
Randolph neither of them ever charged
Patrick Henry with desire to surrender to
the British. 1t is shown also that the time
selected by Taylor for this alleged motion is
unfortunate Tor its historical truth, as it
was in bright season of the war and not
during the dark hours. The independence of
the States was an accomplished fact, and, as
our correspondent we'll remarks, sit would
have seemed, therefore, the height of folly
for Virginia to have proposed submission.
The historical value of this discussion will
not be doubted. Patrick Henry, however,
was too great man, and bis fame is too
precious in the eyes of Americans for us to
accept upon the sole authority of political
opponent a story that would take from him
much of the lustre with which posterity sur.
rounds his name.