The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-06-09
NO BUNKER HILL BATTLE
CURIOUS BOOK WRITTEN TO DIS
PROVE THE HISTORIES.
Published Half Century Ago by
Charles Hudson Under the Shadow
of the Battle Monument.
Boston Globe.

Boston Globe.
Charles Hudson half century ago adj
dressed to the Christian public certain
doubts concerning the battle of Bunker
HILL which were subsequently published
in book form by James Munroe & Co, 13i
Washington street, Boston, and Lyceum
building, Cambridge. Evidently in connec-
ton with a religious discussion he wove an
argument to show that the patriot farmers
never fought in Charlestown, and that the
city was never burned by the British. Mr.
Hudson's essay, in part, follows:
You may, perhaps. be startled at the
idea of rejecting what is so generally be-
lieved and is so intimately connected with
the history and glory of our country as the
battle of Bunker Hill is supposed to be.
But L would ask whether the glory of the
country rests upon facts or falsehoods. L
have no desire to disturb what may be
called the hallowed associations which clus-
ter around that spot but faithful inquirer
after truth should take nothing for grant
ed but should be governed by the weight
of evidence, to whatsoever conclusions it
may lead him.
II am no more bound to believe in that
battle because such a belief is general,
than 1 am to believe in any other popular
error. If it be fact that such battle
was ever fought let it be proved; and If it
be not a fact, the sooner it is discarded the
better for the honor of our country.
1.-The Romans for ages supposed that the
glory of their country required a belief
in the ridiculous story of Romulus and Re-
mus being nursed by a wolf; but where is
the sober man at the present day who gives
any credit to that idle tale2
Now what evidence have we of the bat
tie of Bunker Hill? You will probably APP
peal TO history. But what court of justice
would receive mere hearsay evidence? The
historians who have written and the poets
who have sung of this famous battle do
not pretend that they were eyewitnesses
of the scene they describe. There seems TO
be kind of sacredness attached to history
to which it is not entitled.
Many of you, well as myself, have
seen the town Of Charlestown: and what
has been our experience concerning 1t?
Mars and the town in flames? Nothing like
ii. We have seen II repeatedly, and have
witnessed no such spectacle. our expert
ence, our uniform experience, leads us to
the conclusion that no such battle was
ever fought.
Now, according to Mr.. Hume, "A uni
form experience amounts TO proof We
have then the positive proof that Charles
town has never been the scene OF blood
that has been represented. If we rely upon
our own experience the matter Is decided
at, once. and decided against the commonly
received opinion.
"And If we take into the account the
experience of others we shall come 10 near
ly the same conclusion. OF our acquaint
ances more than ninety-nine out of one
hundred. who have visited the place, will
testify that their experience corresponds
entirely with ours.
INDIVIDUAL TESTIMONY.
There are. it is true, few individuals
among who profess 10 have been eye
witnesses of the scene which is reported to
have occurred on June Il, 1775- But what is
our experience in relation TO human testi-
mony? We know that most men may easily
be deceived. and that there are not want
ing those who will willingly deceive others.
The few who profess to have seen the bat