Major General William Heath to George Washington, 21 April 1781
From Major General William Heath
West point, April 21. 1781.
Dear General,
I have been honored with your two favors of the 20th.1 I am informed that twelve or thirteen men have deserted from the light infantry—but few of them have come to their regiments. It is generally thought, that such as have not come in, are lurking in the vicinity of the post to hear how those who have come in are treated.2
The subaltern who was with Captain Pope, and who had the immediate charge of the prisoners when several of them made their escape, shall be arrested this day and brought to tryal the beginning of next week.3
Mr Hutton will be brought to tryal this morning.4 I do not know which of the two criminals who are under sentence, is the worst—Walker is exceedingly penitent. By the proceedings of the general court-martial which are inclosed, one John Williams is sentenced capitally.5 Williams and Walker belong to the same line. Perhaps your Excellency may think it unnecessary to execute them both. Walker is a foreigner, a british soldier, taken prisoner on the lakes. Williams, I believe, is an American—has inlisted three or four times—has been whipped twice one hundred lashes—has done very little duty—and may deserve death as much as Walker.6 Nathan Gale belongs to the Rhode Island line—I do not know his character—I think Colonel Greene, some time since, informed me, that an example was necessary in their line.7
In the year 1759, when General Amherst was at Crown point, a criminal was to be executed. The Provost marshal offered fifty gunieas to a man to be executioner. The man refused. The Provost marshal waited on the General, begged he might be excused from being executioner, or that he might resign his appointment. General Amherst would not consent to either. The Provost marshal performed the execution.8
I am exceedingly sorry so often to repeat to your Excellency our alarming situation on account of the scantiness of provision, as I know every possible means in your power has, and will be exerted for our relief. Nearly half the Irish beef is already gone—& yesterday morning we had not half a ration of flour per man, at the post. 120 barrels arrived in the afternoon.9 I have the honor to be With the greatest respect, Your Excellency’s Most obedient servant
W. Heath
P.S. Such of the proceedings of the court martial as do not amount to capital sentences, I will save your Excellency the trouble of deciding on, if they are returned.10
W.H.
LS, DLC:GW; ADfS, MHi: Heath Papers.
1. For GW’s second letter to Heath on 20 April, see Heath to GW, same date, n.4.
2. See Heath to GW, 17 April, and n.1. to that document.
3. Ensign Murdoch McPherson was the soldier arrested and court-martialed (see General Orders, 2 May).
4. For the result of William Hutton’s court-martial and his dismissal as provost marshal, see General Orders, 22 April.
5. The enclosed court-martial proceedings have not been identified.
6. GW’s aide-de-camp David Humphreys wrote Heath from headquarters on 22 April: “It is His Excellency’s pleasure that One of the two Prisoners belonging to the Massachusetts Line, now under sentence of Death for desertion, should be pardoned. He therefore requests that you will be pleased to Order that One of the two Culprits, whose crime shall appear to you the least aggravated, to be finally pardoned, and released from his confinement” (MHi: Heath Papers).
In a directive written at West Point on 24 April, Heath used the “Special power” GW had given him to pardon “Robert Maples alias John Walker, and order that he be released from confinement” (MHi: Heath Papers).
Heath’s aide-de-camp Henry Sewall wrote in his diary entry for 24 April: “John Williams and Robert Walker, both under sentence of death were, the former executed and the latter pardoned, between the hours of 8 & 9 in the morning. Went with Genl. Heath to Head Quarters. Dined there and returned” (Maine Farmer [Augusta], 19 Oct. 1872).
John Williams (d. 1781) evidently enlisted with the alias Andrew Forster as a private in the 6th Massachusetts Regiment in January 1780 and soon deserted. He appears to have served in at least one other regiment under a false name.
7. Heath wrote Col. Christopher Greene from West Point on 23 April: “By the enclosed warrant you will observe that no Provost martial is appointed, for the Execution of Gale the Case is Similar with respect to the Culprits here, Some person must therefore be appointed to See the Sentence executed, the warrants usually where there was no provost martial have Been directed to the Brigade Major or Adjutant of the Day, you will adopt that mode as you may think most adviseable, Some person as executioner will probably be found among the Troops without difficulty—please direct the warrant returned with a report of the Execution when performed” (MHi: Heath Papers).
Lt. John Rogers, adjutant for the Rhode Island Regiment, wrote at the “Rhode-Island Hutts” on 24 April: “I do Certify that Nathan Gale was this Day Executed, agreeable to a Warrant, given by his Excellency General Washington, for that purpose” (MHi: Heath Papers).
8. For this incident, which appears to have occurred at Ticonderoga, N.Y., in August 1759, see Orderly Book and Journal of Major John Hawks on the Ticonderoga—Crown Point Campaign, Under General Jeffrey Amherst, 1759–1760 (New York, 1911), 55. Heath wrote an undated note indicating that Maj. Hugh Maxwell had brought the earlier event to Heath’s attention (see MHi: Heath Papers, filed just before 1 May documents).
9. A “Return of Provisions and Stores on hand and the Number of Rations Issued daily on and Average for the preceeding Week at West-Point, Posts, and Brigades in its Vicinity,” dated 22 April, records a total of 1 hogshead, 101 tierces (casks), and 150 barrels of beef (MHi: Heath Papers). The same return shows 208 barrels of flour, with 80 at New Windsor and 70 at West Point.
10. The enclosed court-martial proceedings have not been found, but see General Orders, 22 April; see also Heath to GW, 29 April.
Heath struck out an initial postscript on his draft: “a Considerable number of women and Children, draw provisions as I observed in a former Letter to your Excellency—What will become of them if prohibi[t]ed drawing Provisions I cannot Say, but our present Situation Seems to Call for every Saving” (see Heath to GW, 2 April).