George Washington to Major General Lafayette, 22 April 1781
To Major General Lafayette
New Windsor April 22d 1781
My dear Marqs
Since writing the inclosed your several letters (acknowledged in my public one of this date) are come to hand—all of them except that of the 12th arrived at Hd Quarters within the course of one hour.1
The reasons assigned in some of your letters—and others which have occurred to me—chiefly of a political nature—assure me that great advantages will be derived from your being wherever the French Army and the American head Quarters, are2—I therefore not only repeat the offer contained in the inclosed letter, but accompany it with a wish that you may return, if you can, consistently with your own inclination, relinquish your present command for the prospects I have mentioned—not else—as it always has been, and ever will be my wish to make things as agreeable to you as the nature of the service will admit. To recall the detachment I cannot, for reasons which in my judgment are conclusive.
The accidents to which letters are liable, forbid me, unless I could write to you in cypher, to go into a full explanation of some matters wch you seem not to be well informd of and wch I wish to set you write in; but I dare not attempt it in a common letter—nor will there be any necessity for it if you return.3
I am very sorry that any letter of mine should be the subject of public discussion, or give the smallest uneasiness to any person living—The letter, to which I presume you allude, was a confidential one from me to Mr Lund Washington (with whom I have lived in perfect intimacy for near 20 Years)4—I can neither avow the letter as it is published by Mr Rivington, nor declare that it is spurious, because my letter to this Gentn was wrote in great haste, and no copy of it was taken—all I remember5 of the matter is, that at the time of writing it, I was a good deal chagreened to find by your letter of the 15th of March (from York Town in Virginia) that the French fleet had not, at that time, appeared within the Capes of Chesapeak; and meant (in strict confidence) to express my apprehensions and concern for the delay;6 but as we know that the alteration of a single word does, often times, pervert the Sense, or give force to expression unintended by the letter writer, I should not be surprized at Mr Rivingtons or the Inspector of his Gazette having taken this liberty with the letter in question; especially as he, or they have, I am told, lately published a letter from me to Govr Hancock and his answer, which never had an existance but in the Gazette.7 That the enemy fabricated a number of Letters for me formerly, is a fact well known—that they are not less capable of doing it now few will deny.8 as to his asserting, that this is a genuine copy of the original—he well knows that their friends do not want to convict him of a falsehood and that ours have not the opportunity of doing it though both sides are knowing to his talents for lying.
The event, which you seem to speak of with regret, my friendship for you would most assuredly have induced me to impart to you in the moment it happened had it not been for the request of H. who desired that no mention might be made of it: Why this injunction on me, while he was communicating it himself, is a little extraordinary! but I complied, & religeously fulfilled it.9 With every sentiment of Affecte regard I am Yrs
Go: Washington
P.S. The letter, wch you say has made much noise, I enclose you—lest you may not have had it from any other Quarter.10
ADfS, DLC:GW; Varick transcript, DLC:GW.
1. GW enclosed his letter to Lafayette dated 21 April; see also GW’s first letter to Lafayette, this date, and n.2 to that document.
2. GW apparently wrote this word after striking out “happen to be” on his draft.
3. Lafayette inclined toward staying with his detachment (see his letter to GW, 4 May).
4. See GW to Lund Washington, 28 March, and the source note to that document; see also Lafayette to GW, 15 April.
5. GW wrote “rember” for this word on his draft.
6. For the publication of the letter in James Rivington’s The Royal Gazette (New York), see Rochambeau to GW, 26 April, and n.1 to that document; see also Lafayette to GW, 15 March.
7. The Royal Georgia Gazette (Savannah) for 22 March printed an undated letter purportedly from GW to John Hancock, easily identified as a forgery because it attributes implausible sentiments to GW and positions Hancock as president of Congress, an office he left in fall 1777: “The following is sent us by a Correspondent whose connections on this continent give him every opportunity of knowing what passes in Congress. …
“You are to inform Congress that I received the honour of their letter of the 16th, but that my resolution, if not fixed finally before, is now in fact determined. The surrender of Charlestown explains every doubt.
“Tell them, Sir, that, whilst I was supported with even the most distant prospect of success, my life and all I held dear was at their service. Tell them I acted from no mean views—from no private purposes. My sentiments were open and candid, as they were constantly delivered. I said I would hold my services to my country a duty whilst there were uprightness in the cause, and unanimity in the people; sorry am I now to say that tyranny is substituted for freedom in the magistrate, and that defection outsoars a love of virtuous liberty in all our troops. I am therefore no longer the commanding officer of the brave citizens struggling for their rights; I am only a distressed superior among dissatisfied, disaffected complainants, whose ardour is cooled, and whose native virtue no longer exists. My troops are tired of war, and destitute of the common comforts of a soldier. I tremble for them when the dreadful day of final decision comes on, when they must (for now it is not to be postponed or avoided) meet an army flushed with victory, and refreshed with all the necessaries of war. Tell Congress all these things, and say I entreat them to reconsider my former letters, and as they love the peace and future happiness of poor America, to offer an unconditional sheath to the British sword. Generous even in the hour of their bitterest anger, we need not dread the terms that the English may insist on. It is their interest now to seek our amity as well as our subjection.
“Our friends in London are no longer considered the friends of the people. The faction is split, and for one wellwisher we had in England we have now an hundred enemies. Indeed, and I speak it from the bottom of my heart, we were all along deceived both by Mr. B. and his party. We never had the love of the English since we took up arms—it was only the pernicious views of faction there that misrepresented matters here. But this is not a time to prove the cursed cause of the present state of affairs.
“In the name of God, I then conjure them to give up the contest, and seek in an humble submission that peace which our arms can never restore. We may again be reinstated in tranquillity, and whilst we mourn the relatives slain, we will pray that in their deaths all animosity with England may for ever lie buried. The thoughts of the people will soon be turned to industry, and as our amity with Great Britain would close the scene of war with France and Spain, the ports of Europe would again be opened. Do, Sir, represent these matters, and, in my name, desire that the last letter I sent may again be referred to. It contains such truths, relative to the state of our credit, and the impossibility of carrying on the war, as must convince, if seriously attended to.
“I pray God to direct the resolves of Congress for the best, and that they may with my eyes see inevitable destruction to America, in a shameful and total overthrow of her army, if the voice of peace does not immediately stop the victorious troops of Clinton.” British forces under Gen. Henry Clinton captured Charleston on 12 May 1780 (see Duportail to GW, 17 May 1780, and n.1 to that document). The forged letter likely alludes to Edmund Burke, who had favored peace with the United States.
8. Rivington had published forged correspondence involving GW and relatives in February and March 1778. The spurious letters first appeared in a pamphlet published in London in 1777 (see Richard Henry Lee to GW, 2 Jan. 1778, and n.3 to that document).
9. GW refers to his break with Lt. Col. Alexander Hamilton and the latter’s resignation as an aide-de-camp (see General Orders, 16 Feb. 1781, source note; see also Lafayette to GW, 15 April).
10. GW presumably enclosed a copy of the extract of his letter to Lund Washington as printed in The Royal Gazette (see n.4 above).