this occasion displayed upon one of the spears used by the lancers of the legion, entwined with Pulaski's sword belt. It was when this gallant officer received his mortal wound in the attack upon Savannah, on the 9th of October, 1779, and his noble soul was about leaving its earthly tenement, that he bequeathed this belt to his loved and equally brave companion in arms, Colonel, (then captain,) Bentalou. The legion of Pulaski was raised, organised, and disciplined in Baltimore in the spring of 1778. At that period the country generally was destitute, none of the fine or useful arts were cultivated—the whole energies of the country being bent on war. The army was poorly clothed and badly fed—and, in the absence of more elegant materials or accomplished artists, the standard of the legion was formed of a piece of crimson silk, and embroidered by the Moravian nuns of Bethlehem, in Pennsylvania. On one side are the initials, U. S. with this motto-unità virtus fortior--on the reverse, the all-seeing eye, surrounded with thirteen stars, and the motto, non alius regit. It may appear, as it certainly is, a singular circumstance that the standard, (first consecrated at Baltimore when a small village,) after having waved over the greater part of the old thirteen states, should be returned to the same place, now a large and important city, and there be permanently enshrined. The history of the times which tried men's souls," while it shows the unsurpassed bravery, and great services of the legion, furnishes also an explanation of this circumstance. We find that in the summer of 1778, the lieutenant colonel of the legion was killed at Egg Harbor, in New Jersey, by British bayoneis. In 1779, the colonel, at the advanced age of nearly seventy, (and who had been a colonel of hussars in the armies of Frederick the Great of Prussia,) fell under the cuts of sabres before Charleston, South Carolina. On the 9th of October, of the same year, the General Count Pulaski was mortally wounded by a swivel shot, at the attack on Savannab, in Georgia. In 1780, we find that the major was sabred at Monk's corner, in South Carolina, and the command then devolved upon Captain Bentalou, of the first troop of light dragoons of the legion, and senior surviving officer. When the legion was disbanded at the close of the war, the standard was retained in the possession of Colonel Bentalou, by whom it has been carefully preserved.'

As a military man of science, knowledge, and experience, as a soldier in the highest sense of the word, quick to perceive and decide, prompt to act, unwearied in perseverance, collected in the midst of danger, brave without rashness, and discreet in his designs, Pulaski has few rivals in the lists of eminent warriors. His fame spread over Europe during the

short space in which he maintained the unequal contest in Poland, and even Wraxall says of him, that he was acknowledged by the Russians, his enemies, to possess military talents of a very superior pature; nor were they ever able to take him prisoner during the civil war.' Dr Franklin says in a letter to General Washington, dated Paris, June 13, 1777, ‘Count Pulaski, who was a general of the confederates in Poland, and who is gone to join you, is esteemed one of the greatest officers in Europe.' These testimonies to his military character were fully borne out by his conduct in this country. Wherever he appeared, he showed himself a brave and skilful soldier, inspiring his officers and men with a warm attachment to himself, and confidence in his talents.

In respect to the charge of Judge Johnson, above alluded to, very little needs be added. It is presumed that no one, who takes pains to become acquainted with Pulaski's history, will entertain the impression on the subject, which seems to have existed in the mind of the biographer of General Greene. Speaking of the unfortunate result of the battle at Germantown, he uses the following words. . 'It is a melancholy fact, of which few were informed, that the celebrated Pulaski, who commanded the patrol, was found by General Washington himself, asleep in a farm house. Policy only, and a regard to the rank and misfortunes of the offender, could have induced the general to suppress the fact. Yet, to this circumstance, most probably, we are to attribute the success of the enemy's patrol, in approaching near enough to discover the advance of the American column. Now, admitting this to be true, it is a most extraordinary thing, that it should have been kept secret so long, especially as all the circumstances of that engagement were of a nature to call forth the severest public scrutiny into every transaction, to which the failure could possibly be ascribed. Whatever may have been the indulgence of Washington, it is not credible, that the “ few who were informed,' and who cannot be supposed to have had any such motives of delicacy, should not reveal a fact, so well calculated to screen the American officers from the disgrace of a defeat, by throwing the burden on the shoulders of a foreigner just then arrived in the country.

Nor is the imputation, which this charge casts on Washington himself, such as we should be willing to admit The

kind of policy to which Washington's silence is here ascribed, was not that which became the commander in chief of a nation's forces, nor was it that which Washington was known in any other case to exercise. Such a policy, indeed, would have been little else, than betraying the high trust confided to him, and a most unjustifiable breach of right conduct, in suffering the odious consequences of the neglect of one officer to be borne by those, who had faithfully done their duty. Moreover, Washington afterwards recommended Pulaski to Congress, was instrumental in procuring him a very high and responsible appointment in the service, and always treated bim as an officer, whom he respected, and in whom he had the fullest confidence.

These considerations alone are enough to destroy the force of the charge. It needs not be inquired whether Pulaski was found in a farm house, or what he did, or whether he did anything, at the battle of Germantown; it is enough to know, that Washington was acquainted with all his conduct there much better than any other person, and that he never lisped a whisper of censure for neglect of duty, but on the contrary aided his future promotion. In short, we doubt not, that Judge Johnson has been deceived, and that the authority on which he relied, from whatever source it came, is not entitled to credit; and every generous minded citizen of the United States must lament, that he should have sanctioned by his name a charge, calculated to reflect no honor on the character of Washington, and to cast reproach on the memory of a brave man, whose fame was so well earned, who devoted his best days to a defence of the rights of outraged humanity in his native land, and, when exiled by the usurpers whom he could not conquer, gave the last years of his life, and the last drop of his blood, to the struggle for the liberties of America.

ART. VII.-1. Code Civil, suivi de l'Exposé des Motifs sur

Chaque Loi présenté par les Orateurs du Gouvernement,

&c. 11 Tomes, 12mo. à Paris. 1809. 2. Conference du Code Civil avec la Discussion particu

liere du Conseil d'Etat et du Tribunat, &c. 8 Tomes,

12mo. à Paris. 1805. 3. Code de procedure Civile. 2 Tomes, 12mo. à Paris.

1808. 4. Code Pénal, suivi des Motifs présentés par less Orateurs

du Gouvernement, &c. 2 Tomes, 12mo. à Paris. 1812. 5. Code d’Instruction Criminelle, suivi des Motifs, &c.

12mo. 1809. 6. Code de Commerce. 2 Tomes, 12mo. 1812. 7. Les cinq Codes avec Notes et Traités pour servir à un

Cours complet de Droit Français ; à l'Usage des Etudi-
ans en Droit, et de toutes les Classes de Citoyens cultivés.
Par J. B. SIREY. Avocat aux Conseils du Roi, et à la
Cour de Cassation. 8vo. Paris. 1819.

We know not the individual to whose character justice is so little likely to be done, as Napoleon Bonaparte. The child of the French Revolution, he is, by most persons, confounded with its active leaders. The criminality of its horrid excesses fixes on him, as on the most prominent individual, that owed his advancement to that Revolution. It is difficult to induce men to reflect, that the most revolting of these excesses were perpetrated while Bonaparte was at school ; and that though he did not bring the Revolution to a close, by restoring the Bourbons, he brought it still more effectually to a close, by crushing its parties, reviving many useful institutions, which it had destroyed, and reorganising the government of the country. It is very easy to charge him with being a tyrant and an oppressor ; the changes are easily rung upon his ambition, conquest and devastation of foreign states, the conscription, and the murder of the Duke d'Enghien. It is in no degree our design to defend him from the real or imaginary guilt, imputed in these or any similar charges. We are even free to confess, that we do not think Napoleon possessed the true sentiment of greatness. He was not a Washington. But he was an Alexander, a Cæsar, a Frederick the Great; as brave as the bravest, and as good as the best of them. He governed by no very good title ; but it was a better one, than that, by which any prince in Europe sits on his throne. We


the most enthusiastic friend of legitimate monarchy does not believe, that if the right to reign of Charles Tenth, George Fourth, or Alexander, were put to the vote of the male population of their several states, of the age of twentyone years and upwards, either of these sovereigns would unite as many unbribed suffrages, as those which proclaimed Bonaparte Emperor. He ruled, and they rule, by the right of the strongest and that alone.

But it is too prevalent an impression, that Napoleon owed his advancement, and his continuance in power, solely to his talent as a military chief; that it was merely a military despotism, in which he held France and the continent of Europe enslaved. Fairly analysed and explained, indeed, this impression is just enough. No one can suppose, that, but for his military talents and success, he could either have reached or maintained his throne. In a form a little modified, the condition of every prince in Europe is the same. There is not one of the leading sovereigns, who could reign a day, without his standing army. Without the horse guards, London itself would not be habitable. Nor does it seem to us, in point of principle, to matter much, whether the Head of the government be maintained in his power, by an army, fascinated with the splendor of his military qualities—if you please, by the glory and plunder, which that army has acquired under his command; or by a standing army in the legitimate sense of the word, a redcoated rabble, hired out of the jails and the brothels. To an American citizen the difference is not worth a straw.

Nevertheless it is true, that Napoleon Bonaparte rose to his greatness by many qualities, besides and above those of the military chieftain ; and which, had his fame in war been less, would unquestionably have given him a great name as an administrator, a financier, and a statesmari.

We presume there is nothing paradoxical in this remark; nothing violently absurd in the intimation, that, because he did not emanate frorn the Faubourg St Germain, he was therefore as stupid and senseless as the handle of his own sword. We are

« ForrigeFortsett »