WILLIAMS COLLEGE LIBRARIES
Your unpublished thesis, submitted for a degree at Williams College and administered by the Williams College Libraries, will be made available for research use. You may, through this form, provide instructions regarding copyright, access, dissemination and reproduction of your thesis.
_ The faculty advisor to the student writing the thesis wishes to claim joint authorship in this work.
In each section, please check the ONE statement that reflects your wishes.
I. PUBLICATION AND QUOTATION: LITERARY PROPERTY RIGHTS A student author automatically owns the copyright to hislher work, whether or not a copyright symbol and date are placed on the piece. The duration of U.S. copyright on a manuscript--and Williams theses are considered manuscripts--is the life of the author plus 70 years.
_ I/we do not choose to retain literary property rights to the thesis, and I wish to assign them immediately to Williams College. Selecting this option will assign copyright to the College. This in no way precludes a student author from later publishing his/her work; the student would, however, need to contact the Archives for a permission form. The Archives would be free in this case to also grant permission to another researcher to publish smaIl sections from the thesis. Rarely would there be any reason for the Archives to grant permission to another party to publish the thesis in its entirely; if such a situation arose, the Archives would be in touch with the author to let them know that such a request had been made.
_I/we wish to retain literary property rights to the thesis for a period of three years, at which time the literary property rights shall be assigned to Williams College. Selecting this option gives the author a few years to make exclusive use of the thesis in up-coming projects: articles, later research, etc.
\/I/we wish to retain literary property rights to the thesis for a period of ~ years,ooffl" urrtit-rny--~~);, at which time the literary property rights shall be assigned to Williams College. Selecting this option allows the author great flexibility in extending or shortening the time of his/her automatic copyright period. Some students are interested in using their thesis in graduate school work. In this case, it would make sense for them to enter a number such as '10 years' in the blank, and line out the words 'or until my death, whichever is the later.' In any event, it is easier for the Archives to administer copyright on a manuscript if the period ends with the individual's death--our staff won't have to search for estate executors in this case--but this is entirely lip to each student.
II. ACCESS The Williams College Libraries are investigating the posting of theses online, as well as their retention in hardcopy.
J Williams College is granted permission to maintain and provide access to my thesis in hardcopy and via the Web both on and off campus. Selecting this option allows researchers around the world to access the digital version of your work. _ Williams College is granted permission to maintain and provide access to my thesis in hardcopy and via the Web for on-campus use only. Selecting this option allows access to the digital version of your work from the on-campus network only.
_ The thesis is to be maintained and made available in hardcopy form only. Selecting this option allows access to your work only from the hardcopy you submit. Such access pertains to the entirety of your work, including any media that it comprises or includes.
III. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION Because theses are listed on FRANCIS, the Libraries receive numerous requests every year for copies of works. If/when a hardcopy thesis is duplicated for a researcher, a copy of the release form always accompanies the copy. Any digital version of your thesis will include the release form.
'...I/CoPies of the thesis may be provided to any researcher. Selecting this option allows any researcher to request a copy from the Williams College Libraries, or to make one from an electronic version.
_ Copying of the thesis is restricted for _ years, at which time copies may be provided to any researcher. This option allows the author to set a time limit on copying restrictions. During this period, an electronic version of the thesis will be protected against duplication.
_ Copying of the thesis or portions thereof, except as needed to maintain an adequate number ofresearch copies available in the Williams College Libraries, is expressly prohibited. The electronic version of the thesis will be protected against duplication. Selecting this option allows no reproductions to be made for researchers. The electronic version of the thesis will be protected against duplication. This option does not dis-allow researchers from reading/viewing the work in either hardcopy or digital form.
Signed (student author) Signa1:ure Relllc>ved
Signed (faculty advisor) Signa1:ure Relllc>ved
Thesis title fo(' ~~:~'-- WE:.. S~r~\J~·. \\.....e.. f\·J~~\1~~ L'j\t ~\p~s.lI. o-.~ l a A'#\.e..\~ CJ:>....V\..... 1-b.~~ \~t..~ Date 5,(,0-1{Zl U
Accepted for the Libraries S i 9 n a 1: u re R e III C>V e d
Date accepted _---'-<_·,.:::;.cJ_--"'G'-..-.L('-..)-,t;'-..,: _ FOR THESE WE STRIVE:
THE PHILADELPHIA LIGHT HORSE AND AMERICAN IDENTITY
by
THOMAS BUCK MARSHALL
James Wood, Advisor
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Honors in History
WILLIAMS COLLEGE
Williamstown, Massachusetts
MAY 25, 2009 Acknowledgments
The idea for this work came during a lunch with Professor Michael Lewis, a friend and a mentor. We were talking about Frank Furness, an architect of iron and stone. The art critic Lewis Mumford described him as "a horsy, flashy, tweedy sort of man." Furness had won the Medal of Honor for his bravery during the Civil War, where he fought alongside some members of the First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, a volunteer cavalry troop and social organization founded in 1774 as the Philadelphia Light Horse. Our discussion eventually turned into this paper. I thank my advisor, Professor James Wood, for his patience and support as I found my way through this process. I thank John Tulp, whose teaching and friendship has meant more to me than he could know. I thank Joseph Seymour and Dennis Boylan, two members of the First City Troop who opened the group's private archives to my study and answered every question I had. Towards the end, I received some critical help from Dr. John Van Home, for which I am indebted. Finally, I thank my mom and dad, and my two grandfathers, who gave me an interest in history beyond watching the neon Liberty Bell swing over the bleachers of Veterans Stadium when a Phillies ballplayer hit a home run. lowe all of them a few bottles of Madeira-just the way the Troop would have thanked them.
T. Buck Marshall Contents
Abbreviations iv Illustrations v
Introduction 1 1. "Gentlemen ofFortune": The Founding ofthe Philadelphia Troop ofLight Horse 11 II. Amateurs to Anns: The Philadelphia Light Horse in the American Revolution 34 III. "The Horse! The Horse!": The Troop's Unconventional Roles During the American Revolution 49 N. A Seed in the Watermelon Anny: The First City Troop in the Early Republic 74 Conclusion 95 Bibliography 99
iii Abbreviations
APS American Philosophical Society
Armory Armory Collection ofArchival Material at the Armory. First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry
Donnaldson Donnaldson Narrative, Armory
HSP Historical Society ofPennsylvania
LCP Library Company ofPhiladelphia
WMQ William and Mary Quarterly
iv Illustrations
FIGURE 1. Markoe Standard, 1775, Armory.
The first Captain ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse, Abraham Markoe, commissioned this standard for the Troop in 1775. The Philadelphia Light Horse carried it into battle and on parade. It survives today in the Armory ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry.
v FIGURE 2. Scull and Heap, An East Prospect ofthe City ofPhiladelphia, engraving, 1756, LCP.
-1 ,-'...... =<
';,
,,' ~ ~~ VI ~:: .' /o~~ . f'O • - ..., , s,
c. '.
------
---~------_. ------;.--:..
I, . ::1-, , , ---\" " .. " ----- ; , ,
"~.
1 -T- 1----1
--~ ------!
This engraved view ofPhiladelphia depicts merchant activity on the busy Delaware River, the Battery and the State House.
vi FIGURE 3. The Paxton Expedition, Inscribed to the Author ofthe Farce, 1764, LCP.
This scene shows Philadelphia citizens turning out under Benjamin Franklin's organization to defend their city from the Paxton Boys, a group offrontiersmen who were angry at the Quaker-dominated government's lack ofmilitary support for the frontier against American Indian attacks.
vii FIGURE 4. William Faden, A Plan ofthe City and Environs ofPhiladelphia, 1777, reprinted by Thomas Fisher, 1847, LCP.
This survey by Scull and Heap, and engraved by William Fadden in 1777, also gives an elevation ofthe State House.
viii FIGURE 5. A Representation ofthe Figures Exhibited and Paraded Through the Streets ofPhiladelphia, on Saturday, the 30th ofSeptember, 1780, engraving, printed in Anthony Sharp's The Continental Almanac, for 1781, 1780, HSP.
This scene is ofa procession through Philadelphia to denounce Benedict Arnold-the fonner Continental General who switched sides to the British in the middle ofthe American Revolution. According to the diarist Samuel Rowland Fisher, the procession was "escorted by abt. 20 ofthose called Militia & three ofthose call'd City Light Horse viz: James Budden, John Dunlap & Thomas Leiper."
ix FIGURE 6. Banner ofPhiladelphia Tobacconists for Federal Procession, 1788, LCP.
Thomas Leiper, one ofthe twenty-eight founding members ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse, carried this banner to represent the Tobacconists in the July 4, 1788 Federal Procession. The Troop also paraded as a unit in this celebration ofAmerican Independence and the new Constitution, which had been ratified by ten states including Pennsylvania. The tobacco plant's thirteen leaves and the thirteen stars over top ofit are symbols ofnational unity.
x FIGURE 7. William Russell Birch, High Street, from the Country Market-place Philadelphia: with the Procession in Commemoration ofthe Death ofGeneral George Washington, December 26,1799, engraving, 1800, LCP.
The Troop, which had fought with George Washington in battle, served as his escort and hosted him for dinner, marched dismounted in "compleat uniform at the State House for the purpose ofpaying their sad tribute ofveneration to the remains oftheir late Commander-in-Chief."
xi
Introduction
On the fifth Monday ofNovember, 1812, the American Daily Advertiser read,
"The first Troop ofCavalry will meet this morning at halfpast eight 0'clock, at Peter
Evans's, in Sixth-street, to attend the Funeral ofMI. JOHN DUNLAP, their late
Commander, by order ofthe Captain."l Dunlap was the printer ofthe Declaration of
Independence and the Packet and Daily Advertiser, a newspaper that George Washington himselfhad delivered from Philadelphia to his estate at Mount Vernon.2 Dunlap had emigrated to Philadelphia from Ireland with his family when he was around nine. He immediately apprenticed to his uncle's small printing business in the city, eventually buying it and growing it tremendously when his uncle left to become a clergyman. By the end ofhis life, Dunlap had amassed a large fortune, including 98,000 acres ofland in
Virginia-modem day Kentucky-and proceeds from the $100,000 sale ofhis mansion and land in Philadelphia between Market and Chestnut, and Eleventh and Twelfth streets.3 Among Dunlap's many possessions at his death was one item that his son took special care in returning to the same Captain who had called out the Troop to attend his father's funeral procession.
This item was a flag that the young John Dunlap, JI. had sent to Captain Charles
Ross, writing, "I hereby forward to you the Standard of76, and being convinced that it is the inestimable property ofthat Old Troop I resign all private claim to it.,,4 Dunlap Sr.
1 Poulson's American Daily Advertiser, 30 November 1812. 2 George Washington to Clement Biddle, 5 March 1788, in "Selections from the Correspondence of Colonel Clement Biddle," The Pennsylvania Magazine o/History andBiography 48 (January 1918): 338-39. 3 Dunlap made this sale to the Philadelphia merchant Stephen Girard. John Dunlap, Estate Papers, 1812, HSP. 4 John Dunlap to Charles Ross, 18 February 1813, Armory. John Dunlap Jr. joined the Troop in 1807.
1 had been in possession ofthe "Standard of76" from his own earlier service as Captain of the Philadelphia Light Horse, which later became known as the First City Troop. Dunlap had contributed to the American Revolution both as a printer and a founding member of the Philadelphia Light Horse, a volunteer cavalry troop that fought in the American
Revolution and served the Revolutionary Pennsylvanian and Continental governments.
On the Standard of76, or Markoe Standard as it was named for the Troop's first Captain, thirteen blue and silver stripes alternate in the top left comer set against the flag's gold background. In the center ofthe silk square, an Indian warrior and a winged angel flank a shield and a horse's head. The warrior symbolizes liberty. He holds a bow in one hand, and in the other, a pole with a liberty cap. The angel symbolizes fame. She blows a trumpet and carries a wand. Beneath the warrior and angel reads the motto, For These We
Strive.
The Markoe Standard's symbols distinguish it from other early standards. Its thirteen-stripe motifrepresenting the thirteen American colonies is among the first known depictions. The stripes connect the troop to a national identity, not simply a city or colony.
In contrast, the standard designed in 1775 for the Hanover Associators, a frontier militia in Pennsylvania, forgoes the pageantry ofthe Troop's flag. It depicts a single rifleman standing against a red background. He wears buckskin boots, a clean blue top and a simple black-feathered hat. Beneath him is the motto: Liberty or Death. This sense of laconic liberty and frontier individualism is distinct from the Troop's more embellished symbolism and national consciousness.
The danger exists in interpreting too much from a standard-even one that the
Troop chose to carry proudly throughout the Revolution and Early Republic in battle and
2 on parade. The Troop's distinct standard, however, helped to inspire my study ofthe
Troop from its 1774 inception in Carpenters' Hall through its role in suppressing the
1799 Fries' Rebellion in nearby Pennsylvania counties. I tell this history in three parts: first, ofthe rise to power ofa more pragmatic Anglican and Presbyterian elite over the
Pennsylvania Quaker establishment; second, ofthat elite fighting for a Revolutionary
American government that would institutionalize its vision ofAmerican society; and third, ofthat elite's mining the legacy ofthe American Revolution for meaning and cultural identity.
Histories on Philadelphia, the Revolution and the Early Republic form the basis of my questions and perspectives, as do letters, journals, Trooper Rolls and Trooper
Histories assembled in the Troop's archives at 22 South 23 rd Street, Philadelphia. Before
I construct my argument, I will describe the foundations; before I outline my chapters, I will describe my sources. My thesis contributes to the dialogue on the American
Revolution's role in transforming American society. Gordon Wood, in The Radicalism of the American Revolution, introduces himselfin opposition to what he defines as the
Progressive and Neo-Progressive Schools that interpret the Revolution as a more socially conservative event. For Wood, the Revolution was indeed radical, "as radical and as revolutionary as any in history."s For Wood, it was the transformative event.6 Jon Butler gives another interpretation in Becoming America: The Revolution Before 1776. 7 In
Butler's story, or history, the fundamental changes to American society took place before the Declaration ofIndependence. Gary Nash's The Unknown American Revolution: The
5 Gordon Wood, The Radicalism ofthe American Revolution (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1992),5. 6 lbid., 8. 7 Jon Butler, Becoming America: The Revolution Before 1776 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).
3 Unruly Birth ofDemocracy and the Struggle to Create America denies any reductionist attempt to synthesize a single meaning from the Revolution.8 He sees American society in this period as a crucible where the struggle for authority and an American vision is central to the Revolution. The Troop's evolution as both a social and military institution responds to questions surrounding the Revolution's role as an agent ofchange. My thesis explores the vision ofAmerica for which the Troop fought and the conflicts its American identity created with other American groups.
The Revolution has inspired many different, often conflicting, responses. A chronological historiography ofthe Revolution and Early Republic will have exceptions to any synthesis offered. These conflicting interpretations have only increased as historical writing in America has multiplied in the second halfofthe twentieth century.
With this as a forewarning, post-World War II American military history has increasingly focused on the militia and the citizen soldier. New types ofmilitary history emerged with this and a shift to history from the bottom-up. In the 1960s, military history and historians moved to extend "beyond campaign description and strategic analysis...[to examine] peacetime institutional development and policymaking, and connections between war and society.,,9 In much the same way, my questions on the Troop as a military and social institution during and following the Revolution place it in the context ofthis New
Military History. 10
8 Gary Nash, The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth ofDemocracy and the Struggle to Create America (New York: Viking, 2005). 9 Jerry Cooper, The Militia and National Guard in America since Colonial Times: A Research Guide (London: Greenwood Press, 1993),52. 10 Examples ofthis history ofthe Revolution include: Lawrence Cress, Citizens in Arms: The Army and the Militia in American Society to the War of1812 (Chapel Hill, NC: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1982); Charles Royster, A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775-1783 (Chapel Hill, NC: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1979); John Shy, A People Numerous andArmed: Reflections on the Military Struggle for American Independence
4 My historical analysis ofthe Troop is not Jesse Lemisch's call for history from the bottom Up.II George Washington described Troopers as "gentlemen offortune" in a letter to the Troop, where he thanked its members for their "noble example ofdiscipline and subordination" and "spirit and bravery.,,12 Troopers were not farmers or
Philadelphian laborers and artisans; they were "professional men, ship owners, shippers and importers-'traders in dry goods, teas, wines, silks and linens. ",13 All members were wealthy enough to fully equip and support themselves and their horses throughout the
Revolution. Their status as gentlemen in Revolutionary society shaped their objectives, actions and national ideology. Because these often conflicted with the loyalists-
Americans loyal to the Crown-and also fellow patriots oflower socioeconomic standing, studying the Troop engages with history from the top and bottom ofAmerican society.
The Troop's status as a collection ofurban gentlemen is, in part, what makes its actions in the Revolution so compelling. Its twenty-eight founding members volunteered their services to the Continental Congress, not to their local community. In addition to participating in the Battles ofTrenton, Princeton, Brandywine and Germantown,
Troopers served as reconnaissance men, couriers, money and prison guards, escorts and riot-busters. Steven Rosswurm, in Arms, Country and Class: The Philadelphia Militia and 'Lower Sort' During the American Revolution, 1775-1783, writes, "the militia
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1976); David Martin, The Philadelphia Campaign: June 1777 July 1778 (Conshohocken, PA: Combined Books, 2003); David Hackett Fischer, Washington's Crossing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). 11 See Jesse Lemisch, "The Revolution Seen from the Bottom Up," in Barton J. Bernstein, ed., Towards a New Past: Dissenting Essays in American History (New York: Pantheon Books, 1968), 3 29. 12 George Washington to Samuel Morris, 23 January 1777, Armory. 13 Joseph Lapsley Wilson, ed., Book ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry (Philadelphia: Hallowell, 1915),2.
5 transfonned the laboring poor; the laboring poor transfonned the militia.,,14 In a similar way, the Philadelphia gentlemen who founded the Troop went from military amateurs to veterans and used their military service to wield power and enhance their status. Military service was not merely a reflection ofsocial and economic status, but a way to improve it.
The Troop's role in putting down insurrections in the Early Republic reveals this struggle continuing after the American Revolution. It indicates the divisions between the urban elite-merchants and professionals-and small land-owning farmers, as well as the city's artisans and laboring poor. The Troop's interactions with Rosswunn's "lower sort" are central to its identity.
The Troop's own recording and collection ofits history have helped to shape its identity. Items like the Markoe Standard and the 1777 letter ofthanks from George
Washington offer perspectives into the Philadelphia Light Horse. The very act of preservation reveals a pride that the Troop took in its connection to the Revolution. In
1815, a committee ofthree Troopers examined the records ofthe Light Horse to establish an early history and list ofmembership. It assembled papers and interviewed living
Troopers to detennine the Troop's actions before 1796, after which time, minutes had been regularly kept and saved. One ofthe committee members, John R. C. Smith, would rise to become Captain ofthe Troop. As Captain in 1823, he contacted John Donnaldson, one ofthe seven surviving members ofthe Troop from the Revolutionary War, and asked him to write his recollections. He compiled these with other existing documents to fonn
14 Steven Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class: The Philadelphia Militia and the 'Lower Sort'During the American Revolution, 1775-1783 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987),75.
6 the Donnaldson Narrative "as an authentic book ofminutes from 17 November 1774 to
January 1796.,,15
Troop members continued to follow in this tradition. In 1856, a committee offive
Troopers selected some papers and letters from the Troop archive to be printed in a small 16 book. In 1874 and 1915, members published two histories oftheir Troop. 17 These histories provide the annals ofthe Troop from 1774 to 1914, also including appendices with information on its meeting places and armories, its Captains and a list ofits members. In a similar style, Troopers published two later histories, the first in 1948 and the second in 1991Y Each focuses on the Troop's actions in the years after the earlier histories were published. These histories have helped point me to dates, letters and individuals critical to my understanding ofthe Troop and its relationship with an emerging American identity.
I structure my exploration ofthe Troop into four chapters where chronology is a loose guide. The first chapter frames the Troop's 1774 association in a broader context, emphasizing how the shift in Pennsylvania from the rule ofa pacifist Quaker elite in the
Pennsylvania Assembly to that of citizens more willing to use military force enabled and shaped the Troop's founding. The emerging non-Quaker mercantile and professional elite made up the Philadelphia Light Horse. This group, in addition to artisans, laborers and
15 It is likely that Donnaldson and some ofthe other surviving members were with Smith for parts of the compilation process, as the account includes some narrative sections in different handwriting than Smith and the use ofthe first person tense. Donnaldson himselfwas the first man elected into the Troop after their founding, becoming the twenty-ninth member in October, 1775. 16 By-Laws, Muster-Roll, andPapers Selectedfrom the Archives ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, from November 17,1774, to March 1, 1856 (Philadelphia: James B. Smith and Co., 1856). 17 First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, ed., History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, from Its Organization, November 17, 1774 to Its Centennial Anniversary, November 17, 1874 (Princeton: Hallowell, 1875); Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915. 18 History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, 1915-1947 (Philadelphia: Hallowell, 1948); History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, 1948-1991 (Philadelphia: Winchell, 1991).
7 farmers closer to the frontier, used the increasing importance ofPennsylvania's military defense to assert their voice and claim power in Pennsylvania's government.
The second chapter follows the Troop's conventional light horse role during the
American Revolution, where it acted as couriers and reconnaissance men for the
Continental and Pennsylvania armies and governments. The Troop also participated in the four major battles around Philadelphia: Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine and
Germantown. In these actions, the Troop fought to establish a Revolutionary American government and society that would institutionalize its vision ofAmerican society-the vision ofthe more pragmatic Anglican and Presbyterian elite that had seized power from the Quakers.
To examine the nature ofthis vision, the third chapter explores the Troop's nonconventional role as a light horse unit during the war. Troopers rode in and put down a riot where militiamen had attacked a group ofprominent Philadelphians, including other Troop members, for opposing the price-fixing ofgoods. The Philadelphia Light
Horse strove to assert the authority ofthe Revolutionary government and maintain order, serving as an early form ofdomestic police and helping the Pennsylvania government negotiate terms with 2,500 soldiers who had revolted, demanding that their enlistment contracts be met. In these actions, the Troop fought to establish an independent America with a strong state and national government that would protect property rights and contracts.
The fourth chapter shows the Philadelphia Light Horse continuing to defend the authority ofthe American government and its laws. The Troop rode as part oflarger armies to stop two revolts in Pennsylvania that were directed at increased government
8 taxation-reflecting the lingering divisions in Pennsylvania. The Troop reinforced these actions in its ceremonial roles. Through escorts and parades, the Light Horse tried to foster patriotism and construct a national identity that would better establish the authority ofstate and Federal government. In the 1790s, as citizens ofthe young nation split into
Republicans supporting states' rights and the primacy ofthe yeoman farmer, and
Federalists supporting stronger national government and the primacy ofthe businessman and merchant, the Troop defended the Federalist order and tried to redirect the loyalties ofPhiladelphians to this vision ofAmerica.
In my thesis, I treat meaning as a product ofmy present engagement with documents and material artifacts ofthe past. My present, as constituted through my memory and consciousness, guides my perspective. In a similar way, the Troop's present-an ongoing present throughout its own history-shaped its engagement with the
Revolution. Ultimately, the Troop drew and formed its identity from the Revolution.
The Revolution itselfis no longer the radical agent ofchange as seen by Gordon
Wood. Nor is the Revolution an event that did not impact the fundamentals ofAmerican society following the War, or a conservative event that simply preserved the social hierarchy. The power ofthe Revolution lives in its ongoing interpretation and impact. My thesis explores the Troop as an agent and manifestation ofchange towards the institutionalization ofits vision ofAmerica, a vision ofa powerful and independent nation with a strong government to protect property rights and foster business growth what later came to be defined as Federalism. In the midst ofpolitical upheaval and war, the Troop created its own symbols and myths from its service in the Revolution and connection to national leaders like George Washington. The Philadelphia Light Horse
9 forged a legacy from the memory ofthe Revolution. Through public ceremony, the Troop drew upon the collective war consciousness in Philadelphia to empower itself and its members in the city and the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania.
10 I. "Gentlemen of Fortune": The Founding ofthe Philadelphia Troop ofLight Horse
December 12 [1767]: The gentlemen hunters let a fox loose at Centre Woods, which afforded an agreeable ride after the hounds till dark. The fox ran up a tree on the Schuylkill side, and when Levi Hollingsworth climbed up after him, it jumped down and was killed. l
Levi Hollingsworth lived in a Philadelphia mercantile and professional world where social clubs, familial ties and church membership reinforced business and social connections.
The Hollingsworths were Quakers who, in the last quarter ofthe seventeenth century, had settled in Pennsylvania. Levi Hollingsworth's grandfather and the rest ofthe family, however, would convert to the Anglican Church in the early eighteenth century. With support and financial backing from his family, Hollingsworth ran a shallop service transporting flour around the northern Chesapeake during the French & Indian War. He then started two mercantile partnerships with Philadelphia men before creating his own flour brokering firm in 1772. Family connections remained central to the growth ofhis business-his correspondence and financial ledgers reveal that he worked with a mercantile firm started in Baltimore by two ofhis brothers.2
Hollingsworth also belonged to two social and leisure clubs, the "Gloucester Fox Hunting Club" and the "Colony in Schuylkill."
These clubs and three similar ethnic clubs connected the merchants and professional men who founded the Troop. Nine ofthe Troop founders were members ofthe Gloucester Fox
Hunting Club in 1774, and twelve ofthem were members of"The Society ofthe Friendly Sons ofS1. Patrick.,,3 The Troopers' socioeconomic networks in pre-war Philadelphia shaped the
1 Jacob Cox Parsons, ed., Extractsfrom the Diary ofJacob Hiltzheimer ofPhiladelphia. 1765-1798 (Philadelphia: William F. Fell, 1893), 12 December 1767, 14. 2 Hollingsworth Family Papers, 1748-1887, HSP. The Hollingsworth papers are focused between 1770-1825. They contain some correspondence to and from the Troop founder Levi, but are predominantly his financial records and ledgers surrounding his flour brokering business. 3 For a history ofthe Gloucester Fox Hunting Club and membership roll, see William Milnor, Memoirs ofthe Gloucester Fox Hunting Club, near Philadelphia (Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1830). For a history of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, see John Hugh Campbell, History ofthe Friendly Sons ofSt. Patrick and ofthe Hibernian
11 founding ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse. The Troop was representative oflarger patterns in the development ofPhiladelphia and Pennsylvania-a shift in the colony's leadership from Quakers and Quaker principles to those ofa more diverse and strident professional and merchant class.
Troopers, like other Pennsylvanian laborers, artisans and farmers, were willing to use martial force to achieve their ends. With Quaker ideals ofnon-violence institutionalized into the government and fabric ofPennsylvania, the transition to a more pragmatic Pennsylvania increasingly guided by self-interest rather than religion created a conflict and power vacuum into which Anglicans, Presbyterians and less dogmatic Quakers stepped.
In this chapter, I explore the increasing resistance to Pennsylvania's pacifist traditions and the Quaker government that espoused them. I then look at how merchant resistance to British regulations followed in similar patterns and further eroded the Quaker establishment. Merchants and professionals, in addition to the city's laborers and artisans, formed private clubs and associations outside governmental authority to assert their members' views and objectives into society. I examine the ways in which these older clubs both connected the Troop and served as models for its association. I finish by examining how Troopers' personal and professional lives also shaped the founding ofthis group, further revealing the transition from a society dominated by Quaker principles to those ofan emerging Anglican and Presbyterian merchant and professional elite.
Pacifist Traditions
Early Pennsylvania's Quaker traditions kept the colony apart from forms ofrequired military service used in other American colonies. Until the last quarter ofthe seventeenth century,
Society for the ReliefofEmigrants from Ireland: March 17, 1771-March 17, 1892 (Philadelphia: Hibernian Society, 1892). 12 European settlers living in the land that became Pennsylvania had employed a militia.4 However, the idea ofan institution that required the military service ofall able-bodied males in a community did not agree with Quaker principles ofpacifism. After King Charles II granted the
Quaker William Penn a twenty-nine million acre proprietary colony in 1681, the Quaker- controlled government came into frequent confrontation with the Crown up through the mid- eighteenth century over its refusal to directly support British military efforts and recruit colonial militias to fight the Crown's wars in North America.
Opposition to the Pennsylvania Assembly's pacifist principles did not come from the
Crown alone. Lutherans, Presbyterians and Anglicans, men ofthe emerging professional and merchant class, in addition to lower artisans and mechanics, all pushed against the Quaker peace principle upheld by the Assembly. 5 While the more pietistic sects ofGerman immigrants supported the Quaker peace principle, during King George's War, which was fought in North
America as an extension ofthe War ofAustrian Succession, the internal demand for military defense became louder. Those who opposed the Assembly's peace principle included even
William Penn's son Thomas Penn, who publicly advocated for Pennsylvania's adoption ofa system ofdefense. 6 The Society ofQuakers, however, remained opposed. This opposition continued through the Revolution when the Society disowned those Quakers, including Trooper
4 For further discussion, see the first chapter of Samuel Newland, The Pennsylvania Militia: Defending the Commonwealth and the Nation, 1669-1870 (Annville, PA: Pennsylvania National Guard Foundation, 2002). 5 I define middling artisans as skilled manual workers whose average taxable wealth was above those classified as laborers-whom I later refer to as the laboring poor--on the Philadelphia tax lists of 1775. The average taxable wealth ofa Philadelphia laborer in 1775 was £1.6, compared to the following groups that are included in my definition ofartisans: bakers, £18.7; skinners, £15.7; carpenters, £14.5; shopkeepers, £12.8; hatters, £12.2; smiths, £9.7; butchers, £9.2; tailors, £8.7; andjoiners, £7.5. As a profession's taxable wealth approaches the common laborer, like porters, £5.6 and cordwainers, £4.9, the definitions increasingly overlap. The average taxable wealth ofPhiladelphia merchants in 1775 is significantly higher than all ofthese professions: £63.4. This information is taken from Tables A.3, A.5 and A.6 ofRosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 262-66. He uses the County Provincial Tax Duplicate, 1775, Philadelphia City Archives. 6 Governor Thomas Penn would convert to the Anglican Church in 1751, remaining steadfast in his support of an established system ofcolonial defense.
13 Samuel Morris, who served in combat. But twenty-seven years before Morris and twenty-seven other men would associate their Troop, another military group was started that established many precedents for the Philadelphia Light Horse.
Benjamin Franklin's Associators were a voluntary and self-equipped military group outside the direct control ofany government. In November of 1747, during King George's War,
Benjamin Franklin published a popular pamphlet titled, Plain Truth: or, Serious Considerations on the Present State ofthe City ofPhiladelphia, and Province ofPennsylvania. Franklin's Plain
Truth tried to scare his fellow citizens into action, reading, "Sacking the City will be first, and
Burning it, in all probability, the last act ofthe enemy....Confined to your houses you will have nothing to trust to but the Enemy's Mercy.,,7 He then proposed, advertised and organized a voluntary militia called the Associators. To do this, Franklin staged three meetings, speaking to different cross-sections ofPhiladelphia. First, he addressed a group ofaround 150 tradesmen and mechanics at Walton's Schoolhouse, then a group ofgentlemen and merchants at Robert's
Coffee House, and then a group ofshopkeepers, tradesmen and small farmers at the New
Building. This resulted in his first 500 signatures.8 Days later, Franklin advertised the
Associators in the Daily Gazette. It was a success: Franklin had signed up over 1,000 men, entirely circumventing the Assembly. The pacifist ruling Quakers had grown out oftouch with the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania citizenry.
The Associators operated outside the direct control ofthe colonial government. Like the
Troop, they supplied themselves. In the Daily Gazette, Franklin's advertisement stipulated that members were required to supply themselves with "a good Firelock, Cartouche-box, at least 12
7 A Tradesman ofPhiladelphia [Benjamin Franklin], Plain Truth: Or, Serious Considerations on the Present State ofthe City ofPhiladelphia, andProvince ofPennsylvania (Philadelphia: 1747), 7-8. 8Leonard W. Larabee, ed., The Papers ofBenjamin Franklin, January 1, 1745-June 30,1750 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961),4:184-86.
14 Charges ofPowder and Ball, and as Many ofus as conveniently can, a good Sword, Cutlass or
Hanger, to be kept always in our respective Dwellings in Readiness and good Order.,,9 Franklin's
Associators were a more diverse group than the Troop would be, though each member still had to possess the means to supply his own equipment, and like the Troop, the Associators self- elected their officers, from ensigns to captains. Both groups shared a common core, as they were formed as private military institutions defending their perceptions ofthe public good surrounded by the rhetoric ofdanger from a European power. In both cases, individual Philadelphia citizens felt it necessary to organize themselves and volunteer their services as an extralegal military body in defense oftheir colony.
The organization ofPennsylvania's government gave the Associators room to maneuver.
They were able to seek support from the proprietor and governor, and not the more conservative
Assembly. The proprietor represented the owner ofPennsylvania, established through the King's
1681 charter. The proprietorship had passed from William Penn to John Penn to Thomas Penn by
1747.10 The proprietor possessed the sole right to appoint and remove the province's governor. In the transition from governors in 1747, the President ofthe governor's Provincial Council agreed to commission military officers elected by the Associators.ll
The Pennsylvania climate towards a military system ofdefense was changing. The
Associator concept spread quickly from Philadelphia to other counties. In 1748 and 1749,
Philadelphia and Philadelphia County combined to tum out twenty Associator companies;
9 The Pennsylvania Gazette, 3 December 1747. 10 William Penn's second wife, Hannah Callowhill Penn, served as acting proprietor from 1712-1718, when William was sick until his death. At this point, the proprietorship was divided between their three sons. 50 percent ownership went to the first son John, 25 percent went to the second son Thomas and 25 percent went to the third son Richard. John died without children and Thomas inherited his 50 percent, giving him 75 flercent ownersh~p in 1,;46. .. .. ". Russell F. WeIgley, The Colomal MIlItIa, ill Uzal W. Ent, ed., The First Century: A History ofthe 28th Infantry Division (Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1979), 21.
15 Chester County, twenty-six; Lancaster County, thirty-three; and Bucks County, nineteen. 12
Companies consisted ofbetween fifty and one-hundred men, and around ten Associator companies made up a typical regiment. When King George's War ended with the peace treaty of
Aix-la-Chapelle on April 19, 1748, these companies were not disbanded, despite opposition to them from both the Assembly and the Pennsylvania's proprietor, Thomas Penn. Penn disproved ofthe Associators for other reasons, writing to the governor's Council in 1749, "Ifthe people had desired for their defense, they should have applied to you, their legal Governors for License to do, when you would have formed them into Bodys proper for Service & issue such Orders as would be from time to time necessary.,,13 Penn wrote that he wanted a permanent system of defense run by the Council.
The Philadelphia Associators continued to function in a much-lessened capacity after the news ofAix-la-Chapelle finally reached Philadelphia on August 24. Just a week later, they improved the Grand Battery at Wicaco with additional cannon, one oftwo batteries built by the
Associators to protect Philadelphia from sea-born attack. 14 The Pennsylvania Gazette reported that the Associators again added more cannons in September, 1750, and continued training exercises and even recruitment through 1754. 15 But in October, 1755, French-supported attacks by the Algonquin tribes against western Pennsylvanian settlements would again motivate the
Associators into action. 16 Benjamin Franklin described the news ofone ofthese attacks: "We have this Day the bad News that the Enemy have last week supriz'd and cut offeight families in
12 Newland, Pennsylvania Militia, 40. 13 Thomas Penn to the Council, 30 March 1749 ,in George E. Reed, ed., Pennsylvania Archives: Papers ofthe Governors, 1747-1759 (Harrisburg, PA: State ofPennsylvania, 1900),2:676-79. 14 The Pennsylvania Gazette, 1 September 1748. 15 The Pennsylvania Gazette, 27 June 1754; The Pennsylvania Gazette, 15 October 1754. 16 The Algonquin tribes included members from the Delaware, Ottawa, Shawnee, Miami, Kickapoo, Illinois, Sauk-Fox, Potawatomie, and Ojibwa tribes. 16 this Province. Thirteen grown persons were killed and scalped and 12 Children, carried away.,,17
Still, the Assembly refused to raise a fully regulated militia. Increasing reports ofattacks such as the Gnaddenheutten Massacre, where a French-supported Shawnee war party killed all eleven inhabitants ofa pacifist Moravian mission, and the march ofhundreds ofGerman farmers from their homes in Cumberland, Lancaster and Berks counties to Philadelphia on November 25, 1755, helped to change the Assembly's decision. IS Recently-elected Assemblyman Benjamin
Franklin's proposed bill, "An Act for Better Ordering and Regulating Such as Willing and
Desirous to be United for Military Purposes Within this Province," passed through the Assembly on November 25. A companion act, the Supply Act ofNovember 27, also passed. While military service remained voluntary, for the first time the Assembly had moved to raise a full-time military unit and also build a system offrontier forts.
In 1756, the Quakers lost the majority they had always held in the Assembly. Ten members resigned, and others refused to run for re-election. Only six ofthe thirty-six
Assemblymen belonged to the Society ofFriends by the end of 1756. A statement signed by six
Quakers who retired in June summarizes their beliefs:
As many ofour constituents seem ofopinion that the present situation ofpublic affairs calls upon usfor services in a military way which from a conviction ofjudgment after mature deliberation we cannot comply with, we conclude it most conducive to the peace ofour minds, and the reputation ofour religious profession to persist in our resolution of resigning our seats, which we now accordingly do. 19
Pennsylvania participated in the French & Indian War, but none ofthe Troop founders played an active role. The men who associated the Troop in 17741eft this war to be fought for the protection ofthe western counties by those living there and also the British. Military service was
17 Larabee, ed., Franklin to 1750, 6:231. 18 Newland, Pennsylvania Militia, 68. 19 Gertrude MacKinney, ed., Pennsylvania Archives: Votes ofthe Assembly, October 15, 1753-September 24, 1756 (Harrisburg, PA: State Printer, 1931),5:564.
17 not yet a part oftheir lives. The Philadelphia Light Horse, however, would later include some veterans ofthe French & Indian War as its membership expanded during the Revolution. War service would play an increasing role in Philadelphia's social makeup as it threatened all of
Pennsylvania.
At this time, however, the western counties' direct exposure to attacks created a divide between them and Philadelphia. In December, 1763, Matthew Smith and roughly fifty men from the Paxton area killed six Conestoga Indians, members ofa small and peaceful tribe, accusing them ofaiding hostile Indians. Two weeks later they killed the remaining fourteen whom
Governor John Penn had placed in protective custody. Over one-hundred Moravian and Quaker
Indians fled to Philadelphia under the protection ofthe government. The Paxton mob marched to
Philadelphia with designs to kill them. Franklin called for a new Association at the Governor's request, and over 1,000 Philadelphians turned out.20 Franklin went just outside Philadelphia to
Germantown with a small delegation to try diplomacy with the Paxton Boys. Franklin agreed to present their grievances to the Assembly, and the mob dispersed to their homes. Franklin wrote,
"The fighting face we put on and the reasoning's we used with the insurgents...turned them back and restored quiet to the city. ,,21 A group offrontiersmen had come close to rampaging through the capital city to murder Quaker-converted Indians.
Pennsylvania was not the harmonious Quaker-principled society William Penn had envisioned. In addition to the east-west tensions shown by the Paxton march, Pennsylvania was coming into increasing conflict with the Crown. Before the French & Indian War, it was the
Assembly's refusal to establish a defense system or directly support colonial troop requirements that created this. After that war, Pennsylvanians, including Philadelphians from merchants to
20 The Pennsylvania Gazette, 9 February 1764. 21 Carl Van Doren, ed., Franklin's Autobiographical Writings (New York: Viking Press, 1945),310. 18 mechanics-the likes ofwhich were represented in the Associators-increasingly opposed
British legislation for governing the colonies. Philadelphia and its merchant class had shown that it could contribute to and develop a private response to a larger public problem. It could make dramatic moves around, and even in opposition to, the colonial government. The merchant response to the Stamp Act further developed this pattern.
Merchant Resistance
Philadelphia merchants undertook coordinated and large-scale opposition to the Stamp
Act in October and November of 1765. On November 7,375 merchants, including twelve ofthe twenty-eight Troop Founders, signed a Non-Importation Agreement to halt the purchase and sale ofall British goods until the Stamp Act was repealed. A more encompassing colonial merchant mien is visible in the opening lines:
The Merchants and Traders ofthe City ofPhiladelphia, taking into their consideration the Melancholy state ofthe North-American Commerce in general, and the distressed situation ofthis Province ofPennsylvania in particular, do unanimously agree: That the many difficulties they now labour under, as a trading people, are owing to the Restrictions, Prohibitions, and ill-advised Regulations made in several Acts ofthe Parliament ofGreat Britain, lately passed to regulate the Colonies. 22
The merchants' agreement considers North American commerce as a whole, in addition to the local situation. Merchants were aware that local, colonial and global forces all acted upon and determined prices in the Philadelphia market. For example, British and West Indian food shortages in the mid-eighteenth century increased demand for colonial foodstuffs and drove up prices. This market force raised grain prices in Philadelphia, boosting business for Pennsylvania farmers and flour merchants like Troop founder Levi Hollingsworth. While rising food prices negatively affect the purchasing power ofall those who consume food, the question becomes,
22 Non-Importation Agreement o/November 7, 1765, Pennsylvania Stamp Act and Non-Importation Resolutions Collection, APS.
19 how much is this offset by the increase in wealth for those connected to the production and sale offoodstuffs? Even for a Philadelphia artisan paying higher prices to purchase the same amount offood, the increased business flow to him spurred by the greater trade and wealth ofmerchants and farmers could improve his lot. For the American colonies, rising prices for food did not simply mean a redistribution ofthe wealth to enlarge the merchants' and farmers' shares. It meant an increase in goods transferred to them from Britain, Europe and the West Indies. It was not a zero-sum game.
British legislation governing colonial commerce in this period, however, was focused on transferring wealth from the colonies back to Britain, making it a zero-sum game within the
Empire where London claimed a lion's share. The merchants described this legislation as limiting the export ofcertain goods and increasing the cost ofimports. They hoped that in their actions, "their Brethren, the Merchants and Manufacturers ofGreat Britain, will find their own interest so intimately connected with ours, that they will be spurred on to befriend us from that
Motive, ifno other should take place.,,23 They stressed that the legislation not only hurt themselves, but also Great Britain, by not allowing them the means to pay their debts to Britain and continue in business with their British brethren.
Merchants and traders took matters ofgovernment into their own hands with the Non-
Importation Agreement. They described the Stamp Act as an "unconstitutional law," but did not petition the Pennsylvania Assembly to make this request.24 Instead, they voluntarily formed and created their own request, taking personal measures through their businesses to accomplish their objectives. Private clubs and associations helped provide the model for this. The enforcement of non-importation also relied on social and business networks, not any sheriffor law from the
23 Non-Importation Agreement, APS. 24 Ibid.
20 colonial government. The Agreement was binding, agreed upon by the subscribers' "WORD OF
HONOUR." In a similar way, the Agreement "hopes that [by] their Example [the subscribing merchants] will stimulate the good people ofthis Province, to befrugal in their use and consumption ofall Manufactures, excepting those ofAmerica, and lawful goods coming directly from Ireland, manufactured there, whilst the necessities ofour Country are such as to require it.,,25 Again, this indicates the merchants coming to view the individual colonies as part ofa whole, and starting to look out for the welfare not simply oftheir own province, but ofAmerica as a country.
The Stamp Act was repealed in 1766 in response to strong resistance from all the colonies except Georgia. The news ofthe repeal brought about celebrations in Philadelphia, including a large banquet at the State House. The resistance ofPhiladelphia merchants and other
American colonials to the Stamp Act contrasts with the response ofBritish colonies in the West
Indies. The environment ofthe British West Indies was markedly different from Pennsylvania.
These islands were dependent on slave labor, and each colony's enslaved labor force heavily outnumbered the free whites. The fear ofslave revolts was a real factor in creating a dependence on the British army. Militias were difficult to support given the lower numbers of a white male population and the distance between the large sugar plantations?6 A fear ofslave revolts likely also bred an environment inherently hostile to internal uprising. The significantly lower slave population in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania made them more conducive to militia activity and resistance to government authority.
25 Ibid. 26 Andrew Jackson O'Shaughnessy, An Empire Divided: The American Revolution and the British Caribbean (Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 2000), 34. Ofthe thirteen American colonies, only South Carolina had a larger population of slaves than free whites. South Carolina was the site ofthe largest slave revolt in America, the 1739 Stono Rebellion, and unlike the other colonial governments, it did not express opposition to occupation by the British anny in North America before 1768. 21 Unlike the American colonies and the Philadelphia merchants who comprised the Troop, the British protectionist legislation was directly benefiting the British West Indies plantation owners and traders. The Sugar Act of 1764 and the Revised Sugar Acts of 1766, replacing the unenforced Molasses Act of 1733, essentially gave the British West Indies a monopoly on the sugar, molasses and rum trade to the American colonies. The lower-priced French West Indies alternatives were banned, and smuggling them, as had been done before, became prohibitively expensive.27 While this British legislation helped their colonies' planters in the West Indies, it hurt Philadelphia merchants and the Philadelphia economy, contributing to the resistance that would result in the association ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse.
The colonial response in Philadelphia to further British legislation continued to be more hostile than that ofthe West Indies. Philadelphia merchants opposed the Townshend Revenue
Acts of 1767, which placed special duties on common items like paper, paint, glass and tea, with another non-importation agreement signed by over 300 merchants in March of 1769. This response, however, took longer than their response to the Stamp Act. It was Philadelphian mechanics and artisans who displayed the earliest and most adamant opposition to the
Townshend Acts. 28 In the press, the most vocal and consistent opposition to these acts came from the Pennsylvania Journal, Pennsylvania Gazette and Pennsylvania Chronicle and Universal
Advertiser. The Pennsylvania Chronicle that first published John Dickinson's "Letters from a
Farmer in Pennsylvania to the Inhabitants ofthe British Colonies." Dickinson, actually a prominent lawyer, railed against the Acts, which he described as unconstitutional.
27 Ibid., 65. 28 Theodore Thayer, Pennsylvania Politics and the Growth o/Democracy, 1740-1776 (Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1953), 144; Gary Nash, The Urban Crucible: Social Change, Political Consciousness, and the Origins o/the American Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979), chapters 11-12.
22 Opposition to British legislation led by Philadelphia citizens acting outside the colonial government continued into the 1770s. For example, the 1773 Tea Act gave the East India Tea
Company a monopoly on tea trade with the colonies. Initially, some Philadelphia merchants had agreed to import it; however, increasing public outcry initiated by mechanics and artisans discouraged them. On December 25, a day after The Pennsylvania Packet reported the news of the Boston Tea Party, where a large mob dressed as Indians dumped around 45 tons ofEast India
Tea into the Boston Harbor, Philadelphia's shipment oftea had landed at nearby Chester.29 A delegation intercepted the ship, bringing her captain to the State House Yard. A large meeting there soon convinced the captain to sail away with his cargo, never landing in Philadelphia.
Voluntary associations ofcitizenry operating without government mandate are central to the origins ofthe Revolution. Bernard Bailyn stresses the importance ofindependently formed and elected assemblies to understanding the background ofthe American Revolution, as they became the focus ofopposition to Britain, the forum for Revolutionary leaders and the framework for the American cause.30 These new assemblies, more closely representing the passions ofthe people than their predecessors, took away power traditionally held by the legislatures and governors. They depended on strong social networks, reinforced by taverns, newspapers and associations. For the merchants and professionals that made up the Philadelphia
Light Horse, these were the types ofclubs that helped connect their social lives.
Social Organizations
Philadelphia clubs forged the social networks that later became cornerstones for
Revolution, and the cross-enrollment ofTroopers on them is high. Among these clubs, and considered the oldest social club in America, was the "Colony in Schuylkill." Founded in 1732
29 The Pennsylvania Packet, 24 December 1773. 30 Bernard Bai1yn, The Origins ofAmerican Politics (New York: Knopf, 1968),9-10.
23 for fishing and hunting, its members treated its grounds as their own small colony. Club tradition holds that at an early meeting, the members held council in the forest with some chiefs ofthe
Lenni Lenape tribe, the tribe with whom William Penn made his treaty on the Delaware. These chiefs granted the club the right to hunt and fish on the land.31 The Colony in Schuylkill elected its own officers, including a governor, a five-member Assembly, a sheriff, a coroner and a secretary-treasurer. The self-election process was a constant pattern in voluntary Philadelphia associations. The Troop would follow in this, electing its officers and new members.
The Philadelphia Light Horse and the Schuylkill club had significant membership crossover. Seven Troop founders were also members ofthe Colony in Schuylkill. A common mindset ofmembers ofthe Colony in Schuylkill was represented by their interest in hunting and fishing, and also politics. The gentlemen who joined this club overwhelmingly supported the
American cause over Britain's. Ofthe forty Schuylkill members from 1766, who in that year unanimously elected future Troop founder Samuel Morris as governor ofthe Schuylkill club, only one would become a Loyalist.32 Clubs built and reinforced the social network ofthese professionals and merchants, and reflected certain shared beliefs.33
A year before the Colony in Schuylkill elected Samuel Morris a member in 1754, Morris helped to found a similar club called the "Schuylkill Company ofFort St. David's." This club's membership contained four Troop future founders. For their clubhouse, the members built a
31 Milnor, Gloucester;"The Restoration ofthe Schuylkill Gun to the State in Schuylkill," Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography (March 1884): 201. Whether this Lenape myth is simply club lore or based on a factual occurrence is unclear, but the story is repeated in the club's histories. 32 John F. Watson and Willis P. Hazard, Annals ofPhiladelphia, and Pennsylvania, in the Olden Time Being a Collection ofMemoirs, Anecdotes, and Incidents ofthe City andIts Inhabitants, and ofthe Earliest Settlements ofthe Inland Part ofPennsylvania (Philadelphia: E.S. Stuart, 1884),292. 3 In addition to professionals like lawyers and doctors, top level Philadelphia craftsmen also made up the membership ofthis club and were part ofthis larger social network-indeed it would be very beneficial for business to be on a persona11eve1 with clients. Among the craftsmen in the Colony in Schuylkill's founding membership oftwenty-eight included its elected governor, clockmaker Thomas Stretch, and silversmiths Philip Syng and John Leacock.
24 timber-fort on the eastern side ofthe Schuylkill River that was later burned down by Hessian 34 soldiers during the British occupation ofPhiladelphia of 1777-1778. The Colony in Schuylkill demonstrated a similar martial mien with its gift ofa 32-pound cannon to the Associators in
1747.35 The cannon was the largest of all the cannons at the two Philadelphia batteries. The cannon was inscribed with the Unami Lenape motto, "kawanio che keeteru," which translates as,
"this is my right, I will defend it.,,36
Ethnic clubs were also important to the social networks ofthese men. "The St. Andrews
Society ofPhiladelphia" was founded in 1747 for Scotsmen and their descendents with the purpose ofactive and charitable aid towards Scotsmen, their widows and minor children. This was a club based upon loose common ancestry and dedicated not simply to fraternization, but also to charitable acts for the common good. Three Troop founders were members, and four other members ofthis society would become Troopers during the American Revolution. The
"Society ofthe Friendly Sons ofSt. Patrick" was another ethnic club whose membership played a large role in the Troop's founding. Nine ofthe twenty-five men who founded the Society in
1771 were founders ofthe Troop. Intended for Irishmen and Irish descendents, thirty Friendly 3 Sons were on the Philadelphia Light Horse roll at the close ofthe war. ? The overlap ofthese two clubs with the Light Horse reveals that while ethnic identity was an important part of eighteenth-century Philadelphian life, these ethnicities were not mutually exclusive. Four Troop founders also belonged to the "Society ofthe Sons ofSt. George for the advice and assistance of
Englishmen in distress," associated in Philadelphia in 1772. The Troop demonstrates the mixing
34 Hazard, Annals ofPhiladelphia, 293. 35 "Schuylkill Gun," 201. 36 Ibid.: 214. This motto was known for its connection to St. Tammany's Day, named after an early Lenapi chiefconsidered the Pennsylvania Saint. It was later used by the 1775 Committee ofSafety. Troop Founder Samuel Howell belonged to both the Committee and the Colony in Schuylkill. 37 Campbell, St. Patrick.
25 ofthe Scots and Irish, predominantly Presbyterian, and the English, predominantly Quaker and
Anglican, occurring among Philadelphia professionals and merchants.
The club most connected to the Troop was the "Gloucester Fox Hunting Club."
Organized in 1766, it elected Samuel Morris as its first president that year, the same year he was also elected governor ofthe Colony in Schuylkill.38 Nine Troop founders were members ofthe
Gloucester Fox Hunting Club in 1774, and twenty-three men would be members in both clubs by
1778. The Troop's uniform ofa "dark brown short coat, faced and lined with white; white vest and breeches; high-topped boots; round black hat, bound with silver cord; a buck's tail" was inspired by, ifnot exactly the same as, Gloucester's: "a brown cloth Coatee with lapelled dragoon pockets, white buttons, and frock sleeves, buffWaistcoat and Breeches, and a black velvet Cap.,,39 Like the fishing clubs, Gloucester reinforced social networks through an athletic leisure activity, but more importantly, it collected men who supported their own horses and could ride well. When Philadelphia livestock trader Jacob Hiltzheimer described Troop founder and
Gloucester member Levi Hollingsworth dismounting on a fox hunt and climbing up a tree to force the animal down, he was describing the same kind ofathleticism and hardy spirit necessary to make a successful cavalry man. Though fox-hunting was an English tradition tied to the aristocracy, Troopers had taken these English customs and made them their own. Almost all the
Gloucester members would contribute directly to the American cause by fighting in the
Revolutionary War.
The ethnic and social clubs ofPhiladelphia's merchant and professional class helped to connect the social network from which the Troop was born. The Troop followed in this tradition ofvoluntary associations with its self-election ofofficers. Elements ofthe clubs to which
38 Milnor, Gloucester, 2-3. 39 Minutes ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry. Philadelphia, Nov. 17, 1774, Donnaldson, Annory; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 3; Milnor, Gloucester, 3. 26 Troopers belonged were also incorporated into the Light Horse. The emphasis on athletic leisure activities, specifically horsemanship and shooting, developed through the Colony in Schuylkill and Gloucester Fox Hunting Club, were critical to the Troop. Also important was the concept of private contribution to the public good, seen in small ways through the charity ofethnic societies and the donation ofthe Schuylkill cannon to the Associators. In all ofthese clubs, bonds were based on not just shared ethnicity or religion, but common beliefand practice.
Home and Business
Overlapping spheres ofactivity made up the Troopers' lives. Their social spheres included the clubs and associations to which they belonged, and also their domestic life. They operated in a Philadelphia society that was as rigid and oppressive for some as it was fluid and opportunistic for others. The privacy ofthe home makes this difficult to access, but glimpses into the Troopers' private relationships illuminate the breadth ofPhiladelphia culture and their interconnected lives. In 1775, Troop founder George Campbell, Esq. was also Register for the
Probate ofWills for the City and County ofPhiladelphia, in the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania.
He reviewed and signed the will ofMary West, the wife ofTroop founder and merchant Francis
West. In it, she directed that, "my three Negro Slaves Dick, Judah, & Simon shall be liberated & made free, in one month after my decease... and paid to them each five pounds." 40 She further ordered that whatever remained ofthe estate left to her from her father be divided equally among her five sons and three daughters. Here, Philadelphia's Quaker heritage does not isolate those of its merchant and professional class from the institution ofcolonial slavery. The hierarchical fluidity for Anglo-Welsh Quakers and Anglicans and Scots-Irish Presbyterians did not extend to all those living in Pennsylvania.
40 Will ofMary West, West Family Papers, 1764-1893, HSP.
27 Another group facing discrimination in Pennsylvania was German immigrants. A letter from Benjamin Franklin to Peter Collinson after King George's War reflects the colonial leader's concern that the German immigrants were not a part ofPennsylvania society and loyal to their causes. He wrote that the Germans, "giving out one among another, and even in print, that ifthey were quiet the French, should they take the Country, would not molest them.,,41 However, first- generation German immigrant Jacob Hiltzheimer, who left Rotterdam at the age ofnineteen and apprenticed himselfto a silversmith, shows that Philadelphia society could also be open. He married a Philadelphia Quaker in 1761 and frequently fox-hunted and ate with Troop founders
Levi Hollingsworth and Samuel Morris in the 1760s and 1770s.42 This included at least one dinner at the Colony in Schuylkill. Hiltzheimer was friendly with other Troop founders, including Samuel Howell, who informed Hiltzheimer that the British ship carrying the East
Indian Tea had arrived at Chester.43 The strong pre-Revolution social networks ofthe Troopers helped to foster a cultural identity and the communication ofinformation.
The Troop's founding members were ofScots-Irish, English and Welsh descent; they were Presbyterians, Anglicans and Quakers. First-generation immigrants made up some ofthe
Troop's founding members. Among them was Thomas Leiper, who came to America from
Scotland in 1763. He was eighteen years old, the youngest brother offour, and followed his middle two brothers to America because only the first-born was to inherit the family's estate in
Scotland.44 His brothers helped set him up in the tobacco and snufftrade. Within ten years,
Leiper had become one ofthe principle merchants in the Philadelphia tobacco trade, also acquiring at least five nearby mills often used for snuffproduction. Both Thomas Leiper and
41 Benjamin Franklin to Peter Collinson, 9 May 1753, in Larabee, ed., Franklin to 1750,4:485. 42 Two ofJacob Hiltzheimer's sons would join the Troop in the 1790s. 43 Parsons, ed., Hiltzheimer Diary, 25 December 1773,27. 44 H. Simpson, The Lives ofEminent Philadelphians Now Deceased (Philadelphia: 1859),239.
28 John Dunlap had moved to America, and with family assistance and entrepreneurial spirit, established their businesses. During the Revolution, both men continued to rapidly expand their businesses after allying themselves with the American cause. Their social networks forged during the pre-Revolutionary period better facilitated this.
Abraham Markoe, the man elected captain at the Troop's founding, was a different kind offirst-generation immigrant. He was a well-established Danish citizen when he settled in
Philadelphia in 1770 at the age offorty-three. Sugar plantations started by his grandfather in
Abraham's birthplace ofSanta Cruz supported him. Samuel Morris, the second captain ofthe troop, was descended from one ofPennsylvania's original Quaker families. Seven years younger than Markoe, Morris was a Philadelphia merchant. Levi Hollingsworth, like Morris, was descended from a Quaker family who had settled around Pennsylvania in the last quarter ofthe seventeenth century, although Hollingsworth's grandfather and family converted to the Anglican
Church. Hollingsworth shared memberships with Morris in the Gloucester Fox Hunting Club and
Colony in the Schuylkill.45 As discussed earlier, social and familial connections helped to grow his business.
The Troop was a combination ofrecent immigrants and men who had operated around
Philadelphia for multiple generations. Friendships through private clubs and associations connected their Philadelphia business world, and so did the concept offamily, both through blood and marriage. While Dunlap married a woman who had just emigrated with her father from England, Markoe, Morris and Hollingsworth all married daughters ofestablished
Philadelphia merchants.
Private relationships and associations, both forms ofsocial networking, played a crucial role in pre-Revolution Philadelphia society. The English financial revolution that occurred in the
45 Hollingsworth Family Papers, HSP.
29 first halfofthe eighteenth century better allowed individuals, businesses and the government to borrow the necessary capital to begin or expand investment ventures. In colonial America, however, the role ofbanks as private lending institutions was often fulfilled by wealthy individuals. Levi Hollingsworth's financial papers include promissory notes and checks surrounding his mercantile operations, and also private loans. Philadelphia would not have its own banks until the Revolutionary War, with the Bank ofPennsylvania and the Bank ofNorth
America, both ofwhich relied upon large Trooper subscriptions in their foundings. Like
Franklin's Philadelphia Associators, the Philadelphia Light Horse supported the American
Revolution through their financial backing in addition to their blood and sweat.
The overlapping business and home spheres ofthe Troop founders reveals the fluidity and emergence ofthe merchant and professional group. These men lived in William Penn's gridded city, built upon the fertile soil where the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers meet.
Philadelphia's role as a port city connected its businessmen through trade directly with supply and demand from not only the other American colonies, but also the West Indies, Europe and
Africa. This encouraged a more pragmatic mindset with a worldly view, not one simply attuned to local goings-on. The Troopers' lives during the mid-eighteenth century exemplify this.
Public and private institutions alike depended upon the support ofprivate individuals.
Gordon Wood writes that in American colonial society, "most public actions-from the building ofwharfs and ferries to the maintaining ofroads and inns-- Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, public institutions and even defense, with Benjamin Franklin's 46 Wood, Radicalism, 82. 30 Associators, relied upon private energy and private funds. Troop members took an active part in this Philadelphian pattern ofprivate involvement in matters ofa larger scale. To Revolution A stricter legislative period for the American colonies came at the conclusion ofthe French & Indian War, where Great Britain's army, colonies and allies defeated the French in North America and the globe. This legislation, a string ofacts passed by the Parliament intended to more actively govern the colonies, marked a change in direction from a long period ofsalutary neglect.47 As the colonies resisted these acts, tensions increased with Great Britain. From September to October of 1774, fifty-five delegates sent by their colonial governments-all except Georgia-met in Philadelphia to discuss ways to compel the British government to repeal the legislation. This First Continental Congress resolved a Declaration ofRights and Grievances to King George III, agreed to convene the next spring iftheir complaints were not addressed, and established a boycott ofBritish goods through non-importation. To better implement the boycott, a Committee ofCorrespondence chosen by Philadelphia citizens met on November 17, 1774. Later that evening, three men from this committee joined with twenty-five others and associated as the cavalry troop under the name, The Light Horse ofthe City ofPhiladelphia.48 As the Troop served the Revolutionary Pennsylvania government, its members often served in it. In addition to the Committee ofCorrespondence, that five Troopers ultimately participate in, eight Troopers were members ofthe Committee ofSafety. The Pennsylvania Assembly had established this committee oftwenty-five in June of 1775 "for calling forth such 47 Salutary neglect was a tenn coined in 1775 by Edmund Burke in a speech in the British House ofCommons marked for its support ofthe American colonies. The following is some ofthe legislation for governing the American colonies passed by British parliament in London between 1763 and 1774: The Proclamation of 1763; the Sugar Act; the Stamp Act; the Currency Act; the Declaratory Act; the Townshend Duties; the Tea Act; the Port ofBoston Act; and the Quartering Act. 48 Donnaldson, Armory. 31 and so many ofthe Associators into actual service, when necessity requires.,,49 Pennsylvania's militia law from the French & Indian War had expired before the Revolution, so unlike the other colonies, Pennsylvania did not have an institutionalized militia system ofobligatory service for all white male inhabitants. Only after Pennsylvanian communities began to revive their defense associations through the first halfof 1775-including the Troop's independent association in 1774--did the Assembly finally pass the June, 1775 legislation allowing "the Association entered into by the good people ofthis province for the Defense oftheir Lives, Liberty and Property," and directing a Committee ofSafety to oversee it. 5o Between May, 1774 and 1776, over 180 Philadelphians served on civilian committees. In this expansion ofpower, emerging patriotic merchants like the Troop members better cemented their status over the old Quaker guard and loyalist conservatives. The Council ofSafety and the Committee ofInspection and Observation each included three Troopers. Middling artisans also asserted themselves, taking an active role and serving on these committees. Pennsylvania's new Constitution, adopted on September 28, 1776, reflected this radical movement. 51 It extended voting rights to all taxpaying free men and replaced the proprietary rule, where the grandson of William Penn had been governor ofPennsylvania, with a Supreme Executive Council to administer the government. The city ofPhiladelphia and Pennsylvania's eleven counties each got to elect one member to serve on the Council, and together with the Assembly-Pennsylvania's 49 Pennsylvania Archives: Votes ofthe Assembly, January 7, 1771-September 26, 1776. (Harrisburg, PA: State Library, 1935),8:7247. 50 In addition to the eight Troopers who served on the committee, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, John Dickinson, and John Cadwa1ader were members. Ibid., 8:7245. For more on the relationship between Pennsylvania's Constitution of 1776 and the militia, see Newland, Pennsylvania Militia, 131-32. 51 For a closer analysis ofthis movement and how the committees ofPhiladelphia first reflected the transition from Quaker leadership to a younger mercantile elite, and then a further extension, "which drew from the entire upper and middle ranges ofPhiladelphia society, but which finally centered on the aggressive, rising men ofthe middle classes," see Richard Alan Ryerson, The Revolution Is Now Begun: The Radical Committees ofPhiladelphia, 1765-1776 (Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 1978), 190,65-88. 32 unicamera1legislative body-they elected the council's President. The Troop would serve in these bodies and help establish their authority by fighting as a light horse unit in the American Revolution. 33 H. Amateurs to Arms: The Philadelphia Light Horse in the American Revolution I take this Opportunity ofreturning my most sincere thanks to the Captain and to the Gentlemen who compose the Troop, for the many essential Services which they have rendered to their Country, and to me personally, during the Course ofthis severe Campaign. Though composed of gentlemen offortune, they have shown a noble example ofdiscipline and subordination, and in several actions have shown a spirit and bravery which will ever do honor to them, and will ever be gratefully remembered by me.! -George Washington, 23 January 1777 The Philadelphia Light Horse would earn the respect ofContinental generals for its success as a conventional light horse, performing reconnaissance and acting as couriers during and between battles. The Troop's founders, however, were military novices. Like most Philadelphians, not one ofits twenty-eight men had fought in the French and Indian War. Washington's letter to Troop Captain Samuel Morris is full ofpraise for the Troop, while also revealing that expectations for "gentlemen offortune" were not high, even for Washington who was a wealthy member ofVirginia's elite plantocracy. This chapter explores the military methods by which the Philadelphia Light Horse contributed to the defense ofPhiladelphia, ofPennsylvania and ofthe emerging nation. The Troop's military support as a conventional light horse unit was critical to the success ofthe Revolutionary army and the Revolutionary governments. As a whole unit and in small groups, the Troop served a Continental army in need oflight horse forces, fighting in the four major battles around Philadelphia. While many members ofPhiladelphia's elite merchant and professional class avoided militia service, the Troopers' more active role in the American patriotic cause continued to propel their rise to power over the older Quaker establishment. ! George Washington to Samuel Morris, 23 January 1777, Armory. 34 Amateurs to Arms The Troop began its military preparations the winter and spring of 1775, drilling together several times a week. It employed a "Mr. Moffit," who had "belonged to a corps ofHorse in Ireland, to instruct them in the Horse and sword exercise, and as a rough rider to break in their horses.,,2 Unlike the British Dragoons it encountered during the Revolutionary War, the Troop was not a truly professional unit. The closest thing to military training its members had received before their association was fox-hunting, and even during the War, the unit would only drill together part-time, its members holding other jobs and positions. Despite this limited training, the Troop functioned extremely well in its military capacities, holding its own and often winning its engagements with the professional and highly trained British cavalry. In the spring of 1775, as tensions increased between Britain and the American colonies, the Troop drilled with increasing zeal. News ofthe Battle ofLexington reached Philadelphia on April 24, 1775. A warning from "J. Palmer" ofWorcester, Massachusetts' Committee of Correspondence ran in the Philadelphia's newspapers: "To all friends ofAmerican liberty, be it known, that this morning before break ofday, a brigade, consisting ofabout 1000 or 1200 men, landed at Phipp's Farm, at Cambridge, and marched to Lexington, where they found a company ofour colony militia in arms, upon whom they fired without any provocation, killed six men and wounded four others.,,3 Amidst this danger, and without an established militia, Philadelphia returned to Franklin's Associator model. The city's amateur armies rushed to prepare under war's looming shadow. Christopher Marshall, a Philadelphian chemist, wrote in his diary entry ofMay 20, 1775, "the militia, light 2 Donnaldson, Annory. 3 Pennsylvania Evening Post, 25 April 1775. 35 infantry, horse, and company ofartillery, exercising every day, and some ofthem twice a day.,,4 On June 20, the Philadelphia Light Horse and around 2,000 other citizens ofPhiladelphia classified as Associators under state law paraded in front ofGeneral George Washington. This entire number had equipped and trained themselves voluntarily and without pay--only when actually in the field would they receive money. In the war, the Troop would be one oftwo Philadelphia light horse units. A second troop oflight horse drawn from the boroughs outside Philadelphia had begun to form but was not yet ready to drill. Modeled after the Troop, although unable to attract the same number ofmembers, the Philadelphia County Light Horse also became important to the Revolutionary Pennsylvania and Continental governments that depended upon light horse to carry out varied military functions. 5 Light horse forces were an essential part ofeighteenth-century European warfare. In his authoritative 1778 "The Discipline ofthe Light Horse," the retired British Light Dragoon Captain Robert Hinde described the "particular duties" oflight cavalry: They are to be employed in reconnoitering the enemy, and discovering his motions: and as often as officers are detached on such commands, all that will be required ofthem, is, to make their observations with certainty, so as not to deceive the commanding officer afterwards byfalse intelligence: they are also on such parties to avoid engaging with the enemy, as being sent outfor a different purpose. Light Cavalry are also to be made use of for distant advancedposts, to prevent the armyfrom beingfalsely alarmed, or surprised by the enemy. 6 The purpose oflight horse was not direct battle-engagement with the enemy, but to provide communication and support through reconnaissance and skirmishing. The American and British armies relied on their light horse to perform this essential supporting role. Both the Pennsylvania 4 William Duane, ed., Passages from the Diary ofChristopher Marshall, Kept in Philadelphia and Lancaster During the American Revolution (Philadelphia: Hazard & Mitchell, 1849),20 May 1775, 30. 5 The loyalists ofPhiladelphia would also contribute two troops to the British: the Philadelphia Light Dragoons and the nearby Bucks County Dragoons. 6 Robert Hinde, The Discipline ofthe LightHorse (London: 1778), 147. 36 and Continental annies suffered from a severe shortage oflight horsemen in the first few years of the war, and the Troop helped fill that gap. The undersupply ofcavalry came from both an inability to raise mounted troops when needed and an inability to afford the large expense offeeding horses. General Washington did not have enough light horse in his New York camp in the summer of 1776, but when the Connecticut Light Horse appeared with some 500 men, Washington told them that he could not afford to support them and that they needed to get rid oftheir horses. Washington instead requested them to serve dismounted and dig fortifications with the rest ofhis army-something these horsemen viewed as beneath them.? Washington explained his subsequent dismissal ofthe unit to John Hancock, saying that though "their assistance is much needed, and might be of essential service in case ofan attack, yet I judged it advisable, on their application and claim of such indulgences, to discharge them." Washington feared their refusal to do the common duties ofa soldier "would set an example to others, and might produce many ill consequences."s Though the Connecticut Light Horse was the only large body ofcavalry available to the Continentals, Washington had needed their services as soldiers to help prepare the New York fortifications. His dismissal ofthem indicated that the difficulty ofsupporting such a large group oflight horse-especially one that also carried morale concerns-was not worth the benefits. The Philadelphia Light Horse better fit the Continental anny's needs. Already a small and semi-independent body, Troopers typically operated in even smaller dispatches ofa handful of men rather than as a whole unit. This made them easier to supply. In August of 1776, six Troopers were attached to Brigadier General Hugh Mercer's Continental troops in New Jersey for four weeks, conveying intelligence and communicating messages. Afterwards, Mercer 7 David Hackett Fischer, Washington's Crossing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 85-86. 8 George Washington to John Hancock, 17 July 1776, in Worthington Chauncey Ford, ed., The Writings of George Washington (New York: George Putnam's Sons, 1889),261. 37 thanked the six "Gentlemen" for their "Services, which have always been performed with the greatest Alacrity and Attention." Mercer had relied on them until more local New Jersey light horse could be "properly posted.,,9 The Continental army depended on these regional light horse units. Even at the New York fortifications, where Washington had rejected the Connecticut Light Horse, he kept the forty men ofthe Light Horse Troop ofNew York City. The need for light horse would become increasingly apparent to Washington and his commanders. After British forces took New York and drove the Continental army southwards that fall, General Washington wrote to Congress on December 11, 1776, "From the experience I have had in this campaign ofthe utility ofHorse, I am convinced there is no carrying on the war without them and I would therefore recommend the establishment ofone or more COrps."lO Pre- Revolution misconceptions about the applicability and necessity ofmounted troops in America, a landscape more heavily forested and less open than Europe, were changing. Congress, however, struggled to both raise and support a large enough Continental Corps oflight horse, and this part ofthe army remained undersupplied. British and Continental forces both struggled to meet the demand for cavalry throughout the war. Britain's 1i h Light Dragoons even took to advertising in colonial papers, seeking to purchase horses from "any person who have such to dispose Of."ll The Continental army struggled to feed what horses it could raise, especially pack horses and animals. During one six- month encampment, it lost over 1,500 horses and mules to starvation and disease. 12 The Troop 9 Hugh Mercer to Benjamin Randolph, John Dunlap, James Hunter, John Lardner, Thomas Peters and Thomas Leiper, 26 April 1776, Armory. 10 George Washington to the President ofCongress [John Hancock], 11 December 1776, in Thaddeus Allen, ed., An Inquiry into the Views, Principles, Services, andInfluences ofthe Leading Men in the Origination of the American Union, and in the Formation andAdministration ofthe Government (Boston: Geo. W. Briggs, 1849),353. 11 Pennsylvania Ledger, 21 February 1778; Pennsylvania Ledger, 4 March 1778. 12 This was at the Valley Forge encampment from the winter of 1777 through the spring of 1778. David Martin, The Philadelphia Campaign: June 1777-July 1778 (Conshohocken, PA: Combined Books, 2003), 176. 38 helped meet this undersupply and paid for the expenses ofits horses when not in active service. But whether it could successfully realize the capabilities ofa light horse unit in battle against the better trained and more professional British army would soon be seen. Trenton and Princeton As the British forces drew nearer to Philadelphia in the closing months of 1776, the Pennsylvania government sent reinforcements to General Washington's army. The Troop and three Associator battalions met with General Washington's army on December 2 in Trenton, New Jersey. The Troop's payroll from this time lists twenty-two members who were "employed in carrying confidential dispatches from the Commander in Chiefto the commanding Generals and in reconnoitering the enemy." They were then ordered to cover the rear and gather stragglers as the American armies, a mix ofstate and Continental troops, crossed the Delaware River in small boats to get to the Philadelphia side. The Troopers "had not reached the shore before the advance ofthe enemy were on the opposite bank." They camped by Washington's headquarters in Newtown, four miles from the river, continuing to deliver messages and conveying orders to the various American camps stretched over thirty miles. 13 On the other side ofthe river, the British and Hessian garrisons were spread out in seventeen posts from the Delaware to the Hudson River. Washington and his fellow commanders saw an opportunity to strike back against William Howe's forces. Washington's adjutant, New Jersey officer Colonel Joseph Reed, put forth the argument in a letter to Washington on December 22, writing, "Weare all ofthe opinion my dear general that something must be attempted to revive our expiring credit, give our Cause some degree ofreputation & prevent total depreciation ofthe Continental money which is coming on very fast." Times were dire for the Continentals, and Reed urged that "some enterprise must be undertaken in our present 13 Donnaldson, Armory. 39 Circumstances or we must give up the cause.,,14 Washington held a council ofwar that day, and on December 23, he sent out the secret orders for the surprise attack. Approximately 2,500 men were to cross the Delaware River under Washington's command and march south to surprise the British garrison of 1,400 troops, comprised ofHessian mercenaries and twenty British dragoons. Under the cover ofChristmas night, a flotilla ofsmall boats began to ferry Washington's men across the Delaware. For the Troop, "it was a very cold and tempestuous night, with snow and sleet and the boats not being able to reach the shore they had to use their horses belly deep and force them through the floating ice.,,15 Further down-river, the conditions were so bad that Colonel John Cadwalader's force of 1,200 Philadelphia Associators, who had planned to create a diversion for nearby British and Hessian troops, could not even make it across. Washington's force was successful but alone. At four in the morning, four hours behind schedule, the men, horses, artillery and ammunition began the march to Trenton. Washington's army, untrained compared to the British and Hessian troops, executed this Christmas crossing and march to Trenton in extreme conditions. The Troop was not comprised ofprofessional soldiers with years oftraining like the British 16th and 17th Light Dragoons, but their standardized uniform and weaponry indicates an attempt to carry themselves as such. Unlike many ofthe Connecticut Light Horse who had carried antiquated long-barreled fowling pieces, the Philadelphia Light Horse came armed for battle. Each Trooper equipped himselfwith a carbine, a pair ofpistols, and a horseman's sword. 16 The Revolutionary army had maintained 14 Joseph Reed to George Washington, 22 December 1776, quoted in Fischer, Washington's Crossing, 513. An adjutant is a position denoting a staffofficer who assists his commanding officer with administrative affairs. 15 Donnaldson, Armory. 16 Alexander Graydon further described the Connecticut Light Horse as "old fashioned men, probably farmers and heads offamilies...beyond the meridian oflife." Alexander Graydon, John Stockton Littell, ed., Memoirs 40 strict discipline in their march, quietly enveloping the Trenton garrison. They had occupied the town's heights and set up their artillery while maintaining the element ofsurprise. 17 In a forty-five minute battle, the Hessian commander Colonel RaIl would be fatally wounded before the Hessians would surrender. The Troop was mostly attached to General Washington and witnessed the surrender ofthe Hessians near him, although during the battle a detachment ofTroopers was sent to take a group ofHessians who had fortified a bam. These members ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse, led by its Comet, John Dunlap--the man who had printed the Declaration ofIndependence just months earlier-surrounded the bam from a distance while another dashed in close to the rear and demanded the Hessian party's surrender. After some parley, the Hessians complied. 18 The Troop had performed well in its first action. It was one ofonly two mounted troops in this campaign, the other being the newly designated 2nd Continental Light Dragoons that had an estimated fifty men under Elisha Sheldon. 19 The success ofthe Troop and the American army was striking. Twenty-two Hessians were killed, eighty-three seriously wounded, and 896 captured in the engagement. Washington reported to Congress that the Americans had lost "only two officers and one or two privates wounded.,,20 Although a larger and unknown number ofAmericans would suffer and die from the exposure and starvation surrounding the battle, Trenton remained an overwhelming success for the Continental cause. On the march back, the Philadelphia Light Horse was ordered to remain on the New Jersey side and patrol the roads, finally crossing the river at midnight. The ofHis Own Time, with Reminiscences ofthe Men andEvents ofthe Revolution by Alexander Gradyon (Philadelphia: Lindsay & Blakiston, 1846), 155. 17 For a detailed description ofthe battle, see Fischer, Washington's Crossing, 234-58. 18 Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915,11. 19 This infonnation is taken from the "American Order ofBattle Before the Attack on Trenton, December 22, 1776" in Appendix F ofFischer, Washington's Crossing, 390-93. 20 George Washington to John Cadwalader, 27 December 1776, quoted in Ibid., 406. 41 Troop had been "exposed two nights and one day without rest to the rigors ofthe climate." It had proven its ability to function in a conventional light horse capacity under extreme duress. 21 Just days later, Washington and the Continental army would again depend on the Troop when they attempted to follow up on their victory at Trenton. Colonel John Cadwalader and the Philadelphia Associators, who had initially failed to cross the Delaware, made it over on a second attempt the morning ofDecember 27. With this surprising information, Washington and his commanders decided in a council ofwar that night to attempt another attack into New Jersey.22 After crossing the Delaware River on December 30 with the Continental army, a dispatch oftwelve Troopers went on a reconnaissance mission the next day with Washington's adjutant, Colonel Joseph Reed. Attempting to capture a British soldier as he passed unarmed between a bam and a house, two Troopers moved in. When two more British soldiers appeared, all twelve Troopers and Colonel Reed charged the house. Eleven British Dragoons inside the house surrendered to them while a British Sergeant fled the scene. The Troop quickly marched the prisoners back to their lines, riding double with a few ofthe prisoners mounted on their horses to make it out of enemy territory. Through daring and martial vigor, the Troop had advanced from military amateurs to an effective light horse unit that could equal and even overcome the more professionally trained British Dragoons.23 The Philadelphia Light Horse's success comes in part because the conventional duties of the light horse were unconventional. Performing reconnaissance in enemy territory and 21 Donnaldson, Annory. 22 Fischer, Washington's Crossing, 264-65. 23 Thomas Rodney, The Diary ofCaptain Thomas Rodney, 1776-1777 (Wilmington: The Historical Society of Delaware, 1888),52; Donnaldson; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 13. A briefmanuscript ofTroop founder Thomas Peters was found by his granddaughter, written inside his copy ofthe "By-Laws ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry," which was printed in 1815. This manuscript, which further details these events, was reprinted in "A Scrap of'Troop' History," The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 15 (1891). 42 delivering communications in battle or over long distances demanded a level ofindependence and quick-thinking. During the Battle ofPrinceton on January 3, 1777, with Colonel Cadwalader's Associators struggling under heavy fire, General Washington, accompanied by a group ofPhiladelphia Light Horse and a few other troops, rode in to rally them. Boosted by the deployment ofmore Continentals along the line, the American armies advanced. The British troops broke, outnumbered and outflanked. Washington, revealing some ofhis own elite background, called out, "It is a fine fox chase, my boys!,,24 And the Americans pursued the British offthe field. Trooper John Donnaldson nearly took this advice too far when, as the Continental General James Wilkinson describes: In the ardor ofthe pursuit he [Donnaldson] had separated himselffrom the Troop, and as the infantry could not keep up, hefound himselfalone and liable to be shot by any straggler ofthe enemy who would not surrender, yet unwilling to slacken his pace, he mounted a Lt. Simpson of the foot, behind him who, whenever, a fugitive threatened to be refractory, jumped offand shot him, and in this manner three men, at different times, while taking aim at Mr. Donnaldson were knocked down and his life saved, but he made a score ofprisoners whom he sent to the rear after disarming them. 25 Donnaldson's "ardor" had gotten him into trouble, but that same innovative boldness also saved him. The roles ofthe light horse often required Troopers to operate in hostile territory where this kind ofdaring made them successful. After Trenton and Princeton, two victories in barely a week's time for an army that had suffered a string of defeats, Washington moved the Continentals into winter quarters. The Philadelphia Light Horse covered the rear ofthis march from Princeton, delaying an advanced party ofBritish horse and allowing Captain Joseph Moulder's artillery pieces to be saved. The Troop continued to serve on reconnaissance missions and act as couriers until General Washington discharged them. As partially quoted earlier, Washington wrote, "I take this 24 James Wilkinson, Memoirs ofMy Own Times, 3 vols. (Philadelphia: 1816), 1:145, quoted in Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915,12. 25 Ibid. 43 opportunity ofreturning my most sincere thanks to the Captain and to the gentlemen who compose the Troop, for the many essential services which they have rendered their country, and to me personally, during the course ofthis severe campaign." The Troop's contributions as a light horse unit in this campaign, which Washington describes as "essential services," were critical to its success. Washington continued, "Though composed ofgentlemen offortune, they have shown a noble example ofdiscipline and subordination, and in several actions have shown a spirit and bravery which will ever do honor to them, and will ever be gratefully remembered by me." The Troop had moved beyond "gentlemen offortune," displaying an honorable "spirit and bravery." In this, it had transformed itselffrom silk-stocking amateurs to an effective light horse unit. 26 Brandywine and Germantown The American victories at Trenton and Princeton combined with New Jersey militia groups' ongoing harassment to drive British and Hessian forces back to New York. Congress, which had evacuated Philadelphia in early December of 1776, returned to the city from Baltimore at the end ofFebruary. The Troop's reputation and influence were growing. It elected eighteen new members in March of 1777, also showing the support for the Revolutionary cause from Philadelphia's merchants and professional class?? The Troop's experiences in New Jersey during this time also highlight the Revolutionary support from people in the countryside. Describing the Troop's patrols in New Jersey in January after the two battles, the Donnaldson Narrative reads, "In this service they felt themselves pretty secure, as the ill treatment the Jerseymen had received from the British had changed their whole 26 George Washington to Samuel Morris, 23 January 1777, Armory. 27 All information on Trooper elections and resignations is taken and consistent with the muster rolls and assorted papers collected in the Armory and the Donnaldson in that archive, as well as the By-Laws, Muster Roll, andPapers; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915; Troop History to 1991. 44 conduct, attached them to their country with great hatred to the British." Philadelphia Light Horse detachments found that Jerseymen "would frequently join their parties" on patrol, and one man offered Troopers two "quarter casks ofMadeira wine" as a gift, one for General Washington and one for the Troop. The Troopers "prepared a light wagon with two good horses & a few young men ofthe neighborhood" at their camp and returned to their benefactor's cellar. They had just sent the wagon offwhen "a party ofBritish horse made their appearance but they kept them in check until the wine was safe.,,28 These examples indicate strong levels ofsupport for the Revolutionary cause from Philadelphia and southern New Jersey, but they do not tell the full story. When the first class of Philadelphia militia was called up in July of 1777, only forty-three percent met the demands of service, while twenty-seven percent paid a fine for avoiding service, twenty percent hired a substitute, and nine percent could not be found. Ofthose who paid the fine, their average taxable wealth in 1775 was £33 compared to £6.5 ofthose who served. 29 Many Philadelphians were not in full support ofthe Revolutionary cause and were not willing to serve in a military capacity. That the average taxable wealth ofthose paying fines was more than five times higher than those serving indicates that the burden ofsupport fell more on the laboring poor than the elite. The Troop's record ofservice and commitment to the Revolutionary separates them from many other members ofPhiladelphia's elite. Philadelphian support for the Continental cause would drop further as the British threat to the city increased later in the summer of 1777. British General William Howe had sailed with 15,000 troops from Staten Island, New York to stage an invasion ofPhiladelphia. On August 28, 28 Donnaldson, Annory. 29 Information taken from Tables A.3 and AA in Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 262-64. A man serving in the Philadelphia Light Horse who had been called up would not be included in these categories-he would be classified as a miscellaneous exemptions along with other Philadelphians serving in the artillery or navy. 45 1777, a British engineer reported the landing at Elk, Maryland of"One thousand men under a Colonel Paterson and the Philadelphia Light Horse fled from this town on our approach.,,3o This retreating group destroyed a bridge to slow the British advance, but neither they nor Washington's army could prevent the British from occupying Philadelphia in less than a month's time. In the militia call-ups ofSeptember, 1777, only sixteen percent met the demands ofservice, and the average taxable wealth ofthose paying a fine for avoiding service was twice that ofthose who served.31 Again, the burden fell on the laboring poor to fight for the patriotic cause, while those who were wealthier paid to avoid the fighting. The Troop's record stands in proud contrast. In the beginning ofSeptember, as Howe's army moved northward and battle was imminent, the Troop was so eager to join the Continental army that it petitioned to be exempted from prisoner duty in Philadelphia. The Light Horse attached itselfto the Continental army in September, fighting in the battles ofBrandywine and Germantown during the failed campaign to defend Philadelphia. Twenty Troopers, along with their trumpeter and a rough rider to care for their horses, performed conventiona11ight horse duties through September and October.32 Troop detachments acted as couriers and performed reconnaissance including the capture ofBritish soldiers for interrogation. Despite its limited training, the Troop again served as an effective light horse unit. In the September 10 defeat at Brandywine and its immediate aftermath, the Philadelphia Light Horse performed both courier and reconnaissance roles for the Continental army. However, this loss enabled the British to occupy Philadelphia, forcing the Troopers and other Philadelphians to evacuate the city, leaving behind much oftheir property to be seized. Estimates 30 G. D. Scull, ed., The Montresor Journals (New York: New York Historical Society, 1881),28 August 1777, 443. 31 Information taken from Table A.3 in Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 262-63. 32 Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 23. 46 vary, but around 12,000 people would flee, leaving approximately 23,000 in the city in addition to the British.33 The desertion rate for the Philadelphia militia during this tour ofduty was around twenty-five percent. The majority ofthe 252 known deserters came from the rank and file, although ofthe noncommissioned officers, seventeen sergeants and seven corporals left, and of the commissioned officers, two lieutenants and one ensign left. Rosswurm asserts, "the actions of these men should not be judged solely within a military context." 34 That is because two-thirds of the deserters left between September 20 and September 27, right around the time when the British occupied Philadelphia on September 26. This was less an indication ofcowardice than of concern for their families living in the city. Especially among the laboring poor who made up the militia, families did not have savings enough to pay for the basic necessities oflife. To win back Philadelphia, the Continental forces and local militia attempted an attack at Germantown under General Washington's direction. In this failed three-columned attack on October 4, 1777, Troop detachments helped maintain communication between the columns and provided reconnaissance during a confusing battle that took place on a morning "so dark from the heavy fog from the river.,,35 Some Troopers relocated to York, Pennsylvania, as did the Continental Congress; others moved to Lancaster, as did the Pennsylvania Supreme Council. Troopers continued to perform courier services for these governmental bodies. Another group stayed with General Washington at his headquarters and were issued letters permitting them "to pass and repass at all times. By His Excellency's Command.,,36 The Troop remained committed 33 Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 149. 34 Ibid., 143,45. 35 Donnaldson, Annory. 36 A military pass in the Annory archives issued on December 1, 1777, reads, "Pennit Mr. John Donnaldson of the Philadelphia Light Horse to pass and repass at all times. By His Excellency's Command. Tench Tilghman Aid." Members also temporarily perfonned missions as part ofother Continental annies, including the 4th Continental Light Dragoons. 47 to serving in the Revolutionary cause independently as light horsemen. The members would reunite to serve as a unit in the summer of 1778 after the British evacuation ofPhiladelphia. Congress, in addition to General Washington, came to recognize light horse as "essential to the operations ofthe army." In a 1778 resolution, Congress called for the "young gentlemen of property and spirit" in each state to form troops oflight cavalry "to serve at their own expence, (except in the article ofprovisions for themselves, and forage for their horses)....That it be recommended to the government ofthe respective States to countenance and encourage this design." 37 The Troop's model as a small and semi-independent body ofregional light horse that largely paid to equip itselfhad proven extremely useful to the Revolutionary cause. From Trenton to Brandywine, the Continental army and the rebellious Americans revealed their commitment to independence. In victory and defeat, they showed that they could playa game ofsurvival to outlast the British forces. The only Trooper to ever seek British asylum had done so before any ofthese battles, in the summer of 1776 after the signing of Declaration ofIndependence.38 With France's entry into the war, and the determined resistance ofthe American forces, Britain changed its strategy. Under the threat ofthe French navy, British forces withdrew from Philadelphia to reinforce New York. As the theatre ofwar moved away from Philadelphia, the Troop would not fight again as a unit in any Revolutionary battle. Even when not fighting, however, it had played an important role in the American Revolution. From its beginnings, the Philadelphia Light Horse had served Congress and the Pennsylvania government in essential but nonconventional ways. 37 Resolution ofCongress, 2 March 1778, reprinted in Samuel Hazard, ed., Pennsylvania Archives Selected andArrangedfrom Original Documents in the Office ofthe Secretary ofthe Commonwealth Confromably to the Acts ofthe General Assembly (Philadelphia: Joseph Severns & Co., 1853),323. 38 This was Troop founder Andrew Allen, whose father William Allen had been Pennsylvania's ChiefJustice under the state's colonial government. Both left Philadelphia for political asylum under the British forces in New York in the summer of 1776. 48 HI. "The Horse! The Horse!": The Troop's Unconventional Roles During the American Revolution Comwallis & the whole British army [were] compelled to lay down their arms by the Americans. On the receipt ofthis glourious news, general rejoicing took place throughout the whole country & The Troop procured a full band ofmusic & escorting the British colours taken at York on the surrender ofComwallis laid them at the feet ofthe Congress ofthe United States then sitting in Philadelphia.! -Donnaldson Narrative On November 3, 1781, the Philadelphia Light Horse helped to lead the parade celebrating the British defeat at Yorktown through the streets ofPhiladelphia. Eighty-three members took part, including eleven ofthe group's founders who had retired to the honorary roll.2 The allied American and French armies had successfully laid siege to the British army at the port of Yorktown, Virginia. The British were trapped, surrounded even on water where the French fleet under Admiral de Grasse, on its way to the West Indies, penned in the British from the sea. In Philadelphia, news ofCornwallis's surrender led to parades, while in London, it led to the British Parliament voting to end the war. The cessation ofhostilities was proclaimed on April 11 , 1783. The Troop's laying ofthe captured standards at the feet ofCongress symbolized the larger change taking place-the recognition ofCongress as the authoritative governing body in the colonies. It was a ritual and a tradition performed by the Troop, a group that from its inception had committed itselfto serving Congress and establishing its hegemony. Troop members had risked their property and their lives in the American Revolution, fighting against the British. But more than just fighting against the British as a conventional light horse unit, the Troop made central contributions to the American Revolution that went well beyond the conventional European roles oflight horse. 1 Donnaldson, Armory. 2 Ibid. Again, the Donnaldson's list ofrolls is compared to the Trooper histories and other assorted papers in the Armory. 49 This chapter explores the Troop's unconventional methods ofsupport. Congress and the Pennsylvania government trusted Troopers to deliver money to their armies and to capture and transport prisoners. In this, the Light Horse became an early form ofmilitary and domestic police. This policing role would expand to include not only British agents and loyalists, but also American deserters, mutineers and mobs. The Troop worked to confront and contain both loyalist and radical concepts ofAmerican society. It was conservative in that it strove to preserve a socioeconomic structure similar to pre-war Philadelphia, but radical in that it fought a revolution to overthrow British power. The Troop sought to replace a king with a Congress and the Quakers with the Protestants. The Philadelphia Light Horse was a staunch defender ofthe Pennsylvania and Continental governments throughout the Revolution. Its various methods ofsupport, including its more public and ceremonial role, reveal this. In this public role, it acted as an escort and marched in parades. These efforts attempted to steer patriotic fervor into more authoritative channels and build a national identity. By defending the Pennsylvania and Continental governments, the Troop sought to institutionalize its conception ofAmerica-a country that balanced a strong associational government with the protection ofproperty rights, a country with an elected Congress but also private clubs. Money and Prisoners Delivering money to the American armies and acting as a political police force had been the primary duties ofthe Troop before the unit fought in its four major battles. These activities were unconventional adaptations ofthe conventional light horse roles described earlier by a British Dragoon in "The Discipline ofthe Light Horse.',3 To fit the needs ofits Revolutionary government, the Troop would deliver specie, not just messages; it would capture and guard 3 Hinde, LightHorse Discipline. 50 domestic prisoners, not just military ones. Early Troop experiences in these non-conventional roles help explain their later success when attached to state and continental armies as more conventional light horse. But the Troop's nonconventional roles had given the members more than just experience for their later combat duties as these non-conventional roles were themselves critical to the success ofthe Revolutionary governments and their armies. Congress had relied on the Troop to deliver money even before it served in battle. As early as October of 1775, Congressional President John Hancock had dispatched an escort of four Troopers. The Journals ofCongress reports the success ofthis mission, ordering sent to "Levi Hollingsworth, for expenses ofhimselfand three others, to Ticonderoga and back again, who took with them a quantity ofmoney for general Schuyler, the sum of 128 dollars.,,4 Between August and October of 1776 alone, at least seven different Trooper dispatches delivered money for Congress.5 Depending on the sum ofmoney and the urgency oftime, these Troop dispatches often included a wagon or servant.6 The Troopers traveled as far as Boston and Albany, and never failed in their deliveries. Even when George Fullerton was killed by the accidental discharge ofone ofhis holstered pistols, the first Troop member to die, fellow Trooper William Hall completed the delivery.7 These men were committed to the cause ofestablishing a new government, and Congress put their trust in them in the form ofextremely large sums ofmoney. 4 Library ofCongress Manuscript Division, ed., Journals ofthe Continental Congress, 1774-1789, vol. 3 (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1905),25 November 1775, 370. The Troopers provided their own equipment and donated their pay to the Pennsylvania Hospital after the Revolution. s Journals ofthe American Congress from 1774-1778. vol. 1 (Washington: Way and Gideon, 1823),3 October 1776,477; 17 October 1776,522; 21 October 1776,525; 22 October 1776,525-526; 25 October 1776, 529; 12 November 1776, 544. 6 Though servants are not often mentioned in the records ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse or other American troops in this period, they were a typical part ofa European style eighteenth century army, performing logistical roles such as cooking and cleaning in the camps. 7 Donnaldson, Armory. 51 Delivering specie to the American annies remained an important role for the Troop throughout the American Revolution. Just as the Troop expanded the conventional role oflight horse as couriers, it would expand the conventional reconnaissance role. Troopers applied the skills and methods ofmilitary reconnaissance to domestic threats. The reconnaissance role ofa conventional light horse unit involved capturing enemy combatants and bringing them back as prisoners for interrogation. Acting at the behest ofCongress and also Pennsylvania's government, its Revolutionary committees and Supreme Executive Council, the Troop would capture and guard men who were not British military. Council President Joseph Reed wrote to the Troop's Captain Samuel Morris, "Infonnation having been given me that some Persons, under Suspicious circumstances, having come up the River" were suspected to be "Spies upon some dangerous Errand....They are 2 lusty men and a stripling, the latter supposed dressed in Blue." Reed recommended Morris use eight Troopers to apprehend them and bring them before Reed for further examination.8 As spies, these men were suspected to be working directly for the British as agents. But the Troop's responsibilities for domestic defense extended deeper into Philadelphian society, making it a kind ofpolitical police force that acted directly upon orders from Pennsylvania's Supreme Executive Council, rather than enforcing a general set oflaws upon society. The Supreme Executive Council and its committees, including the Committee ofSafety, wielded martial power to enforce its decisions through the Troop. Repeated examples ofmen "detected in some hostile machinations" against the Pennsylvania government like Dr. Kearsley and James Brookes, who "under guard ofeight ofthe Light Horse left the city for the different jails allotted them in the province," reveal the Troop as an effective tool ofthese bodies. 9 While 8 Joseph Reed to Samuel Morris, 14 June 1779, Armory. 9 Duane, ed., Christopher Marshall, 24 October 1775,48. 52 acting upon the orders ofthese governing bodies, the Troop's actions were also a voluntary service because its members chose to join the Philadelphia Light Horse-they were not drafted and did not serve out offinancial necessity. Troopers were independently wealthy men who purchased their own equipment, including horses, and received only limited pay tied to their direct expenses while in active service, pay they all eventually donated to the Pennsylvania Hospital after the Revolution. Members could also resign at any time. The Troop's actions were not the result ofimpressments; instead, they reveal the group's will to strengthen the authority of the Revolutionary Pennsylvania government and contain elements ofthe population that opposed it. In an enormous step towards giving legal authority to crush any open British support among the Pennsylvania citizenry, the Troop supported and enforced the Supreme Executive Council's "Test Oath," passed in the early summer of 1777. It was "an Act obliging the male white inhabitants ofthis State to give assurances ofallegiance to the same," printed by Trooper John Dunlap, and required the oath itselfto be taken before July 1. The Supreme Executive Council used the Troop to arrest two ofthe most vocal and influential opponents ofthis act. The Council's Minutes from August 12 inform that "Mr. Penrose, Mr. Dunlap, Mr. Hall, and Mr. Hunter, and other Gentlemen ofthe Light Horse," upon the Council's order, made Benjamin Chew, Esquire and the Honorable John Penn, Esquire prisoners. lO These two had been among Pennsylvania's most elite before the war: Benjamin Chew was the ChiefJustice, and John Penn was the former Governor ofPennsylvania and grandson ofWilliam Penn. The Council then directed "an Officer and Six Gentlemen ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse to escort John Penn & 10 Minutes ofthe Supreme Executive Council ofPennsylvania from Its Organization to the Termination ofthe Revolution. (Harrisburg, PA: Thea Penn & Co., 1852), 12 August 1777, 264. 53 Benja. Chew, Esq'rs, as Prisoners to Fredericksburg, in Virginia."ll Here was a new form of justice, supported and executed by the Troop. By removing these men, the Troopers and members ofPennsylvania's Revolutionary government helped to cement their own status as the new elite. Escorting prisoners was an important role for the Troopers, although they preferred performing as a conventional light horse. On September 1, 1777, as the British army moved towards Philadelphia, General John Armstrong, who was in command ofthe militia of Pennsylvania, wrote to the Supreme Executive Council President that while the Troop was necessarily engaged by the Council, he hoped they could be sent to the camp, "as I am apprehensive that should they be totally exempted from Military Service they may be disgusted as I am convinced that their highest Ambition is to act in the Field.,,12 Philadelphia needed the Troop in its role as a domestic police force; but after application from the Troop, the Council released it from the duty ofguarding and moving "the disaffected persons and Quakers" who had refused to take the Test Oath. 13 The Council delegated the responsibility ofa domestic police force to just two Troop members supported by a number ofCity Guards-another group directly responsible for policing Philadelphia-allowing the rest ofthe Light Horse to serve Washington. 14 The Troopers' willingness to fight for Washington's army and their sense ofhonor in doing so set them apart from many wealthy Philadelphians. In September of 1777, as the Troop petitioned for exemption from prisoner duty to join the Continental army, other Philadelphians 11 Ibid., 13 August 1777, 265. 12 John Annstrong to Thomas Wharton Jr., 1 September 1777, quoted in Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 20. General John Annstrong was in command ofthe militia ofPennsylvania and Thomas Wharton Jr., was President ofthe Supreme Executive Council 13 Executive Council Minutes, 5 September 1777,298. 14 "The Gentlemen ofthe Light Horse ofthis City, except two who are to attend to the prisoners now at the Lodge to Reading on their march...do proceed immediately to Camp on a Tour ofDuty." Ibid. 54 continued to attempt to dodge military service. Only sixteen percent fully served their commitments, while forty-five percent ofthose called for militia duty that month paid a fine for avoiding service. A very large number, thirty-three percent, could not be found, indicating that many were fleeing the besieged city; and five percent hired a substitute. IS As observed earlier, militia service among Philadelphians was concentrated among the lower sorts, as wealthier merchants avoided the fight more than the laboring poor. The average taxable wealth ofthose who paid a fine for avoiding service was twice as high as the average of those men serving, and the most common occupation for Philadelphians who paid a fine for avoiding militia service was that ofmerchant. 16 Through their service to the Revolutionary government, Troopers seized authority, as other wealthy merchants and Quakers who had made up the pre-war establishment did not participate. In this way, members ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse better established themselves as the new leaders ofPhiladelphia and Pennsylvania. The Troop, in its direct service to the city and state governments, gave these bodies greater authority. Its efforts better institutionalized the power ofthese bodies and promoted their idea of order in the city. The British, in their occupation ofPhiladelphia, developed a similar domestic policing role for their light horse. The Philadelphia Troop ofLight Dragoons, a loyalist light horse regiment raised from the Philadelphia population, brought in prisoners, including militia officers, justices ofthe peace and others "on suspicion ofbeing active against government.,,17 This indicates a fundamental change in the usage oflight horse in the American Revolution where both the British and the Continental armies and governments recognized an effective use for them as domestic enforcers. The Troop, like these other horsemen, struggled to impose its kind oforder on the city and carry out its perception ofjustice in the city. Troopers 15 Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 207. 16 The average taxable wealth statistics are taken from 1775. Appendices A.3 and AA in Ibid., 262-64. 17 New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, 23 March 1778. 55 would soon find themselves in an extreme situation while performing this new but fundamental role. Fort Wilson Though the supporters ofthe Revolution were allied in their cause against the British, their many different conceptions oforder and justice also brought them into conflict with each other. The Troop fought for a more conservative social order than sought by members ofthe laboring poor. An anonymous broadside posted on Elizabeth Drinker's door on August 29, 1779 reflects the swelling anger against Philadelphia's elite merchant class: "The time is now arrived to prove whether the suffering friends ofthis country, are to be enslaved, ruined and starved, by a few overbearing Merchants, a swarm ofMonopolizers and Speculators....your opponents are rich and powerful, and they think by their consequence to overawe you into slavery, and to starve you in the bargen." The writer urges the people to "Rouse! Rouse! Rouse and COME ON WARMLy.,,18 This was populist anger directed not at loyalists or the British, but at the wealthier and more successful merchants. This was a call in Philadelphia for social, not just political, revolution. Philadelphia's poor had suffered the greatest burden during the war. The inequities of service in 1777 noted above continued through later years. The average taxable wealth ofthose who served in the Philadelphia militia through October 1, 1779, was £8.49, while those who paid fines to avoid service averaged £30.69. 19 This difference was even greater than in September, 1777. Increases in the prices for essential goods during this period also exacerbated the suffering ofthe urban poor who were already struggling to feed and clothe themselves and their families. With demand from the Continental army, the French fleet and speculators, in addition to reduced 18 Quoted in Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 206. 19 Ibid., 208. 56 supplies caused by the war, wholesale prices for the essential goods ofcommon flour, beef, sugar loafand molasses rose continually from July, 1778 through 1780. This included dramatic increases like the 254 percent rise in December of 1778 and the 493 percent spike in February of 1779.20 In the spring, militia activities increased dramatically against suspected Tories and speculators, wealthy men who were considered to profit from the war while the poor suffered. Militiamen had actively involved themselves in Philadelphia's defense from the British army and also in protecting the city's domestic order. Whereas the Philadelphia Light Horse and the City Guards arrested prisoners under the direction ofthe Supreme Executive Council and the city's committees ofdefense, in May of 1779, the militia seized men that it alone decided were enemies. Elizabeth Drinker described the activities ofthis "Mob" in her diary. For May 24, she wrote, "Richard Wister and Levi Hollingsworth put in Prison-have not yet heard on what pretext....Men with clubs, have been to several stores, obliging ye people to lower their prices.,,21 Many ofthe men seized were wealthy merchants accused ofboth Toryism and price gouging, but Levi Hollingsworth was a member ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse. Hollingsworth, a veteran ofTrenton and Princeton, had been captured by the British in the occupation of Philadelphia. He had been brought as a prisoner to the city where he was released on parole, presumably by taking the King's Oath. In 1779, controversy surrounded his flour selling and the high prices charged.22 He would be released soon afterward, along with most others who the militiamen had arrested. The jailing ofHollingsworth indicates the large gulfbetween the laboring militiamen and the wealthy merchants, where the militiamen were demanding a more radical social and 20 Ibid., 168. 21 Henry Biddle, ed., Extractsfrom the Journal ofElizabeth Drinker (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1889),25 May 1779,116. 22 Hollingsworth Family Papers, HSP; Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 23. 57 economic revolution. Important in this was that the Philadelphia Light Horse did not directly intervene on Hollingsworth's behalfwhen he was seized in May, although he was still a member ofthe Troop. The Philadelphia Light Horse did not seek to protect through force one oftheir members from unauthorized seizure. Instead, they allowed time for the militia outburst to settle, and for Hollingsworth to be released through the courts. A resolution ofthe Supreme Executive Council on May 28 shows some support for the activities ofthese groups ofradical militiamen and laborers, but also an attempt to reign in their activities and bring them under the Council's authority. The resolution reads, "divers persons of Suspicious Characters...have lately been restrained in their liberty." To put the matters more closely under its authority, the Council ordered the Sheriffand other officers to transmit to the city magistrates the list ofpeople in their care "other than those committed in the ordinary course ofjustice," acknowledging that the seizures had taken place outside their justice, but also that the courts would now investigate these men, not simply release them. The resolution continues, "this Board do most earnestly recommend to the faithful & good Subjects ofthis State to give all needful assistance & information....& to acquiesce in the decisions & determination ofthe said Justices in the premises, as they tender the Honor & Safety of Government, would avoid giving the Common Enemies ofour Liberty & Country grounds to rejoice & bring reproach on public authority.,,23 The Council put the authority in the hands ofthe justices to make the decision and urged the people ofPennsylvania to do the same. It attempted to unite people under public authority by compromising between the militia's action and its own authority. A less militant but equally radical response to the food crisis also emerged at the end of May. A price-fixing committee met throughout the summer, comprised ofthe middling leadership ofPhiladelphia's popular movement, and tried to force merchants to sell their goods 23 Executive Council Minutes, 28 May 1779, 8-9. 58 at regulated prices that were significantly lower.24 The price-fixing activity in Philadelphia reveals a debate between property rights and imposed sacrifice for the greater good. The Committee on price fixing defended its views, reasoning, "the social compact in a state ofcivil society...requires that every right or power claimed or exercised by any man or set ofmen, should be in subordination to the common good.,,25 A group ofeighty "merchants and traders," including at least seventeen Troop members, declared themselves against the Committee's activities. They defended their views, writing, "The limitation ofprices is in the principle unjust, because it invades the laws ofproperty, by compelling a person to accept less in exchange for his goods that he could otherwise obtain, and therefore acts as a tax upon part ofthe community only.,,26 To them, it would act as a discriminatory tax levied specifically on merchants and traders that would hinder the forces offree markets to ultimately deliver the most goods to society. Troop members had committed strongly to the defense ofprivate property and to allowing merchants to set their own prices, even as the laboring poor continued to suffer. Troop members would not submit to any price controls dictated to them by any price-fixing committees that represented the middling and laboring people ofPhiladelphia. The Troop submitted to the authority ofthe Revolutionary Pennsylvania government. Troop members did not accept pay for many oftheir services during the Revolution, and also risked much oftheir property and credit in support ofthe Revolutionary cause. They did not, however, believe in the principles-or the people-behind price-fixing. The Donnaldson Narrative reads, "About the middle ofSeptember 24 Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 181. 25 Pennsylvania Packet, 10 September 1779. 26 Troop members among the eighty signers ofthe agreement are: John Lardner, Joseph Cowperthwait, Thomas Moore, Isaac Cox, David Lenox, David Conyngham, John Donna1dson, John Mease, James Mease, Alexander Nesbitt, Samuel Morris, Cadwa1ader Morris, Samuel Caldwell, James Caldwell, Patrick Moore, William Pollard, and David Duncan. Pennsylvania Packet, 10 September 1779. 59 a committee appointed at a town meeting had regulated the prices ofrum, salt, sugar, coffee, flour which was much opposed by the importers. Robert Morris, Blair McClenachan, John Wilcocks and a number ofother staunch Whigs had a quantity ofthose articles in their stores which they refused to part with at the regulated prices.',27 Trooper Blair McClenchan, among others, refused to obey this extralegal body. The price-fixing committee announced its failure in late September, but more radical militiamen would take up the cause, bringing themselves into an open conflict with the city's conservatives that would also lose them the support ofless militant radicals. Militiamen gathered on the morning ofOctober 4 at the city commons by Bums' Tavern upon request from the Committee ofPrivates?8 Three militia radicals who had been asked to lead the group arrived at Bums' Tavern, and before leaving, unsuccessfully tried to convince the crowd from marching out and making seizures. This included Alexander Boyd, a member ofthe May 25 and August 2 price-fixing committees. The militiamen, without any leadership from these more middling radicals, had already determined their purpose. It seems these men had been asked to lead in name only. Without them, the crowd left Bums' Tavern to seize five men they had identified as Tories. They succeeded in finding the four wealthy ones and parading them as prisoners "about ye streets with the Drum after them, beating ye Rogue's March."z9 The militiamen had adapted the tradition ofthe Rogue's March, usually played at a soldier's dishonorable discharge, and also the public parading ofprisoners by city officials. Rosswurm writes, "These rich men had become the symbol for their continuing grievances during the 27 Donnaldson, Annory. 28 The Committee ofPrivates was a radical group comprised ofone man chosen from each company ofthe Philadelphia Associators. 29 Henry Biddle, Extracts from the Journal ofElizabeth Drinker (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1889),4 October 1779,121. 60 war.,,30 The militiamen co-opted tradition to give their actions greater authority. City authorities made no attempt to stop these actions. As the militiamen made these seizures, men who had refused to obey the price-fixing committee, including Trooper Blair McClenachan, gathered together with "30 or 40 oftheir friends determined to defend themselves [and] took post" in the sturdy brick home ofJames Wilson, Esq. "They paraded themselves with arms and considering it a more secure place of safety than their own houses." Wilson, a signer ofthe Declaration ofIndependence, had come under criticism from Pennsylvania radicals for representing Tories in court and supporting the merchants against price fixing. As the group prepared to defend itself, many Troopers, "being appraised ofwhat was going forward and anxious for the safety oftheir fellow citizens, afterwards at their stable a fixed place ofrendezvous, agreed to have their horses saddled and ready to mount at a moments warning. Notice was to be given to as many as could be found: a part was to assemble in Dock below second street and to join the party at the stables.,,3! The sides were set-radical militiamen on the one, conservative merchants and professional men on the other. Both groups included war veterans who had fought together against the British, and both groups were prepared to use force against each other. "About two o'clock the mob stopped before Wilsons house with drums beating and members with arms in their hands.,,32 Who fired first is unclear, but shots were exchanged between the mob outside and Captain Robert Campbell inside Wilson's house.33 The situation 30 Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 213. 31 Donnaldson, Annory. 32 Ibid. 33 Rosswunn mistakenly calls him "Captain George Campbell," confusing Captain Robert Campbell with Troop member George Campbell. Both men were inside Wilson's house during the riot, although George Campbell would survive the day and live until 1810. Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 174; Simpson, Eminent Philadelphians; Horace Edwin Hayden, ed., Reminiscences ofDavid Hayfield Conyngham, 1750 1834 (Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania: Wyoming Historical & Geological Society, 1904),32-34. 61 escalated immediately as Campbell, who had earlier lost his arm in the campaign against the British at Staten Island, was shot and would die. Two others inside the house were also wounded, but the mob, soon finding it could make "no impression on the house" with their shooting, attempted to force an entry. At a nearby blacksmith's shop, some militiamen found a "sledge and crowbar and were in the act offorcing the door, when fortunately the Horse made their appearance.,,34 Two Troop detachments, along with Supreme Executive Council President Joseph Reed and two ofColonel Baylor's Continental Horse, charged the mob as the cry "the Horse! the Horse!" was raised. The mob gave way and men from inside Wilson's house--what became known as Fort Wilson-came out to assist the horsemen. Troop Captain Samuel Morris, who had been inside during the attack, was shot in the arm, and sources tend to agree that three others from inside Fort Wilson were wounded. Estimates on the militiamen vary, but around five were killed and fourteen wounded.35 Trooper patrols were sent through the city, putting "several into prison," and Trooper David Conyngham "remembers large stones and bricks thrown down upon us" and being "insulted everywhere.,,36 Animosity towards the Troop and the importers remained, as evidenced by the reaction in the streets against Troopers. The Light Horse helped to maintain order were "patrolling ye streets.,,37 Activity continued the next night, when a mob surrounded the house of Trooper Private David Lenox, who had rode in with the Troop at Fort Wilson. The crowd stopped trying to force an entrance after he assured them he would open the door to them at daylight. Meanwhile, he sent out a woman who was living with his family to his fellow Troopers for assistance, and the Philadelphia Light Horse rode in and dispersed the crowd. 34 Donnaldson, Armory. 35 Ibid.; Hayden, ed., David Conyngham, 33; Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 217. 36 Donnaldson, Armory; Hayden, ed., David Conyngham, 37, 34. 37 Biddle, ed., Drinker, 4 October 1779, 122. 62 Before Fort Wilson, the Troop and the Pennsylvania government had avoided direct opposition to patriotic crowd and mob activity. During the militia seizures ofMay, 1778, the Executive Council tried to direct this activity into its own authoritative channel instead of stopping the seizures and arrests from taking place. However, at the Fort Wilson Riot, when a mob had chosen to confront a group ofprominent Philadelphians who had gathered inside a house to protect themselves, they forced a response from the government and their fellow citizens ofPhiladelphia. The militant action drew a backlash and price-fixing did not receive as . 38 much support agam. Fort Wilson was a victory for the city's conservatives. Ronald Schulz writes, "At Fort Wilson a line was drawn through the working community across which no sentiment or activity unauthorized by the Constitutionalists and radicals was allowed to pass....the rough, course behavior ofthe crowd was judged improper; the world ofthe laboring poor was cut away from view.,,39 On October 6, the Supreme Executive Council, headed by Reed, issued a call for all those involved-both the men outside and the men inside--to tum themselves in and account for what happened. On October 10, the Assembly resolved to let the judiciary determine who was to blame, but later proposed and finally passed on March 10, 1780, an "Act ofFree and General Pardon and Indemnity.,,4o Forgiving all those involved was an act ofcompromise, the kind that neither the merchants nor the radical militiamen had been willing to make. Through compromise, the Pennsylvania government preserved and extended its own authority. The Executive Council did not go after the militiamen in the courts, preventing an explosion ofanger from the laboring radicals, nor did it seek to punish the horsemen, who along 38 For further discussion, see John K. Alexander, "The Fort Wilson Incident of 1779: A Case Study ofthe Revolutionary Crowd," WMQ 31, no. 4 (October 1974): 589-612. 39 Ronald Schultz, The Republic ofLabor: Philadelphlia Artisans and the Politics ofClass, 1720-1830 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 6l. 40 For further discussion, see Ibid., 60-68. 63 with President Reed, had killed and wounded members ofthe mob as they dispersed the attack. Instead, it called all parties involved to tum themselves in and describe the events, and later the Assembly issued a general pardon. Like the Revolutionary government, the Troop had balanced action with inaction. It did not engage against general crowd and mob activity, including the seizure ofTrooper Levi Hollingsworth in May. On the morning ofOctober 4, when the first four wealthy men were seized, the Troop did nothing. Only when the lives ofsome thirty prominent Philadelphians were threatened, including fellow Troop members, did they ride to put the mob down. The militiamen had exerted self-will, acting without orders from above or the leadership ofmiddling radicals, and the Troop had exerted its own. Where typically the Philadelphia Light Horse acted on orders from the Pennsylvania government, in this crisis, its members voluntarily rode into a dangerous situation. They sought to maintain order in the city and prevent the possible deaths ofa number ofprominent Philadelphians in an attack. They succeeded as a result oftheir military experience and training. Policing and Pomp The Fort Wilson Riot, which revealed expansive divisions between the city's conservatives and laboring radicals, was an exception to the normal policing role ofthe Light Horse. More routine was the importance ofmaintaining its public reputation in Philadelphia. Troopers often made choices that indicated a consciousness oftheir reputation and also the sentiments offellow Philadelphians. The Philadelphia Light Horse reinforced its actions as a light horse unit and sought to channel patriotic fervor through the ceremonial roles ofescorting and parading. Escorting put the Troop on display to the people, emphasizing the importance of the figure it chose to accompany and also acting as his or her bodyguard. In this public role, the 64 Troop had associated itselfwith the Congress and the Continental army from its inception. On June 23, 1775, the Troop left with General Washington just after his appointment by Congress to take command ofthe army at Massachusetts Bay. They escorted him through New York. The Troop then escorted Washington's wife Martha when she came into the city on her way to visit him at Cambridge, Massachusetts in November. The Troop connected itselfto both prominent American and European figures. For Don Juan Mirailles, the ambassador from the High Court of Spain, the Troop "made a very grand cavalcade.,,41 The Troop put on its uniform and took itself seriously in these roles. Escorting could also carry negative implications. The Troop, in its expensive uniforms, made a fine show for European ministers. The Philadelphia Light Horse escort for the French minister was essential to Executive Council President Reed, who wrote to Troop Captain Samuel Morris, "The Chev de Luzerne, the present Minister, is every Way deserving out utmost Respect & Attention.,,42 But when Washington entered the city without any escort, he was praised for it. The Pennsylvania Evening Post reports, "Too great for pomp, and as iffond ofthe plain and respectable rank ofa free and independent citizen, his Excellency came in so late in the day as to prevent the Philadelphia troop ofmilitia light horse, gentlemen, officers ofthe militia and others ofthis city, from shewing those marks ofunfeigned regard for this good and great man.,,43 This reveals a certain American taste for simplicity. The Troop had to balance paying proper respect and celebration with this emerging American concept ofvirtuous Republican modesty. The Troop's role as an escort was similar to its role in parades in that both were public and attempted to elevate a person or situation. Just as George Washington would become a 41 Nathanael Greene to Isaac Coxe, 27 April 1779, Annory. 42 Joseph Reed to Samuel Morris, [nd] , Annory. This letter was likely sent around mid-April, 1780, as the Chevalier de la Luzerne arrived with his Troop escort in Morristown on April 19, 1780. Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 30. 43 Pennsylvania Evening Post, 28 December 1778. 65 public figure who inspired national unity, the Fourth ofJuly would become a day for this. Congress had chosen this day to celebrate the Independence ofthe United States, and the Troop participated in creating a tradition around it. On July 4, 1777, the Troop participated as "several troops ofhorse" marched and were reviewed by Congress. That evening, "a grand exhibition of fire works (which began and concluded with thirteen rockets) [was staged] on the commons, and the city was beautifully illuminated.,,44 These were all celebratory actions meant to unify the people ofPhiladelphia. But with radical outbursts against the city's conservatives being an important part ofpolitical life, Troop members also involved themselves in a different kind of parade. A few Troopers led a parade through the streets ofPhiladelphia in 1780 to denounce Toryism and a common enemy-Benedict Arnold, the former Continental general and hero who had switched sides to the British. Samuel Rowland Fisher, a conservative Quaker, described the event in his diary, writing, "another exhibition thro the City ofan Effigy ofArnold placed on a Wagon....behind him a figure representing the Devil in a Clergyman's Gown, on the head a pair ofGoat's horns, One holding a Purse ofMoney & the other an Iron called Tormentors. Arnold was represented with two faces & his head continually moving.,,45 Fisher continued, "I should not have troubled myself...but because it appear'd not as a frolick ofthe lowest sort ofpeople but as the Act ofsome ofthe present Rulers here, it being escorted by abt. 20 ofthose called Militia & three ofthose call'd City Light Horse viz: James Budden, John Dunlap & Thomas Leiper.,,46 Here was the Light Horse leading the noisy parade along with members ofthe city's militia. The artist, radical and Philadelphia Associator Charles Willson Peale had made the 44 Pennsylvania Packet, 8 July 1777. 45 "Journal of Samuel Rowland Fisher, ofPhiladelphia, 1779-1781," The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 41 (1917): 314. 46 Ibid. 66 effigies. This demonstrates cooperation between the groups that did not exist in the months leading up to Fort Wilson.47 The Philadelphia Light Horse's parading, policing and military roles continued to overlap and reinforce each other. On June 9, 1780, with a British force advancing from New York through Elizabethtown, New Jersey, Executive Council President Reed sent three letters concerning the emergency to Troop Captain Samuel Morris. The first two directed the Troop to be ready at short warning, as General Washington would likely need "re-enforcement from this State & especially ofCavalry, in which he is very weak.,,48 The third letter moved the Troop to a policing role. Reed wrote, "The very Critical Situation ofGeneral Washington's Army, destitute ofhorses to remove his artillery & valuable stores, had made it necessary to send forward, without delay, a number ofhorses, which cannot be obtained otherwise than by taking them from the disaffected, accordingly, orders have issued to seize them." Reed directed the Light Horse to patrol the roads and bridges and "stop all persons leading horses," as he suspected "many will attempt to get them out oftown," and then deliver them to the forage yard on Walnut Street "with the name ofthe Person to whom they are said to belong.,,49 Reed's use ofthe Troop for this mission indicates the utility ofhorses to both the army and to the Executive Council itselffor quickly carrying out its orders. Reed trusted the Troopers and their judgment "not to interrupt Market People going or coming-& in every Respect, secrecy is to be observed previous to entering on Business."so The Troop was the effective tool ofthe Council's authority. 47 See Figure 5. Peale himselfhad been one ofthe three men asked to lead the crowd ofmilitiamen at Bums's Tavern on the morning ofthe Fort Wilson Riot. He failed to convince them to stop and did not participate in the day's events. For further discussion ofPeale, see Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 209-11. 48 Joseph Reed to Samuel Morris, 9 June 1780, Armory. This quote is from the first letter sent by Reed to Morris. 49 Joseph Reed to Samuel Morris, 9 June 1780, Armory. This quote is from the third letter sent by Reed to Morris. 50 Ibid. 67 The British military threat was considered such a great danger that the Council and the Troop were willing to violate property rights to preserve their new government. At Fort Wilson, however, the Pennsylvania government and merchants had refused to compromise with the extralegal price-fixing committee that was trying to bring essential goods to the suffering and even starving laboring poor ofPhiladelphia. Reed himselfthen rode in with the Troop to put the Fort Wilson Riot down-although the government later compromised by pardoning all involved. Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line The memories ofFort Wilson and the societal divisions it exposed did not disappear in the months ahead. The Donnaldson Narrative describes that in January, 1781, the Troop was "again called into service by Governor Reed by that ofthe most threatening and distressing appearances, to contend with their own citizens."Sl The Pennsylvania Line, numbering around 2,500 men, had been in their winter quarters at Morristown. Many who had enlisted in 1776 and 1777 correctly insisted their terms ofservice were over. Their pay was many months overdue, their clothes were rags and some were close to starvation. The Donnaldson Narrative continues, "Their active bravery and their blood had been devoted to the cause, they had suffered much and received no pay, at length the spirit ofmutiny broke forth." A captain was killed and several officers wounded in trying to restrain the revolting men who quickly organized themselves under their non-commissioned officers and began a march to Princeton. The Donnaldson Narrative describes the men in sympathetic terms. These men ofthe line had suffered a much different experience while fighting in the Continental army than the Troopers had. Extreme supply shortages offood, shoes, clothing and blankets led to high death and disease rates among the Continental army. Among the worst periods was the winter of 1777 to 1778, when 3,000 ofthe 12,000 Continental Troops at Morristown perished during the six 51 Donnaldson, Annory. 68 month encampment.52 In May of 1778, over 4,000 men were on the sick roles ofthe Continental army. The Troop's ability to properly supply itselfis shown in that not a single Trooper died of disease or starvation during the American Revolution. While the reconnaissance role oflight horse was dangerous, the only Trooper to die was George Fullerton from the accidental discharge ofhis own pistol while delivering specie. The Troop was committed to the American Revolution, but its physical suffering did not approach that ofthe rank and file ofthe Continental army. In the Revolt ofthe Line, the government and officers ofthe Continental army could again trust the Philadelphia Light Horse to support their actions as they called upon the Troop to serve in its many functions. Council President Reed wrote to Troop Captain Morris, "I presume you are informed ofa most dangerous and unhappy Meeting in the Pennsylvania Line, in which two valuable Officers have lost their Lives. The last account was that they were in full March for the city, but I hope this will not be the Case." He directed three Troopers to "accompany General St. Clair & the Marquis de la Fayette" and for the rest ofthe Troop to be in "Readiness.,,53 On January 5, twenty Light Horse were then requested to escort representatives from Congress and members ofthe Supreme Executive Council including President Reed to New Jersey so that they could enter into discussion with the mutineers.54 The Troopers observed that a "complete order pervaded the whole camp" and even sentinels were posted with regular relief. 55 In addition to keeping strict order while in revolt, the Pennsylvania Line also seized some emissaries that British forces in New York had sent. The men remained loyal to the Revolutionary cause against the British, and simply wanted their terms of agreement with the Continental army honored. 52 Martin, Philadelphia Campaign, 176. 53 Joseph Reed to Samuel Morris, 3 January 1781, Annory. 54 Timothy Matlack to Samuel Morris, 5 January 1781, Annory. 55 Donnaldson, Annory. 69 In the Fort Wilson Riot, Joseph Reed and the Pennsylvania government had compromised to help restore their authority. In the Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line, they would fully yield to the demands ofthe soldiers. On January 7, proposals authorized under Reed as President ofthe Council ofPennsylvania were distributed to the soldiers and non-commissioned officers ofthe Pennsylvania Line offering terms: first, no soldiers would be kept in service beyond the period for which they had voluntarily enlisted; second, $100 was to be paid from Congress to soldiers who had enlisted or re-enlisted for three years; and third, a pair ofshoes, a shirt and overalls were to be delivered to each soldier. "The Governor hopes that no Soldier of the Pennsylvania Line will break his Bargain, or go from the Contract made with the public- and they may depend upon it, that the utmost Care will be taken to furnish them with every necessary fitting for a Soldier." 56 In this, the proposal tacitly admitted the government's failure to provide its soldiers with everything necessary. It used the language ofcivic sacrifice to encourage the soldiers to stop their revolt. The proposal was accepted and the dispute ended. No mutineer was to be brought to trial or censured for his action. A committee offour was appointed to carry out its provisions and handle the pay issues. Troopers again played a central role as its Captain Samuel Morris and Private Blair McClenachan served on the committee. The Troop, in its commitment to the cause ofindependence, had firmly committed itselfto the success ofthe Revolutionary Pennsylvania and Continental governments. For the Troop, establishing order in a society during a revolution meant balancing compromise with martial action. As the Donnaldson Narrative describes, "The dangerous policy ofyielding even to the just demands ofsoldiers made with arms in their hands was soon illustrated-the Success ofthe Pennsylvania line inspired a part ofthe Jersey [brigade]" S6 "PROPOSALS Made to the non commissioned Officers and Soldiers ofthe Pennsylvania Line at Princeton, January 7, 1781," Armory. 70 to make similar demands a few weeks later. This time, however, General Washington sent General Robert Howe immediately with 1,500 troops and "instructions to make no lessons with them & to serve a few ofthe most active leaders & execute them on the spot. These orders being promptly performed the Jersey mutineers were soon compelled to return to their duty."s7 Order was to be upheld. Compromise and pardon were important tools in that they could bring a revolting group back under the authority ofthe government. Conservatives in power hesitated to use them in ways that would simply inspire more militant radical activity. Just as the militiamen ofthe Fort Wilson Riot had a threshold where their anger towards the speculators drove them to radical action, so too did Washington where he would not be pushed by radicals that threatened to derail conceptions ofduty. At Fort Wilson, the Troop, which had not attempted to stop the militia's seizures before, experienced that threshold when the militiamen attacked a group ofprominent citizens, including some ofthe Troop's own, who had joined together in a man's house for protection. But importantly, at the Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line, Troopers understood the justice behind the cause ofthese men ofthe line, and the power that 2,500 revolting men held with a British army in New York trying to take advantage ofthe situation. A compromise was struck whereby these men accepted what they had been promised and conceded to not hold out for more, and the governing authorities agreed to make no attempt to later punish them for their revolt. A compromise was struck, and a country was forged. "Virtuous Citizens" The Troop's most essential contributions to the Revolution were not only as members of the Philadelphia Light Horse. As Colonel Stephen Moylan wrote to the Troop, 57 Donnaldson, Annory. Forty-eight members are listed in the "Pay Roll ofthe Troop at the Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line, 3 January 1781," Annory. 71 I have it in commandfrom the Commander in chiefto thank you and the gentlemen ofyour corps for your spirited intentions to join the Army-His Excellency is very sensible ofthe important avocations which atpresent regain the attention ofthe citizens ofPhiladelphia, and as the enemy have left this state, he would not wish to deprive that Capital ofthe assistance which so many virtuous citizens must naturally give to the laudable exertions nowprosecutingfor the public good. 58 Troopers had actively served on the committees that helped to run Pennsylvania and guide them into the war. As discussed in the first chapter, eight Troopers were on the Committee ofSafety, five on the Committee ofCorrespondence, three on the Council ofSafety, and three on the Committee ofInspection and Observation. Because the Philadelphia Light Horse did not demand its members to be constantly in the field, it was not an exclusive institution, allowing its members to take an active role in both the civil and military affairs ofthe Revolutionary cause. Troop members made significant military contributions outside the confines ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse. Some ofthe early members resigned to the Honorary Roll to become officers in the Pennsylvania and Continental army, and members performed necessary bureaucratic roles in the army like acting as pay-masters.59 The Troop also elected members who had already served in the Revolution. Twenty-six Troopers held military ranks in addition to theirs from the Philadelphia Light Horse. The highest-ranking members in the army included a brigadier-general, three colonels, two lieutenant colonels, four majors, and four captains. Many ofthese men were elected between 1779 and 1782, including Samuel Miles, who unlike the Troop founders had fought in the French & Indian War and would later become Captain ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse. Four Troopers would also contribute to Pennsylvania's naval defense 58 Stephen Moylan to Samuel Morris, 25 June 1780, Annory. 59 Among the Troop founders do this was James Mease, who was appointed Pay-master and Treasurer to the Continental Anny in 1775 and Clothier-General to the anny in 1777, William West, Jr. who was a Captain in the 3rd Pennsylvania Regiment in 1776--later a Major in the 4th Pennsylvania Regiment-and deputy to James Mease, Samuel Caldwell who was Paymaster and Treasurer to the Continental Anny in 1775, and James Hunter who was Pay-master to the 4th Pennsylvania Battalion in 1777. Trooper rolls and remarks printed in Troop History to 1991, 210-12; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 305-07. 72 as Captains, and Troop founder Andrew Caldwell was commodore in command of Pennsylvania's provincial fleet naval. Just as the Troop independently functioned to support the Continental cause, the merchants ofthe Troop independently supported the Continental naval efforts through privateering. These ships operated outside direct government control but significantly damaged British commerce. Privateers in commission in 1776 that were at least partially owned by Troopers included the Industry, owned by Blair McClenachan, the Speedwell, by John Maxwell Nesbitt and David Conyngham, and the General Putnam, by Matthew Irwin.6o Among McClenachan's many vessels that had received letter-of-marque commissions to capture British merchantmen and their cargo was "that mischievous American, the Holker.,,61 The Holker, which had a maximum crew of 130 officers and men, took the appropriately named Friendship and three sloops offthe coast ofJersey, and even joined together with two other American privateers to take a large British ship sailing from Barbados. Troopers, as wealthier merchants connected to the shipping trade, could outfit privateers. The Troop provided essential nonconventional support for the Continental cause, both in its capabilities as a unit ofTroopers and outside ofthem. 60 Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 2; Paul B. Silverstone, The Sailing Navy, 1775-1854 (New York: CRC Press, 2006), 18. 61 Pennsylvania Packet, 10 January 1782, quoted in "That Mischievous Bolker: The Story ofa Privateer," Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 79 (January 1955): 27. 73 IV. A Seed in the Watermelon Army: The First City Troop in the Early Republic Trooper John Donnaldson wrote to his Captain John Dunlap in 1803, "You know in Reed's administration many attempts were made to break us up--and yet we stood the torrent of the faction and afterwards were ofsignal service in saving our City from being plundered when Wilson's house was attacked."! Conflict had been a part ofthe Troop's identity since its association. Its members were united in purpose, battling against the British and standing against other factions in Pennsylvania society to establish a stronger social order. The Troop's active military and civic participation in the American Revolution had cemented its prominence in the Early Republic. Troopers succeeded in both business and government, and its ranks included both Philadelphia mayors and Pennsylvania Assembly representatives. The Troop attracted new members, drawing from Revolutionary War officers and the sons ofprominent Philadelphians. America, however, did not emerge from the War ofIndependence as a unified nation the thirteen colonies had won their independence but would remain under a loose confederation until the United States Constitution was passed in 1789. The increasingly powerful Federal government ofthe 1790s was a vision for which the Troop had fought. But it was not a vision shared by many other Americans who had contributed to the Revolution. The Troop would twice muster out and ride as part ofa larger army to put down Pennsylvanian insurrections that had targeted Federalist taxation policies. The Troop's military purpose from the Revolution through the Early Republic was continuous. I begin this chapter by exploring the divisions in Pennsylvania revealed by the Troop's military role and how its members sought to preserve the Federalist order for which they had fought in the Revolution. I look at how the Troop's public and ceremonial role attempted to 1 John Donna1dson to Captain John Dunlap, 6 August 1803, Armory. 74 lessen these divisions by fostering a sense ofnational unity. Through escorts and parades, the Troop participated in building a national culture for a newborn country out ofsymbols from the Revolutionary War. The Troop drew on its Revolutionary heritage to embolden its identity and assert its vision. The "Insolent Mutineers" of1783 After the cessation ofhostilities with Britain on April 11, 1783, the Continental army began to disband. A small insurrection broke out in Lancaster, Pennsylvania when eighty men from the new levy ofthe Pennsylvania Line revolted against their officers in June. They proceeded to Philadelphia to list their complaints to the Supreme Executive Council. Their numbers increased to around 300 as some disgruntled Continentals quartered in Philadelphia joined them. They marched in "military parade, with fixed bayonets, to the State House where Congress and the Executive Council ofthe State were then sitting.,,2 These bodies refused to meet them, and the troops marched back to their barracks. Congress resolved that "the authority ofthe United States had been grossly insulted by the disorderly and menacing appearance ofa body ofarmed Soldiers" and adjourned to Princeton because ofthe threat. 3 Negotiations with the Council took place through June 24, when Council President Dickinson met a few leaders ofthe "mutineers" at his house on Fifth and Market and persuaded them to disperse "with some threats ofthe consequences." 4 Philadelphia militia units had gathered under arms in the area, with the Troop stationed on Sixth Street; more importantly, General Robert Howe was approaching Philadelphia with 1,500 Continentals. The anger in the Donnaldson Narrative directed towards this "handful ofmen, contemptible in numbers and equally so in point ofservice, who were not worthy to be called 2 Donna1dson, Annory. 3 Resolution ofCongress, 21 June 1783, reprinted in Hazard, ed., Pennsylvania Archives, 329. 4 Donna1dson, Annory; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 47. 75 soldiers" is very different from its respectful description ofthe men in the Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line of 1781. The actions ofthese "insolent mutineers" were reprehensible because, At the same time, those officers and soldiers, the veterans who had bourne the beast ofburden of the war, patiently endured hunger, nakedness and cold and suffered and bled without a murmur, having real cause ofcomplaint, had retired quietly to their homes without a settlement oftheir accounts or afarthing ofmoney in their pockets.5 The Donnaldson Narrative focuses on the sacrifices ofthe "veterans," men who had "real cause ofcomplaint." Their ability to quietly endure was considered virtuous. Troopers had sincere respect for these veterans, knowing that the rank and file soldiers had suffered far worse than had the Philadelphia Light Horse during the war. The "new levies," however, had "disgraced themselves by insulting the authorities ofthe United States & oftheir own State.,,6 The Troop's commitment to the authority ofboth the state and Federal government defined them. The Philadelphia Light Horse helps to reveal the change in the culture ofPennsylvania government. The Commonwealth had passed a militia law during the French and Indian War, only to let it expire. Not until March of 1777, when a more radical Revolutionary government was in place, would Pennsylvania pass a militia act that made its citizens' military service obligatory. The Troop, which had organized along the older volunteer associational model, served the Revolutionary government throughout the war. While most ofthe military, like the "insolent mutineers" ofLancaster, were disbanded after the American Revolution, the military had become institutionalized in Pennsylvania. The Philadelphia Light Horse continued to muster for exercise in the l780s to meet the militia law requirements. In 1788, it was further "authorized and established" by law as a troop oflight dragoons in an act ofthe Assembly that also 5 Donnaldson, Armory. 6 Ibid. 76 recommended and detailed the organization ofa second troop from Philadelphia.7 The Pennsylvania government considered the Troop's model successful and essential, even in peace. The military and the Troop played central roles in Pennsylvania after the Revolution and were closely connected to the Commonwealth's government. Immediately after the United States' new constitutional government took effect, Pennsylvania ratified its own new constitution in 1790--0ne that was more conservative than the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. Rosswurm largely attributes this to the legacy ofthe Fort Wilson Riot, writing, "the congruence ofvalues and political economy between the middling sort and those above, which the former came to recognize in the wake ofFort Wilson, splintered the urban and rural sections ofthe Constitutionalists in the 1780s.,,8 This Constitution was more socially conservative, but it continued the trend ofmilitary institutionalization into the Commonwealth. It allowed the Governor to act as the "Commander in Chiefofthe Army and Navy ofthe Commonwealth, and ofthe Militia except when they be called into the actual service ofthe United States," which also made a strong commitment to national defense. It declared, "The Freemen ofthis Commonwealth shall be armed and disciplined for its defense.,,9 The Revolution had transformed Philadelphia and Pennsylvania. The Whiskey Rebellion and the Watermelon Army The Revolution's transformative role in Pennsylvania's military culture had not erased older divisions between urban Philadelphia and some ofthe Commonwealth's western counties. A tax levied by the Federal government in 1791 on distilled spirits had inspired strong opposition in western farmers from Pennsylvania to Virginia who saw it as both invasive and discriminatory. 7 This became known as the "Second City Troop," and William Jackson, who had been a Major in the Revolutionary War and hadjoined the Philadelphia Light Horse, would become its First Lieutenant. S Rosswurm, Arms, Country, and Class, 256. 9 Pennsylvania Constitution of 1790, quoted in Newland, Pennsylvania Militia, 146. 77 Whiskey, which many farmers distilled from grain, was their primary commodity and bartering good, as it was easier to transport, preserve and sell. These protests spiked in the summer of 1794. In July, Federal Marshal and Troop member David Lenox, joined by John Neville, the supervisor ofthe excise collections in that region, delivered a court summons to an Allegheny Country farmer and distiller. The next day, a group ofmilitiamen showed up at Neville's house, but he had armed his slaves, and in a skirmish, several ofthe militia were wounded and one would die from these wounds. In the ensuing escalation, Lenox was seized by a group ofmilitia, only to be released, and soldiers from Fort Pitt would be injured defending Neville. Washington, as President ofthe United States and Commander-in-Chiefofthe Army, issued a proclamation in August requesting several quotas of militia totaling over 12,000 men from the governors ofPennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland and Virginia. Buildings had been looted, mails robbed, and court procedures stopped-a peace commission returned news ofthe continuing rebellion. Washington moved to re-establish the authority and law ofthe Federal govemment,lO During the American Revolution, the Troop had committed itselfto serving Congress and took pride in its personal attachments to Washington. In a Troop meeting at the City Tavern on September 10, 1794, the twenty-four Troopers present ''unanimously resolved that the Captain be authorized to offer the Troop as volunteers under the late request ofthe President ofthe United States."ll It would again take up its role ofservice to Washington, and it did so unanimously. This support from the merchants and professional men ofPhiladelphia contrasts with the reluctance from other regions in Pennsylvania, where the Commonwealth had to offer bonuses 10 For further discussion ofthese events see Thomas P. Slaughter, The Whiskey Rebellion: Frontier Epilogue to the American Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 177-84; Newland, Pennsylvania Militia, 154. 11 Donna1dson, Armory. 78 and pay raises on top ofthe federal pay to recruit enough men. Describing Philadelphia, Rosswurm writes, ''until the formation ofthe Democratic-Republic Society in 1793, the middling sort, particularly the artisans, aligned themselves with the mercantile interest.,,12 The Whiskey Rebellion and the formation ofthe Republican Party, or Democratic Republican Party, in opposition to the Federalists' foreign and economic policies revealed the underlying tensions that never went away after the American Revolution. Republican Party principles stressed states' rights and a limited Federal power, conflicting with much ofthe Troop's purpose. Thomas Jefferson, who founded the Republican Party with James Madison, later described to Troop Founder Thomas Leiper his concern that Federalist doctrine goes "to the calling all our people from the interior to turn merchants, and to convert this great agricultural country into a city ofAmsterdam."13 Republican rhetoric elevated the yeoman farmer over the merchant and businessman. The founder ofthe Federalists, Washington's Secretary ofthe Treasury Alexander Hamilton, had devised the excise tax on whiskey to help pay for funding the national debt left over from the Revolutionary War. In the Whiskey Rebellion, the Troop continued its commitment to establish and preserve a distinctly Federalist order. The Troop and its members supported the President's decision and the Pennsylvania governor's request for militia. The men could have avoided service and hired a substitute ifthey were drafted-the members, who still supplied their own equipment and horses, could have afforded it. Instead, they volunteered. The Troop also dramatically increased its size at this time, showing the Troop's recognition ofthe necessity oflight horse in this expedition as well as the support for the war among Philadelphia's elite. On September 10, the Troop elected seven new 12 Rosswunn, Arms, Country, and Class, 256. 13 Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Leiper, 21 January 1809, quoted in Slaughter, Whiskey Rebellion, 191-92. 79 members, and on September 12, it elected seventeen more. Before this, the Troop had a membership offorty-six effective members, and nine more on the active roll who were beyond the age ofrequired militia service. 14 The new membership boosted the effective strength ofthe Troop to seventy men. On September 19, fifty-three Troopers, along with two trumpeters, some servants and wagon drivers "took up the line ofmarch against the insurgents ofthe Western counties ofthe State ofPennsylvania who had opposed the excise law.,,15 They served under the same pay and were subject to the same articles and rules ofthe militia, even as volunteers. Showing the army's recognition ofthe important role oflight horse, two other troops were raised from Philadelphia, totaling approximately 160 men. 16 Two classes made up Washington's citizen army: the laboring poor who were militia draftees and the men hired as substitutes by wealthier draftees, and the officers who "came from the ranks ofthe creditor aristocracy in the seaboard cities."I? William Hogeland writes ofthe latter class as "gorgeously uniformed" men, noting that "State governors spent precious hours trying to salve acrimony among young men over personal snubs and outraged dress sense." Furthermore, "when preferences could not be satisfied, many adventurers refused, at the last minute, to participate, and those who did serve brought extreme personal touchiness, along with happy dreams ofvengeance, to the western march.,,18 14 These nine members, including five founders ofthe Light Horse, "being superannuated & beyond the age required by the militia law for active duty, did not join the expedition." Donnaldson, Armory. 15 Donnaldson, Armory; By-Laws, Muster-Roll, and Papers, 27-28. Two ofthe twenty-four men elected in September and fifteen ofthe forty-six effectives who had been elected before this time did not join the Western expedition. The two who were elected in September and did not join march out were Robert Bickley and Benjamin F. West. 16 The other two troops were under Captain McConnell and Captain Singer. General Order from Josiah Harmer, 17 September 1794, Armory; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 54. 17 William Hogeland, The Whiskey Rebellion (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006), 211. 18 Ibid. 80 The Troop matched Hogeland's descriptions in some ways. The group he calls "the most trim and gleaming ofthe eastern urbanites" had indeed put money into their uniform, updating it in May, 1794, to "a blue Coat, faced with red, the edging for the commissioned officers silver cord, and for the non-commissioned officers and privates white edging-for the Horse a white Saddle cloth with blue edging.,,19 This reflects the Troopers' pride in their status as Philadelphia gentlemen and their wish to appear both refined and professional. However, the Troop did not seem to express these "happy dreams ofvengeance." The three Philadelphia cavalry troops arrived in Carlisle after a ten-day march under the command ofthe Troop's Captain Dunlap, who had been elevated to the rank ofMajor. There he issued the following order: "To acknowledge and applaud the conduct ofthe Troop under his command....Their strict attention to orders, their decent and gentlemanly deportment towards the inhabitants and that spirit ofharmony and accommodation which they uniformly displayed." Dunlap singled out the Troop's treatment ofthe Western Pennsylvanians it encountered on this "patriotic cause." The goal, as Dunlap wrote, was the "punishment ofthe guilty violators ofthe laws ofour Country and Submission to them by all descriptions ofCitizens--on which depend the Peace, Liberty and Safety ofthe People.,,2o Dunlap stressed the respect for authority as central to the success ofboth the Troop and the nation. All citizens must submit to the law, and the Troop must submit to the orders ofthe government it was defending. The danger ofa soldier not appearing to submit to the same laws that he was upholding was clear to the leaders ofthe Watermelon Army. 21 After the accidental deaths oftwo civilians 19 DOlU1a1dson, Annory. 20 Jo1m Dunlap to the First Troop ofPhiladelphia Light Horse, 29 September 1794, Annory. 21 The term Watermelon Anny came from a satirical essay told from a frontiersman's perspective that derided the New Jersey farmers who were to fight in the Whiskey Campaign as men who were better offfarming melons and warring with the crabs and oysters around the Capes ofDelaware than doing any real fighting. For more explanation, see Slaughter, Whiskey Rebellion, 272. 81 caused by two soldiers, President Washington directed the soldiers to be turned over to state magistrates, although the judge released the men. Alexander Hamilton wrote to Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Mifflin, "It is a very precious and important idea that those who are called out in support and defense ofthe laws should not give occasion or even pretext to impute to them infractions ofthe laws.,,22 Establishing and preserving order through authority, central to the Troop's purpose during the Revolution, remained important during the Whiskey Rebellion. The Troop was connected to its Revolutionary past on this campaign by more than the importance ofauthority. Ofthe Troop founders at the Carlisle camp, Dunlap was then the Captain, David Lenox the First Lieutenant, Thomas Leiper a Second Lieutenant, William Hall the Comet, John Donnaldson the Quarter-Master, and Samuel Howell a Sergeant. Many ofthe other men present had also fought in the American Revolution, both with the Troop and with the Continental and Pennsylvania armies. This connection reveals a continuation in purpose and culture between the Troop ofthe Revolution and the Troop ofthe l790s. The Troop's actions on the campaign further connected it to the Troop ofthe Revolution. Washington recorded in his diary for October 14, "I found a detachment ofthe Philadelphia light horse ready to receive me and escort me to Carlisle 17 miles away.,,23 The Troop not only performed the same courier and reconnaissance role it had in the Revolution, but again even escorted Washington. Trooper Sergeant Conyngham wrote, "General Washington, Commander- in-Chiefand President ofthe United States, riding alongside me, expressed warmly his respect for the First Troop; that he could scarcely convey how much he had always felt himselfindebted to the Troop, for their services during the Revolutionary War, and also their services on the present expedition; that such gentlemen turning out, was the means ofinducing other troops to 22 Letter from Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Mifflin, 10 October 1794, quoted in Slaughter, Whiskey Rebellion, 206. 23 Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 55. 82 march more cheerfully.,,24 Washington was both a man and a myth to the Troop, which took pride in its personal interactions with him. Washington, after reviewing the army ofaround 1,000 cavalry and 14,000 infantry at Bedford, returned to Philadelphia, where Congress was to assemble, and left the command to General Frelinghuysen. The Troop served in the advanced corps ofthe right wing ofthe militia army, where Dunlap commanded the three Philadelphia troops oflight horse and one from New Jersey.25 The insurrection had largely dispersed when confronted with this overwhelming number offorces, and the cavalry was used to capture some ofthe suspected leaders. The Troop seized a number ofmen in Washington County, including a justice ofthe peace and a Baptist clergyman. As Governor William Findley describes, "to drag men, unexpectedly and unprepared, from their wives and children, from bed-time til morning, is an exertion that shocked humanity," but he conceded that "Captain Dunlap and his party, while they behaved with the greatest dexterity in taking the prisoners, treated them with as much politeness and attention as their situation would admit of, and engaged their gratitude by accompanying unavoidable severity with humanity.,,26 Not one ofthe suspects was injured or killed in these captures, demonstrating that Dunlap and the men under him were not acting as adventurers with dreams ofvengeance. The Troop was successful in the Whiskey Rebellion campaign, where its members were in active service for one-hundred days and played an important role as a light horse. It returned to Philadelphia along with Captain McConnell's and Captain Singer's light horse troops, where Elizabeth Drinker records in her journal: "Dec. 13. Three Companies ofLight-Horse passed by our door before dinner; the first were in blue uniforms, the second in green, the third blue and 24 Quoted in Ibid., 56. 25 The New Jersey Troop was under Captain McKinney. 26 William Findley, History ofthe Insurrection in the Four Western Counties ofPennsylvania in the Year 1794 with a Recital ofthe Circumstances Specially Connected Therewith, and an Historical Review ofthe Previous Situation ofthe Country (Philadelphia: Samuel Harrison Smith, 1796), 201-02. 83 cuff.,,27 Dunlap oversaw all three, and his leadership on the campaign had stressed the authority oflaw. His humane treatment ofthe men he had captured, where he" had them comfortably lodged and provided with victuals, previous to his taking refreshment himself," was the same kind ofcompromising that the Revolutionary Pennsylvania government had made following the 1779 Fort Wilson Riot and the 1781 Revolt ofthe Pennsylvania Line. 28 Likewise, Washington pardoned the men arrested, although one would die in jail before he could return home, and the other men were merely fined. The insurrection itselfdemonstrated that the divisions in American society did not end after independence from Britain. Thomas Slaughter writes that in the Revolution, "conflict among Americans was at least as important a part ofthe story as cooperation against the common enemy.,,29 Conflict remained central through the Early Republic, with the Troop fighting for a more conservative America and a stronger national government. The Troopers in the Whiskey Rebellion were not typical ofa militia unit-Troopers had never been. The Troop's function as both a light horse militia unit and a type ofelite men's club gave it a unique membership among Philadelphians who would have held higher ranks ifserving in another unit. As The American Daily Advertiser describes, "there might be seen as private troopers, some ofthe principal officers ofthe State government, officers who had commanded regiments in the continental service, merchants ofthe most respectable characters, lawyers of eminent talents and property.,,30 These were not adventurers with dreams ofvengeance, but established Philadelphians or younger men on the rise who were committed to serving the authority oftheir government and its laws. 27 Biddle, ed., Drinker, 13 December 1794, 251. 28 Findley, Western Insurrection, 201. 29 Thomas P. Slaughter, The Whiskey Rebellion: Frontier Epilogue to the American Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 4. 30 American Daily Advertiser, 14 October 1794. 84 A Quasi-War and a Rebellion The need for the Troop to police a Federal order in Philadelphia continued with the increasing partisanship between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. In 1795, Federalist chiefnegotiator John Jay had made a treaty with Great Britain whose terms angered the Democratic Republicans who favored France. Elizabeth Drinker recorded, "Threats had been thrown out ofburning John Jay's effigy before the President's door; the Light Horse were parading all day.,,3! This was not the celebratory parading ofthe Troop, but one that relied on its reputation and the threat ofmartial force to preserve order and keep the peace. Jacob Hiltzheimer described "a crowd ofpeople in a riotous manner" burning the effigy ofJohn Jay, and wrote that during dinner on July 5, "George Lauman came in and gave us an account ofthe affair in Kensington. He is a member ofCaptain Dunlap's light horse, and their number being so few, they were unable to disperse the mob.,,32 Ifthe Troop had directly engaged the protestors, the situation could have escalated into violence. Instead, both the protestors and the Troopers asserted their views within accepted cultural standards. The Troop's actions in 1798 and 1799 indicate a stronger commitment to a general conservatism and social order than found in strict political Federalism. In the wake ofJay's Treaty, French privateers increasingly seized American ships trading with Britain. Philadelphians were divided in their support between the French and the British. Jacob Hiltzheimer wrote: "May 10.-Last evening there were some disturbance in the streets, occasioned by men ofthe Black Cockade and those ofWhite Cockade, and some arrests were made. The Light-Horse were called and they paraded the streets.,,33 British supporters wore black cockades, and French supporters wore white ones. As Carey's United States' Recorder warned, "Instead ofthat mutual 31 Biddle, ed., Drinker, 6 July 1795, 272. 32 Parsons, ed., Hiltzheimer Diary, 4 July 1795, 215; 5 July 1795,215. 33 Ibid., 10 May 1798,255. 85 forbearance which ought to subsist among men and christians, instead ofcalm and sober discussions ofthe public concerns, attempts are making to inflame citizen against citizen which will, ifnot speedily checked end in blood.,,34 The Troop strove to support order, assuming its familiar policing role. The Troop actively sought to meet the crisis that would become known as the Quasi-War. It elected twenty-two new members in a May 12 meeting at the "Fish House near Schuylkill," the State in Schuylkill sporting club whose membership had always overlapped with that ofthe Troop.35 The Troop continued to parade, keeping order, as American negotiations with France fell apart. Congress then called to raise a provisional army for the impending war. In a circular letter sent to the officers ofthe Commonwealth's militia, Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Mifflin requested assistance in carrying out Congress' call. The Troop, which had always relied upon unanimous elections to make its decisions, did not make this commitment. Instead, it allowed individual members to make their own choice. At the meeting on July 10, 1798, thirteen Troopers asked permission to temporarily withdraw from the active Troop roll to raise a new cavalry corps to be part ofthe provisional army. They were to be attached to the McPherson Blues-the infantry militia with whom they had marched in the Whiskey Campaign. They were granted permission with "full approbation ofthe Troop and as soon as the service in which they engage expires, such members shall be received into the Troop on the first vacancies without being balloted for.,,36 The Troop supported its members who chose to fill Congress' call for a provisional army. It also prepared itselffor the possibility ofwar, as that summer it hired Thomas Swann and "John Walker, an English Light Dragoon" to better instruct Troopers in the use ofthe broad sword and 34 Carey's United States' Recorder, 10 May 1798. 35 Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 59. 36 Ibid. 86 the cavalry maneuvers three times a week from five to seven in the morning.37 The Troop itself, however, did not commit to serving at this stage. This is a marked difference from the American Revolution, where the Troop offered its services to Congress in November of 1774. In the short-lived Quasi-War, the Volunteer Cavalry directed by Captain Robert Wharton performed traditional Troop roles. When a group ofFrench prisoners "under a small guard, have exhibited proofs ofan unruly and mutinous spirit," and fearing they would "overpower" their guard, ten to twelve ofWharton's Troopers were requested to bring the prisoners to Lancaster.38 After their commitment was over, Wharton and six other Troopers who had withdrawn to serve in his Volunteer Dragoons rejoined the Troop in October, 1801. While the Quasi-War was taking place, a new Federalist tax-this one on land and housing-was again a lightning-rod ofresentment among Pennsylvanians. As Paul Douglas Newland writes, the revolters' concerns were not simply about the tax but about "local control, economic liberty, and national independence.,,39 John Fries, a man who had served in both the American Revolution and the Whiskey Rebellion, was a key organizer ofresistance to the tax. He used rhetoric that seized upon lingering resentment from the Revolution: "All those people who were Tories in the Last War mean to be the leaders, they mean to get us quite under, they mean to makes us Slaves!,,4o After Fries had marched with a few hundred armed men to the town ofBethlehem to free prisoners who had been arrested for tax resistance, President John Adams issued a proclamation ordering the rioters to disperse. He called upon Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Mifflin to use the militia to restore order. 37 Ibid., 60-61. 38 Benjamin Hudde1 to Robert Wharton, 26 July 1798, Armory. 39 Paul Douglas Newman, Fries's Rebellion: The Enduring Strugglefor the American Revolution (Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 2004),39. 40 Quoted in Ibid., 15. Newman claims that Fries made this warning to the Lower Milford Militia under his command on March 7, 1799, however, his only source is the Deposition ofPhillip Schlough before Judge Richard Peters on April 15, 1799, making the quote indirect. 87 Unlike in the Quasi-War, the Troop fully committed to preserving the domestic order and putting down the insurrection. Troop Captain John Dunlap responded to the Pennsylvania Militia's Adjutant-General's request within an hour ofreceiving it, writing, "With pleasure I tell you, that when the laws and government ofthis happy country require defence, the First Troop of Philadelphia Cavalry wants but one hour's notice to march.,,41 The Troop's commitment to the "laws and government" remained its central purpose. Along with the regular militia and infantry, the Troop was called out with eight other Cavalry commands-five from neighboring Pennsylvania counties and three others from Philadelphia. In a quick campaign ofseventeen days, forty-seven Troopers, accompanied by two trumpeters and seven servants, set out with the three other city troops.42 Using small scout parties, similar to the reconnaissance roles the Troop had performed during the Revolution, Fries was quickly captured along with a number ofother suspected leading insurgents. The captured men were brought back to Philadelphia; after trial, many were convicted, and Fries and two others sentenced to be hung. But President Adams pardoned all ofthem with a proclamation ofgeneral amnesty on May 23. Merging the threat ofoverwhelming force with amnesty in meting out justice preserved and restored the government's authority. The Troop had been involved in this delicate balance offorce and forgiveness since the Revolution. Troopers were committed to the Federalist order, but more centrally to a general conservatism and societal order. One ofthe four Philadelphia light horse troops was an independent one led by former Trooper Thomas Leiper. A staunch Democratic Republican and friend ofThomas Jefferson, he had resigned from the Troop in 1794. In response to the cockade demonstrations and the Quasi-War with France, he formed a Republican troop oflight horse. He 41 Peter Baynton to John Dunlap, 20 March 1799, Armory. Baynton was then Adjutant-General ofthe Militia ofPennsylvania. 42 "Pay Roll, March 20 to April 25, 1799," Armory. 88 retained his attachment to Republican ideals throughout his life, even casting a vote in the Electoral College for the Democrat Andrew Jackson, but that never outweighed his commitment to the kind ofauthority and order he had sought from his earlier days as a founder ofthe 43 Philadelphia Light Horse, evidenced by his contributions in putting down Fries' Rebellion. Unity The Troop's military and domestic policing actions preserved the government's authority through force and the threat offorce. The Troop's ceremonial roles also instilled this order. By helping to build traditions and myths around the American Revolution, the Troop created a unifying culture that sought to overcome deep divisions in the Philadelphian and Pennsylvanian societies. In the war and the Early Republic, the central figure was "WASHINGTON, our victorious and illustrious commander-in-chief. ...May the crown ofglory he has placed on the brow ofthe genius ofAmerica, shine with untarnished radiance and luster. ...WASHINGTON THE SAVIOR OF HIS COUNTRy!,,44 In the Troop's escorts and parades, it contributed to his myth and celebrated its own association with him. From its 1775 escort ofthe recently appointed commander-in-chiefthrough New York on his way to Boston, the Troop strongly connected itselfto Washington. As a delegate from Virginia to the Constitutional Convention, Washington recorded his arrival to Philadelphia on May 13, 1787, where the "the City Light Horse, commanded by Col. Miles met me and escorted me in by the Artillery Officers who stood arranged & saluted as I passed.,,45 The Pennsylvania Packet further noted, "The joy ofthe people on the coming ofthis great and good man was 43 John Russell Young, ed., Memorial History ofthe City ofPhiladelphia from Its First Settlement to the Year 1895 (New York: New York History Company, 1898), 155-57. 44 Pennsylvania Journal, 26 November 1781; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915,44. 45 George Washington quoted in William Spohn Baker, Washington after the Revolution: 1784-1796 (Philadelphia: lB. Lippincott, 1898), 74. 89 shewn by their acclamations and the ringing ofthe bells.,,46 The delegates unanimously chose Washington as the President ofthe Convention that May, and the Electoral College unanimously elected him as President ofthe United States in both the elections of 1789 and 1792-the only United States President to be elected unanimously.47 Washington was a unifying figure for the Troop and the colonies that had fought in the Revolution. The Troop continued to participate in creating unifying traditions around both men and days. During the Revolution, Congress had designated July 4 for the celebration ofthe Declaration ofIndependence. The large July 4, 1788 celebration in Philadelphia co-opted this tradition to elevate the Constitution and channel the national pride ofIndependence Day to support its ratification. At the time, the Constitution had been ratified only by ten ofthe thirteen states. "The Troop took the lead marching at the head ofthe procession," with civil and military officers, judges and gentlemen ofthe bar, the clergy ofdifferent churches, and representatives from all the cities trade groups, among many others, all taking part. They had started at in the morning at halfpast nine on South and Third, arriving upon the Union Green just after noon.48 Troop members participated in the parade both within the Light Horse and outside ofit. Three Troopers were chiefmarshals ofthe procession, and two others marched with their respective trade group. Thomas Leiper carried the flag ofthe Tobacconists. The tobacco plant represented on the nearly five foot square silk banner has thirteen leaves with the top three small, and still forming. Symbolism ofnational unity was present throughout, and the states that had made the strong commitment to the country were celebrated: "Ten gentlemen, representing the States that had ratified the Federal Constitution" paraded, each bearing a flag with a state's name 46 Pennsylvania Packet, 14 May 1787. 47 The electors cast ballots with two names on them, and each ballot contained Washington's name as one of the choices. In both elections, John Adams had the second most votes and served as Washington's Vice President. 48 Donnaldson, Armory. 90 printed in gold lettering-Trooper Christian Febiger carried Virginia's.49 Communicating a message ofnational unity through symbols had been a part ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse since its 1775 Markoe Standard. The Troop's ceremonial role as an escort to the President ofthe United States reveals its commitment to a distinctly Federalist identity. While in the office ofPresident, Washington received four Troop escorts. Hiltzheimer records the first on April 20, 1789, "Heard the great guns fire in Philadelphia to welcome his Excellency George Washington, President ofthe United States, from Wilmington. He dined at the City Tavern with the principal gentlemen ofthe city and members ofthe troop oflight-horse. At night fireworks were exhibited.,,5o Upon Washington's death in 1799, Troopers marched dismounted in "compleat uniform at the State House for the purpose ofpaying their sad tribute ofveneration to the remains oftheir late Commander-in-Chief.,,51 The Troop also escorted Federalist President John Adams, who had been Washington's Vice President, in November, 1797, and November, 1798. The Troop did not, however, serve as an escort for the next two Presidents, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who were Democratic Republicans. While the Democrat and former Trooper Thomas Leiper's light horse would participated in the military parade for Jefferson's inauguration, the Troop itself remained absent in the ceremonies and pageantry ofboth administrations. Though the Troop did not participate in escorting Jefferson or Madison, it did volunteer its services in defense ofthe nation to fight Britain in the War of 1812. Its support contrasts to the reaction ofstaunch New England Federalists, whose similarly aligned newspapers widely discussed secession. The Troop's central purpose was American success, not political loyalty. Its 49 Donna1dson, Annory; Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 49. 50 Parsons, ed., Hiltzheimer Diary, 20 April1789, 152. 51 Notice sent to Troopers quoted in Wilson, ed., Troop History to 1915, 63. 91 non-commitment to the Federalist-waged Quasi-War, compared to its full support in suppressing Fries' Rebellion, shows a commitment to American order over American politics. A larger American identity with unifying symbols from the Revolutionary War overlapped with smaller political identities. The Troop's martial and celebratory roles imply its Federalist vision for America, but this Federalism was built upon the shared ideal ofa successful and ordered America. The Troop asserted this more unifying patriotic culture not just by the act ofparading, but in the very uniform it displayed while doing so. The Pennsylvania Herald recorded in 1787, "the City light horse commanded by Col. Miles unanimously resolved to wear leather breeches. The Patriotism ofthe measure is the subject ofgeneral discourse and commendation.,,52 Eleven days later the Pennsylvania Herald described a Light Horse parade, reporting, "they held out in the part oftheir uniform a patriotic example, which does them honor and is highly worthy ofimitation: Their vests and breeches for the most part were ofwhite thin buckskin, the production and manufacture ofour own country.,,53 Through its public and private roles, Troop sought to foster this sense ofAmerican pride. The Troop's more private celebrations further indicate its shared ideals and sense of patriotism. It was not simply a show for the public, but central to the Troop's identity. After the July 4, 1788 parade, the Troop gathered and "American porter, beer and cyder were the only liquors" used in the many toasts.,,54 The act ofdrinking itselfwas part ofthe Troop's culture, as the Troop's more private connection to Washington reveals when it hosted a dinner for him at the City Tavern. 55 The caterer's account for September 14, 1787, shows more than twice as much 52 Pennsylvania Herald, 14 April1787. 53 Donna1dson, Armory; Pennsylvania Herald, 25 Aprill787. 54 Donna1dson, Armory. 55 Washington records in his diary, "September 14, 1787. Dined at the City Tavern at an entertainment given on my acct by the City light horse." "Extracts from Washington's Diary, Kept While Attending the 92 spent on the fifty-four bottles ofMadeira wine and sixty bottles ofClaret than the "55 Gentlemens Dinners & fruit Relishes Olives &c." The bill also includes forty-two bottles of American cyder, porter and beer. 56 Dinners like this were a celebration ofAmerican success and increasing power. In February, 1796, the Troop hosted a dinner for Major-General Wayne and his officers to celebrate his frontier victory at the Battle ofFallen Timbers over an American Indian confederacy led by the Shawnee and Delaware tribes. Their toasts, which were reprinted in the newspapers, reveal patriotic legacies from the successes ofthe American Revolution overpowering factional political loyalties. They drank toasts to both John Adams and the Republic ofFrance, Alexander Hamilton and the Marquis La Fayette, and to "THE PEOPLE-May they always distinguish between Patriotism and Faction, and banish those formidable Foes to Liberty-Licentiousness, Sedition, and Fickleness." General Wayne then toasted "the First Troop ofPhiladelphia Dragoons; may their Patriotic exertions and those ofother worthy citizens who composed the late Volunteer army produce a conviction to the world that the Constitution and Laws ofthe United States cannot be resisted with impunity.,,57 The Constitution and laws ofthe nation took primacy over all else. The Troop sought to foster this patriotic unity. The Troop's vision had largely been institutionalized into the government. At the close of the Revolution and into the 1780s, three Troopers served on the Supreme Executive Council, better realizing their political action that had started on the more radical committees and also in Constitutional Convention of 1787," The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory andBiography, (Philadelphia: Historical Society ofPennsylvania, 1887): 302. 56 The bill also includes money for "Decanters Wine Glass & Tumblers Broken &c," indicating that the many bottles ofalcohol and bowls ofpunch were drunk. In addition, the Troop paid for "16 Musician & Servant dinners" and purchased an additional sixteen bottles ofClaret, five bottles ofMadera, and seven bowls of punch for them. "Caterer's Account for the Light Troop ofHorse, to Edwd Moyston," 14 September 1787, Armory. 57 Claypoole's Daily Advertiser, 20 February 1796. 93 service to the Council during the war. Four Troopers would also be elected the Pennsylvania Assembly. While the Troop itselfretained a more Federalist identity, two ofits most successful members, Thomas Leiper and Blair McClenachan, became Democrats, with McClenachan serving as a member ofthe Pennsylvania Assembly and later the U.S. Congress. Many stayed involved in trade and banking--one ofthe Troop founders was appointed Commissioner ofthe U.S. Bank in 1791 by President Washington. The Troopers' ultimate commitment, however, was ensuring the success and defense ofthe nation, as retired Trooper Samuel Miles showed when he became the first "faithless elector." He wrote that in 1798 he was "nominated by the federalists but...thought it my duty to vote for the man that appeared to me would be most useful for the Public Good, without any regard to party." Believing that "both the Gentlemen [Adams and Jefferson] were real republicans...with a view to the good & independence ofthe country," but fearing the Federalists would be more likely to bring the United States into a war with France, he voted for Jefferson. 58 Compromise and a commitment to the overall success ofthe nation defined the members ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse. 58 Samuel Miles, BriefAutobiographical Sketch [MS], 4 February 1802, in Samuel Miles Papers, 1776-1802, APS. 94 Conclusion Friends and Fellow Soldiers. We are met to commemorate the thirty sixth anniversary since the formation ofyour Corps, organized for the purpose ofprotecting our rights, the brightest boon Heaven ever gave to man.... To You the warwom remnant ofthis ancient band who transmitted it to us its fame unsullied, believe us when we say-whilst life's purple stream plays round our hearts our best endeavours shall be used to transmit the fair inheritance to our successors-nor shall your venerable bosoms heave a sigh for the conduct ofyour sons-the bright example you have set shall be our polar star to guide us in the path ofpolitical rectitude and selfdevotion to the sacred cause ofour country.! -Troop Captain Robert Wharton In the middle ofWharton's speech to the Troop, the Captain took out the letter written to the Troop from the "sainted hero" George Washington, held it up for his men to see, and read it to them? Wharton looked to the past ofthe Light Horse to build a myth and a culture around it. As F. R. Ankersmit writes, "we no longer have any texts, any past, butjust interpretations of them.,,3 Wharton and the Troopers endowed this letter with meaning as they engaged with the memory ofthe Revolution. Meaning is made through interpretation. The legacy ofWashington's letter, like the legacy ofthe Revolution, was not inherent for Wharton and the Troop. The Revolution was neither conservative nor radical-it does not have a singular Truth. Gary Nash, who attempts to reclaim the Revolution's "true radicalism," where radicalism is the Revolutionaries' "wholesale change and sharp transformation," is more in the act ofreforging than reclaiming.4 Like Wharton, he brings his own perspectives to a past whose meaning is constantly captured and recaptured, shaped and reshaped. This is not to say that meaning is lost in transmission and translation, but rather, meaning is added. ! Poulson's American Daily Advertiser, 22 November 1810. 2 Ibid. 3 F. R. Ankersmit, "Historiography and Postmodemism," History and Theory 28 (1989): 137. 4 Nash, Unkown American Revolution, xvii. 95 Gordon Wood writes, "We Americans like to think ofour revolution as not being radical; indeed, most the time we consider it downright conservative."s Which Americans? Progressive, Realist, Neo-Progressive, Conservative, Idealist; Constitutionalist, Federalist, Democratic- Republican-schools ofthought under changing names have been grappling with the Revolution's meaning since the day the Revolution begun. And no one can even decide when that day was. The Troop might choose November 17, 1774, when twenty-eight merchants and professional men gathered in Carpenter's Hall and unanimously volunteered their services to the Congress. Or it might choose July 4, 1776, the day Congress designated for the celebration ofthe Declaration ofIndependence during the American Revolution, when it strove, along with the Troop, to build a unifying tradition around it. The Troop might also choose Washington's birthday-a day that the current members ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, a Pennsylvania guard unit, still celebrate with an annual dinner. What day might a member ofthe Pennsylvania Line choose? Or one ofthe militiamen who marched to James Wilson's house to make the wealthy merchants sell their goods at prices everyone could afford? My study ofthe Philadelphia Light Horse is a study ofthe divisions in Revolutionary Pennsylvania and also the compromises and sacrifices that forged a nation. Nash described the Revolution as a "seismic eruption from the hands ofan internally divided people.,,6 Ifthese hands had always remained divided, the Revolution would have been a failure. A shared commitment to fight offthe British and assert an American authority, however, brought these disparate forces together. The competing visions ofAmerica and authority often clashed, with the Troop fighting to assert a more Federalist establishment, while at the same time understanding a flexible and local community ethic and community boundary. The disorder and 5 Wood, Radicalism, 3. 6 Nash, Unkown American Revolution, xviii. 96 danger ofthe Revolution loosened the boundaries ofthis moral framework, where militiamen could seize a few wealthy merchants they labeled as Tories and price-gougers, and where rank and-file soldiers, who had suffered too much and been too deceived in their contracts, could mutiny to force their agreements to be met. But basic and enforced community understandings of morality remained, lashing back against militant radicals who went too far and threatened the overthrow ofthe entire social order. After the war, authority became increasingly institutionalized, and what was tolerable radicalism in the uncertainty ofthe Revolution became criminal in the Early Republic. The Troop helped achieve its vision ofa unified nation, independent from Britain, with an institutionalized social order that allowed business and trade to grow-and it did grow. Its members helped achieve this through conventional and nonconventional military roles, and also by understanding and cultivating national unity. "Resistance, manly resistance, or unconditional vassalage was our only altemative--the choice was soon made....The die was cast, to retrace our steps was impossible; it only remained by firm perseverance, to secure the future."? Their legacy, like that ofthe Revolution, is what remains to be secured and defined by each future generation. Amidst the 2008-2009 economic crisis, amidst bailouts, bonuses and bankruptcies that have led Americans to question the nation's role as a financial and business power, we ask ifour nation should be Main Street or Wall Street. This same question has divided America since the Federalist Alexander Hamilton and the Democrat Thomas Jefferson, since the merchants and officers inside Fort Wilson and the militiamen outside. America's Revolution was fought by merchants and laborers, professionals and artisans. Only through the compromise ofa common American code, one built upon basic property and contract rights balanced with the knowledge ofwhen enough is enough and a commitment to shared sacrifice, did these disparate forces 7 Poulson's American Daily Advertiser, 22 November 1810. 97 defeat the British and win independence. In a similar way to the Troop's parading to redirect sentiments towards a patriotic Federalist order, Americans now need to make a concerted effort to redirect the social ethics ofthe business and professional world away from insatiable greed towards common sense and a sustainable ethic, to create a sense of"selfdevotion to the sacred cause ofour country," not just one's own bank account.8 But ifthe history ofthe Troop and early America teaches us anything, it is that the violation ofcontract and property rights, however unfair they may be, cannot achieve this. It risks a backlash, as these have been understood to be basic American rights since before the Revolution. Only by convincing those at the top ofsociety to voluntarily put bounds on their winnings-be it sincerely motivated by a social code or simply to avoid an angry mob-can the nation move forward with this commitment to shared sacrifice. And what is a call to compromise in a society that, despite its divisions, understands a basic American moral framework? It is a call to common sense, the common sense ofa shared American identity. 8 Ibid. 98 Bibliography MANUSCRIPTS Armory Collection ofArchival Material, First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry. Hollingsworth Family Papers, 1748-1887, Historical Society ofPennsylvania. John Dunlap, Estate Papers, 1812, Historical Society ofPennsylvania. Pennsylvania Stamp Act and Non-Importation Resolutions Collection, American Philosophical Society. Samuel Miles Papers, 1776-1802, American Philosophical Society. West Family Papers, 1764-1893, Historical Society ofPennsylvania. NEWSPAPERS Microfilm or Digitized: American Daily Advertiser Carey's United States' Recorder Claypoole's Daily Advertiser Pennsylvania Evening Post Pennsylvania Gazette Pennsylvania Journal Pennsylvania Ledger Pennsylvania Packet Poulson's American Daily Advertiser PUBLISHED PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS "A Scrap of'Troop' History." The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 15 (1891): 225-27. A Tradesman ofPhiladelphia [Benjamin Franklin]. Plain Truth: Or, Serious Considerations on the Present State ofthe City ofPhiladelphia, and Province ofPennsylvania. Philadelphia, 1747. Biddle, Henry. Extractsfrom the Journal ofElizabeth Drinker. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1889. 99 By-Laws, Muster-Roll, and Papers Selectedfrom the Archives ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, from November 17,1774, to March 1,1856. Philadelphia: James B. Smith and Co., 1856. Division, Library ofCongress Manuscript, ed. Journals ofthe Continental Congress, 1774-1789. Vol. 3. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1905. Doren, Carl Van, ed. Franklin's Autobiographical Writings. New York: Viking Press, 1945. Duane, William, ed. Passagesfrom the Diary ofChristopher Marshall, Kept in Philadelphia and Lancaster During the American Revolution. Philadelphia: Hazard & Mitchell, 1849. Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. The Writings ofGeorge Washington. New York: George Putnam's Sons, 1889. Findley, William. History ofthe Insurrection in the Four Western Counties ofPennsylvania in the Year 1794 with a Recital ofthe Circumstances Specially Connected Therewith, and an Historical Review ofthe Previous Situation ofthe Country. Philadelphia: Samuel Harrison Smith, 1796. Hayden, Horace Edwin, ed. Reminiscences ofDavid Hayfield Conyngham, 1750-1834. Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania: Wyoming Historical & Geological Society, 1904. Hazard, John F. Watson and Willis P. Annals ofPhiladelphia, and Pennsylvania, in the Olden Time Being a Collection ofMemoirs, Anecdotes, and Incidents ofthe City and Its Inhabitants, and ofthe Earliest Settlements ofthe Inland Part ofPennsylvania Philadelphia: E.S. Stuart, 1884. Hazard, Samuel, ed. Pennsylvania Archives Selected and Arrangedfrom Original Documents in the Office ofthe Secretary ofthe Commonwealth Confromably to the Acts ofthe General Assembly. Philadelphia: Joseph Severns & Co., 1853. Hinde, Robert. The Discipline ofthe Light Horse. London, 1778. "Journal of Samuel Rowland Fisher, ofPhiladelphia, 1779-1781." The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 41 (1917): 145-457. Journals ofthe American Congressfrom 1774-1778. Vol. 1. Washington: Way and Gideon, 1823. Larabee, Leonard W., ed. The Papers ofBenjamin Franklin, January 1, 1745-June 30, 1750. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961. Littell, John Stockton, ed. Memoirs ofHis Own Time, with Reminiscences ofthe Men and Events ofthe Revolution by Alexander Graydon Philadelphia: Lindsay & Blakiston, 1846. MacKinney, Gertrude, ed. Pennsylvania Archives: Votes ofthe Assembly, October 15, 1753-September 24, 1756. Harrisburg, PA: State Printer, 1931. Minutes ofthe Supreme Executive Council ofPennsylvaniafrom Its Organization to the Termination of the Revolution. Harrisburg, PA: Theo Fenn & Co., 1852. Parsons, Jacob Cox, ed. Extractsfrom the Diary ofJacob Hiltzheimer ofPhiladelphia. 1765-1798. Philadelphia: William F. Fell, 1893. 100 Pennsylvania Archives: Votes ofthe Assembly, January 7, 1771-September 26, 1776. Harrisburg, PA: State Library, 1935. Reed, George E., ed. Pennsylvania Archives: Papers ofthe Governors, 1747-1759. Harrisburg, PA: State ofPennsylvania, 1900. Rodney, Thomas. The Diary ofCaptain Thomas Rodney, 1776-1777. Wilmington: The Historical Society ofDelaware, 1888. "Selections from the Correspondence ofColonel Clement Biddle." The Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 48 (January 1918): 310-43. Scull, G. D., ed. The Montresor Journals. New York: New York Historical Society, 1881. Wilkinson, James. Memoirs ofMy Own Times. 3 vols. Philadelphia, 1816. BOOKS AND ARTICLES Alexander, John K. "The Fort Wilson Incident of 1779: A Case Study ofthe Revolutionary Crowd." William and Mary Quarterly 31, no. 4 (October 1974): 589-612. Allen, Thaddeus, ed. An Inquiry into the Views, Principles, Services, and Influences ofthe Leading Men in the Origination ofthe American Union, and in the Formation andAdministration ofthe Government. Boston: Geo. W. Briggs, 1849. Ankersmit, F. R. "Historiography and Postmodernism." History and Theory 28 (1989): 137-53. Bailyn, Bernard. The Origins ofAmerican Politics. New York: Knopf, 1968. Baker, William Spohn. Washington after the Revolution: 1784-1796. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1898. Bernstein, Barton J., ed. Towards a New Past: Dissenting Essays in American History. New York: Pantheon Books, 1968. Butler, Jon. Becoming America: The Revolution Before 1776. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Campbell, John Hugh. History ofthe Friendly Sons ofSt. Patrick and ofthe Hibernian Society for the ReliefofEmigrantsfromIreland: March 17, 1771-March 17,1892. Philadelphia: Hibernian Society, 1892. Cavalry, First Troop Philadelphia City, ed. History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, from Its Organization, November 17, 1774 to Its Centennial Anniversary, November 17,1874. Princeton: Hallowell,1875. Cooper, Jerry. The Militia and National Guard in America since Colonial Times: A Research Guide. London: Greenwood Press, 1993. Cress, Lawrence. Citizens in Arms: The Army and the Militia in American Society to the War of1812. Chapel Hill, NC: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1982. 101 Ent, Uzal W., ed. The First Century: A History ofthe 28th Infantry Division. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1979. Findley, William. History ofthe Insurrection in the Four Western Counties ofPennsylvania in the Year 1794 with a Recital ofthe Circumstances Specially Connected Therewith, and an Historical Review ofthe Previous Situation ofthe Country. Philadelphia: Samuel Harrison Smith, 1796. Fischer, David Hackett. Liberty and Freedom: A Visual History ofAmerica's Founding Ideas. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. ---. Washington's Crossing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, 1915-1947. Philadelphia: Hallowell, 1948. History ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry, 1948-1991. Philadelphia: Winchell, 1991. Hogeland, William. The Whiskey Rebellion. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006. Martin, David. The Philadelphia Campaign: June 1777-July 1778. Conshohocken, PA: Combined Books, 2003. Milnor, William. Memoirs ofthe Gloucester Fox Hunting Club, near Philadelphia. Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1830. Nash, Gary. First City: Philadelphia and the Forging ofHistorical Memory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002. ---. The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth ofDemocracy and the Struggle to Create America. New York: Viking, 2005. ---. The Urban Crucible: Social Change, Political Consciousness, and the Origins ofthe American Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979. Newland, Samuel. The Pennsylvania Militia: Defending the Commonwealth and the Nation, 1669-1870. Annville, PA: Pennsylvania National Guard Foundation, 2002. Newman, Paul Douglas. Fries's Rebellion: The Enduring Struggle for the American Revolution. Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 2004. O'Shaughnessy, Andrew Jackson. An Empire Divided: The American Revolution and the British Caribbean. Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 2000. "The Restoration ofthe Schuylkill Gun to the State in Schuylkill." Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography, no. 29 (March 1884): 199-215. Rosswurm, Steven. Arms, Country, and Class: The Philadelphia Militia and the 'Lower Sort' During the American Revolution, 1775-1783. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987. Royster, Charles. A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775 1783 Chapel Hill, NC: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1979. 102 Ryerson, Richard Alan. The Revolution Is Now Begun: The Radical Committees ofPhiladelphia, 1765 1776. Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press, 1978. Schultz, Ronald. The Republic ofLabor: Philadelphia Artisans and the Politics ofClass, 1720-1830. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Shy, John. A People Numerous and Armed: Reflections on the Military Struggle for American Independence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976. Silverstone, Paul H. The Sailing Navy, 1775-1854. New York: CRC Press, 2006. Simpson, H. The Lives ofEminent Philadelphians Now Deceased. Philadelphia, 1859. Slaughter, Thomas P. The Whiskey Rebellion: Frontier Epilogue to the American Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. "That Mischievous Holker: The Story ofa Privateer." Pennsylvania Magazine ofHistory and Biography 79 (January 1955): 27-62. Thayer, Theodore. Pennsylvania Politics and the Growth ofDemocracy, 1740-1776 Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1953. Wilson, Joseph Lapsley, ed. Book ofthe First Troop Philadelphia City Cavalry. Philadelphia: Hallowell, 1915. Wood, Gordon. The Radicalism ofthe American Revolution. New York: A.A. Knopf, 1992. Young, John Russell, ed. Memorial History ofthe City ofPhiladelphiafrom Its First Settlement to the Year 1895. New York: New York History Company, 1898. 103