Lee, Charles, Continental General

Autograph letter signed ("C. Lee"), 4 pages (13 x 7 5/8 in.; 325 x 200 mm), Brunswick, [New Jersey], 3 July 1778, to Robert Morris [verso of second leaf docketed in Morris's hand], casting aspersions on Washington, adamantly denying the failure of his first test as a field commander at the Battle of Monmouth, and demanding a court-martial to redeem himself; a few fold separations. Blue cloth folding case, blue morocco spine lettered gilt; spine slightly faded.

"Have we not a gracious Prince on the throne? ... not contented with robbing me and the brave Men under my command, of the honour due to us—a most hellish plan has been form'd ... to destroy for ever my honour and reputation—I have demanded a Court martial which has fortunately been granted." Washington's treatment of General Charles Lee at the Battle of Monmouth further infuriates the intemperate, hot-headed commander. The day before his court martial began he penned this venomous retaliation against Washington to his friend Robert Morris.

"The General has the madness to charge me with making a shameful retreat. I never retreated in fact," he hisses. "I say I never retreated but by his positive order who invidiously sent me out of the Field when the victory was assur'd." Early on 28 June 1778, Washington ordered Lee to attack and bring the British withdrawal to a halt until he could bring up the main strength of the American army along the Monmouth Road. Lee lay to the west of the Middletown road and should have delivered a coordinated attack on the slow moving column. Properly planned, this could have halted the British withdrawal to the northeast and enabled Washington to draw up the main army and attack from the rear. There followed a confused series of orders and counterorders, marches and countermarches, advances and withdrawals. From this welter of ill-conceived maneuvers emerges the unshakeable truth that Lee had no plan of attack. Washington, bringing the main army along the Monmouth road encountered not the rear of the British column but Lee's regiments retreating in considerable disorder and confusion with the British advancing behind them. When Washington angrily confronted Lee, the latter responded that from "a variety of contradictory intelligence ... matters were thrown into confusion ... He said besides, the thing [the attack on Clinton, which Lee had never endorsed] was against his own opinion. General Washington answerd, whatever his opinion might have been, he expected his orders would have been obeyed ..." (Lee, Papers, 3:81). Washington orders Lee to the rear and began the task of rallying Lee's disordered troops.

Washington's reprimand spurred Lee to pen several letters demanding an apology as well as a court martial, with which the General obliged him. The court martial took place between 4 July and 12 August. He was found guilty of disobedience of orders, misbehavior before the enemy, and disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief and sentenced to one year's suspension from duty.  Regarded by many historians as a traitor, it seems more likely that Lee's flawed character caused his command failings rather than deliberate treachery.