Ties to a Founding Father – Part III

Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2010 by Kathy Fisher in History, Long Branch
Tags: American Revolution, founding father, History, Thomas Nelson Jr.

History has not dealt adequately with Thomas Nelson.  He is not remembered as a major political figure in Virginia during the era of the American Revolution.[1]

Emory G. Evans, noted Nelson scholar and history professor, captures in the quotation above the correct assessment of Nelson’s legacy in his complete and thoroughly researched account of Nelson’s life entitled Thomas Nelson of Yorktown: Revolutionary Virginian. Evans argues:

He was one of the most important of Virginia’s revolutionary leaders; he has to be considered in the same category as Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, George Mason, George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Benjamin Harrison, and Edmund Pendleton.[2]

In the Summer 2004 edition of the Page-Nelson Society Newsletter, Mary Claycomb points out that recent scholars refer to Thomas Nelson, Jr. as:

the Signer, placing him among the founding fathers, and, thereby, . . . raising him above the military rank and civic function and confirming him as one of the more courageous visionaries of his time.[3]

As part of a family that amassed notable achievements, Thomas Nelson, Jr. was no exception.  In my previous blog I described his many crucial contributions and sacrifices to support the Revolutionary War—both financial and personal.  Yet, why he is not recognized in the same company as other well-known patriots and statesmen is a mystery that sparked my curiosity.  On numerous trips to Williamsburg, Virginia to conduct research for my masters thesis on Nelson while at George Mason University, I was even more aware of this fact as I visited various museums and points of interest.  When I inquired about material on Thomas Nelson, Jr., the response I most often met was “Who was he?”

Nelson’s legacy remains unclear.  Many accounts describe how he is remembered, and how history evaluates and distorts his contributions and the strength of his commitment to freedom from Great Britain.  After he resigned as governor in 1781, criticism that would lay the foundation for his memory began to surround Nelson, and would remain in his shadow until and after his death in 1789.  The perception would not easily be absolved.

Simultaneously, accolades amassed, and when combined with controversy, further blurred the picture of a man whose life should have been commemorated solely on sacrifices made for the good of the country.  Further complications lay in loss of wealth and an early death, which translated into reduced stature and hastened obscurity from the public.  Evans suggests that the dwindling Nelson fortune helped create his misleading reputation.  Loss of wealth equaled loss of prestige: “fortunes have been commonly shortlived in America”[4] and having been a very wealthy family “it was not easy, either economically or socially, to experience so rapid a decline.”[5]

The cause of the decline, they believed, was not a reflection of talent, but rather that “their distinguished forbear had been poorly used by an ungrateful country.”[6] Nelson heirs, Evans points out, petitioned the legislature for twenty years to receive compensation for Nelson’s financial sacrifices: “The family knew that an injustice of some sort had been committed.”[7] To redeem Nelson financially would not only restore his fame and bring him out of anonymity, but would also enhance the Nelsons’ fortune and restore their former status.

Notoriety from Scandal Surrounding Patrick Henry and the Decius Letters

An unfortunate situation tainted Nelson’s legacy following his attempts to obtain reimbursement for funds he spent from his own pocket to support the Revolutionary War.  Evans explains that Patrick Henry, governor of Virginia from 1784-86, opposed the ratification of Virginia’s Constitution.  His position was met with a “violent political attack” presented in correspondence published in Decius’s Letters on the Opposition to the New Constitution in Virginia.  Henry was accused of profiting financially from his political position and appointing one of his friends (purportedly David Ross) as commissioner of public stores.  The author claimed that Ross filed fraudulent claims to obtain state funds with the help of friends in the Assembly,

while one of the truest patriots in America, at the same time, was ruined for want of a bare reimbursement of what he had actually advanced out of his own private fortune for the promotion of our independence .[8]

In 1784 the Assembly recommended that both claims be paid.  Ross was paid a sum of £6,000 but Nelson received nothing; furthermore, the state provided no explanation for its refusal to pay him.  Evans cautions, however, about the validity of the circumstances, but underscores the crucial point that the damage to Nelson had been done:

. . . Ross was not in the Assembly at this time, nor is there any indication that his claim was fraudulent.  And there is no evidence that Henry was involved in the affair.  But the suspicion of collusion remains because none of Henry’s defenders, who answered a wide variety of other charges, denied it.[9]

Tributes

Nelson was the subject of glowing tributes from George Washington and Colonel James Innes (appointed to take temporary charge of Nelson’s militia forces when the general suffered a severe cold).[10] Shortly after the battle of Yorktown, which gave the finishing stroke to the war, Nelson received the following expression of thanks from General Washington:

The general would be guilty of the highest ingratitude, a crime of which he hopes shall never be accused, if he forgot to return his sincere acknowledgments to his excellency Governor Nelson, for the succours which he received from him, and the militia under his command, to whose activity, emulation, and bravery, the highest praises are due.  The magnitude of the acquisition will be ample compensation for the difficulties and dangers which they met with so much firmness and patriotism.[11]

The following is an excerpt from a tribute authored by Colonel Innes after Nelson’s death in 1789:

He who undertakes barely to recite the exalted virtues which adorned the life of this great and good man, will unavoidably pronounce a panegyric on human nature.  As a man, a citizen, a legislator, and a patriot, he exhibited a conduct untarnished and undebased by sordid or selfish interest, and strongly marked with the genuine characteristics of true religion, sound benevolence, and liberal policy.  Entertaining the most ardent love for civil and religious liberty, he was among the first of that glorious band of patriots whose exertions dashed and defeated the machinations of British tyranny, and gave United America freedom and independent empire.[12]

Distorted Legacy

Evans agrees that Nelson’s image and legacy became distorted over time.  He argues that Nelson fell into obscurity, as explained in the following quote:

The demands placed on Nelson by his private affairs and his persistent ill health meant that he did not devote so much time to public life after 1781—it was impossible for him to do so.  His public exposure was limited and he was not involved, in a major way, in the completion of independence.  Nelson faded from public view—a process that was probably hastened by his dwindling fortune.  His comparatively early death completed the process.[13]

Nelson’s troubles with the government did not end with exculpation and accolades.  Although the state indemnified Nelson, they refused to repay him, thus precluding a fuller understanding of the scope of Nelson’s sacrifices and the impact those sacrifices made on him financially and personally.

Historian Mark M.  Boatner leaves no doubt about Nelson’s commitment to and financial support for the Revolution.  He points out that Nelson’s skills were mandatory for conducting the campaign: the conflict may have produced a far different outcome without his leadership.  Boatner writes:

. . . he was elected to succeed the militarily inept Thomas Jefferson and given emergency powers. . . . During the six months of his governorship Nelson was virtually a military dictator, which was precisely what the state needed at this period.[14]

Boatner further explains that despite the reap of Nelson’s personal fortune that ultimately left him poor,

he struggled to raise the men and supplies to support La Fayette’s Expedition, and when Washington and Rochambeau marched south the governor-general was in the field to join them for the kill.[15]

Nelson had been:

obliged to use all means and all possible resources, either to assist Monsieur de La Fayette . . . or to furnish George Washington with the horses, wagons, and provisions which he needed most urgently.[16]

Yet, despite Nelson’s personal commitment and monetary sacrifices, Boatner paints a more unfortunate picture of his legacy as shown in the following excerpt:

It does no honor to Virginia to add that the only recompense he earned by all his labors was the hatred of a great part of his fellow citizens, and that . . . he experienced neither the satisfaction of being freed from servitude, nor that emulation which success generally inspires; but instead . . . he found great dissatisfaction arising from the fact that their horses, wagons, and forage had frequently been “pressed.” Those laws and customs which would have been wiped out had the state been conquered were now invoked against the defender.[17]

Thomas Nelson was often remembered for his honesty and integrity.  He was among many of the most influential leaders who risked everything, but insisted that private debts to British merchants be paid.[18] Historian T. R. Fehrenbach makes the following comparison between Nelson and George Wythe—a lawyer and one of the Virginia Signers of the Declaration of Independence:

The honor, and ethical force, of the dominant Signers, was outstanding.  George Wythe, who would not take a dishonorable case, gave concepts of immense value to the Revolution—but Thomas Nelson, who was no scholar nor any sort of intellectual, gave equally invaluable service, just by being his honest self.[19]

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison remained vague about their knowledge of Nelson’s financial situation following the war, and what they said about Nelson helped create a distorted picture that Nelson’s primary contribution to the Revolution was political—not financial—despite the fact that he spent enormous sums of his own money to support it.  Jefferson recalled:

that he first “heard mention of his losses by responsibilities for the public” when he returned from France in 1789, “and knowing his zeal, liberality and patriotism, I readily credited what I had heard, altho’ I knew nothing of the particulars or of their extent.”[20]

Madison was not in Virginia when Nelson made financial sacrifices for the Revolution but could confirm that:

General Nelson . . . was excelled by no man in the generosity of his nature, in the nobleness of his sentiments, in the purity of his Revolutionary principles, and in the exalted patriotism that answered every service and sacrifice that his country might need.[21]

The Signers were a remarkably long-lived group.  Those not killed or injured in the war exceeded the normal life span.  Following the war, half of all Signers served as president, state governors, state legislators, U.S. senators or representatives.[22] Nelson was one of the few Signers, however, who died young (age fifty-one) and “left public life or fell into obscurity.[23]

The news of Nelson’s death on January 4, 1789 was met with great sadness at the loss of this statesman and soldier.  Nell Moore Lee presents Nelson’s newspaper-published obituary.  Portions are shown below:

The illustrious General THOMAS NELSON, is no more!  He paid the last great debt to nature, on Sunday the 4^th day of the present month, at his estate in Hanover.

He who undertakes barely to recite the exalted virtues, which adorned this good and great man will unavoidable pronounce a panegyric on human nature.  As a man, a citizen, a Legislator, and a Patriot—he exhibited a conduct unvarnished, and undebased . . . by selfish interests.

As a soldier, he was indefatigably active, and coolly intrepid.  Resolute and undejected in misfortune, he towered above the distress, —and struggled with the manifold difficulties, to which his situation exposed him with constancy and courage.

He did not avail himself of this opportunity to retire into the rear of danger—but on the contrary to the field, at the head of his countrymen—and at the hazard of his life, his fame and individual fortune—by his decision and magnanimity he served not only this Country, but all America, from disgrace—if not total ruin—. . . . If after contemplating the splendid and heroic parts of his character—we shall enquire for the milder virtues of humanity, and seek for the man—we shall find the refined, beneficent, and social qualities of private life more thorough in all its forms, and combinations so happily modified, and united in him—that in the words of the darling poet of nature it may be said:

His life was gentle, and the elements, so mixed in him, that nature might stand up, and say to all the world, this was a man.[24]

Nelson went to his grave beloved, but he had lost a fortune that he was never able to recoup.  Historian John Sanderson applauds Nelson’s immeasurable sacrifices, but points out that his country had let him down and would continue to do so for several generations:

He had spent a princely fortune in his country’s service; his horses had been taken from the plough, and sent to drag the munitions of war; his granaries had been thrown open to a starving soldiery, and his ample purse had been drained to its last dollar, when the credit of Virginia could not bring a sixpence into her treasury. Yet it was the widow of this man, who, beyond eighty years of age, blind, infirm, and poor, had yet to learn whether republics can be grateful.[25]

In my fourth and final blog in this series, I will discuss rekindled awareness and interest in the life of Thomas Nelson, Jr. and my hopes for his enduring legacy.

Photo courtesy of Ernest W. Robart

GEN. THOMAS NELSON JR.

PATRIOT SOLDIER CHRISTIAN-GENTLEMAN

BORN DEC. 18,[26] 1738             DIED JAN. 2, 1789

MOVER OF THE RESOLUTION OF MAY 16, 1776

IN THE VIRGINIA CONVENTION

INSTRUCTING HER DELEGATES IN CONGRESS

TO MOVE THAT BODY TO DECLARE THE COLONIES

FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

WAR GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA

COMMANDER OF VIRGINIA’S FORCES

HE GAVE ALL FOR LIBERTY

[2] Ibid.

[3] Claycomb, Mary. Page-Nelson Society Newsletter. Volume X, Number 2, Summer 2004. Warrenton, Virginia: The Page-Nelson Society, 2004.

[4] Evans, Emory G. Thomas Nelson of Yorktown: Revolutionary Virginian. Williamsburg: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 1975.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Lee, Nell Moore. Patriot Above Profit: A Portrait of Thomas Nelson, Jr., Who Supported the American Revolution With His Purse and Sword. Nashville: Rutledge Hill Press, 1988.

[11] Goodrich, Rev. Charles A. “Thomas Nelson Jr. 1738-1789.” Lives of the Signers to the Declaration of Independence. 12 November 2003 <http://www.colonialhall.com/nelson/nelson.asp>.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Evans, Emory G. Thomas Nelson of Yorktown: Revolutionary Virginian. Williamsburg: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 1975.

[14] Boatner, Mark M. III. Encyclopedia of the American Revolution. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 1994.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Fehrenbach, T. R. Greatness to Spare: The Heroic Sacrifices of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company, 1968.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Evans, Emory G. Thomas Nelson of Yorktown: Revolutionary Virginian. Williamsburg: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 1975.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Fehrenbach, T. R. Greatness to Spare: The Heroic Sacrifices of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company, 1968.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Lee, Nell Moore. Patriot Above Profit: A Portrait of Thomas Nelson, Jr., Who Supported the American Revolution With His Purse and Sword. Nashville: Rutledge Hill Press, 1988.

[25] Sanderson, John. Robert T. Conrad, ed. Biography of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence. Philadelphia: William Brotherhead, 1865.

[26] Date of birth shown on gravesite is incorrect. Correct date is December 26, 1738.