Military Archives - WallBuilders

Lexington & More: April 1775

A Midnight Ride to Lexington

The events of April 18-19, 1775 are some of the most famous in the story of how Americans won the liberty that we still enjoy today.

Those eventful days began on April 18, 1775 with a horseback ride by Paul Revere¹ and William Dawes.² They set out to warn militias across the Massachusetts countryside of approaching British troops,³ who were sent to Concord to confiscate the weapons there. These British troops were also dispatched to “bring back the bodies of Mess. Hancock and Adams.”⁴

Arriving in Lexington around midnight at the home of the Rev. Jonas Clark (where John Hancock and Samuel Adams were staying⁵), Revere passed on word of the British plans. Revere and Dawes then left Lexington, joined by Samuel Prescott,⁶ and continued their ride towards Concord. On their way, Revere and Dawes were captured by the British but Prescott escaped and alerted Concord.⁷

After the alert by Revere had been delivered in Lexington, the local militia (largely the men from Clark’s church) was mustered. On the morning of April 19, 1775, some 70 Americans would face about 800 British troops.⁸ Gunfire was exchanged — the American Revolution had begun!

As the smoke cleared, 18 Americans lay wounded or dead⁹ (all the casualties being from Pastor Clark’s church), including both black patriots (such as Prince Estabrook¹⁰) and white patriots (such as John Robbins¹¹). (One of the amazing items we have in the WallBuilders library is a sermon preached by Jonas Clark on the one-year anniversary of the Battle of Lexington.)

The much larger British force, having prevailed in that Lexington skirmish, continued their march towards Concord,¹² where they would be met by the Rev. William Emerson and 400 American patriots awaiting them.¹³ Also involved in that Concord group was black patriot Peter Salem,¹⁴ who a few weeks later went on to become the hero of the Battle of Bunker Hill.¹⁵

As we remember the events of this time from 1775 and the liberties they eventually produced, let’s also remember the responsibility those events place upon us. As John Adams reminded us:

Posterity! You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it.¹⁶

Endnotes

¹ Paul Revere, Deposition, c. 1775, Massachusetts Historical Society, detailing his ride and capture.
² “Paul Revere, Letter to Jeremy Belknap, c. 1798, Massachusetts Historical Society; see also “William Dawes: The Forgotten Midnight Rider,” February 17, 2014 History of Massachusetts Blog.
³ See “Lt. Col. Francis Smith to Governor Thomas Gage, April 22, 1775,” Gilder Lehrman for the British description of their mission, and Paul Revere’s handwritten deposition, c. 1775, Massachusetts Historical Society for the American description.
⁴ “Attempted Capture of John Hancock and Samuel Adams,” May 29, 2023, WallBuilders; see also Paul Revere’s letters to Jeremy Belknap, c. 1798, Massachusetts Historical Society.
⁵ J. T. Headley, The Chaplains and Clergy of the Revolution (NY: Charles Scribner, 1864), 78.
⁶ See Paul Revere’s handwritten deposition, c. 1775, Massachusetts Historical Society; see also Paul Revere’s letters to Jeremy Belknap, c. 1798, Massachusetts Historical Society.
⁷ George Bancroft, History of the United States, from the Discovery of the American Continent (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1864), VII:290; see Paul Revere’s handwritten deposition, c. 1775, Massachusetts Historical Society.
⁸ There is a wealth of sources relating to the numbers in the Lexington battle that often provide differing numbers, such as: “Lt. Col. Francis Smith to Governor Thomas Gage, April 22, 1775,” Gilder Lehrman (British officer who states they sent “six light infantry companies” to Lexington, or 200–300 troops); Deposition #20, Edward Thoroton Gould, American History Central (British soldier who states there were 60–70 American militia); Deposition #8, Nathanael Parkhurst et al., American Battlefield Trust (who provides more details about the militia assembly at Lexington). Benson J. Lossing, A History of the United States (NY: Mason Brothers, 1860), 232, says there were 800 British troops which aligned with information stated by Jonas Clark in his sermon.
⁹ A soldier present at Lexington stated: “they [the British] killed eight of our company & wounded several” (Deposition #8, Nathanael Parkhurst et al., American Battlefield Trust).
¹⁰ “Historical Documents: “A List of the Names of Provincials…” 1775,” PBS, accessed April 10, 2025.
¹¹ “Deposition of John Robbins,” April 24, 1775, DocsTeach.
¹² Bancroft, History (1864), VII:297; see “Lt. Col. Francis Smith to Governor Thomas Gage, April 22, 1775,” Gilder Lehrman for the British description of their march to and from Concord.
¹³ Deposition #17, James Barrett, April 23, 1775, American History Central (specifies 300–400 militia present at North Bridge in Concord); Bancroft, History (1864), VII:290, 299. “Lt. Col. Francis Smith to Governor Thomas Gage, April 22, 1775,” Gilder Lehrman provides a British perspective as he states: “On our leaving Concord to return to Boston they began to fire on us from behind the walls, ditches, trees etc., which as we marched increased to a very great degree and continued without the intermission of five minutes altogether for I believe upwards of eighteen miles, so that I can’t think but it must have been a preconcerted scheme in them to attack the King’s troops the first favourable opportunity that offered.”
¹⁴ “Historical Documents: “A List of the Names of Provincials…” 1775,” PBS, accessed April 10, 2025.
¹⁵ William C. Nell, The Colored Patriots of the American Revolution (Boston: Robert F. Wallcut, 1855), 21.
¹⁶ John Adams to Abigail Adams, April 26, 1777, Letters of John Adams Addressed to His Wife, ed. Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1841), 218.

The mushroom clouds from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs.

Hiroshima, Obama, and American Morals

On May 27, 2016, President Obama visited Hiroshima – the only American president to do so since the city was hit by an atomic bomb on August 6, 1945. That bomb hastened the end of World War II and helped halt further war deaths in the Pacific Theater beyond the 20 million lives already lost. ¹

Both supporters and opponents scrutinized the president’s speech to see whether he would issue any direct apology for America’s having dropped atomic bombs, thereby extinguishing between 200,000 and 250,000 Japanese lives. ² The president carefully stayed on script and delivered no overt apology, but even the mainstream media did not miss the fact that by simply appearing at Hiroshima he was issuing an indirect apology:

A majority of Japanese people view the atomic bombings as inhumane attacks — war crimes for which the United States has never been punished. . . . Hiroshima is a decidedly one-sided location; the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Japan. At this setting one country is victim, the other assailant. ³ Washington Post

No American president has visited Hiroshima or Nagasaki in the 71 years since the attacks because of concerns the trip would be perceived as an apology for the two bombings that helped bring an end to World War II. ⁴ ABC News

The president wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in late March, “As the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons, the United States has a moral obligation to continue to lead the way in eliminating them.” “Moral obligation”? . . . Why would America assume a “moral obligation” if not because the nation was guilty of some ill-advised, even immoral, action? ⁵ US News

A visit would inevitably be construed by many as a de facto U.S. apology. . . It would be seen as vindication for Japanese claims of victimization, encouraging those in Japan who still deny responsibility for a war of aggression. . . . The goal of a presidential visit to the nuclear bombing sites is to finally come to terms with the morally difficult decisions made in World War II.⁶ The Diplomat

A Moral Revolution?

The media recognized that the issue of morals was inseparable from any official visit to Hiroshima, and as expected, the president did address that issue in his speech. According to President Obama:

The scientific revolution that led to the splitting of an atom requires a moral revolution as well. That is why we come to this place [Hiroshima]. We stand here, in the middle of this city, and force ourselves to imagine the moment the bomb fell. We force ourselves to feel the dread of children confused by what they see. We listen to a silent cry. We remember all the innocents killed across the arc of that terrible war, and the wars that came before, and the wars that would follow. Mere words cannot give voice to such suffering, but we have a shared responsibility to look directly into the eye of history and ask what we must do differently to curb such suffering again. Someday the voices of the hibakusha [survivors of the bombings] will no longer be with us to bear witness. But the memory of the morning of August 6th, 1945 must never fade. That memory allows us to fight complacency. It fuels our moral imagination. It allows us to change. . . . We can tell our children a different story – one that describes a common humanity; one that makes war less likely and cruelty less easily accepted. We see these stories in the hibakusha [survivors of the bombings] – the woman who forgave a pilot who flew the plane that dropped the atomic bomb, because she recognized that what she really hated was war itself. ⁷

Notice the interesting moral perspective communicated by the president. He asks that we imagine the suffering in Hiroshima – the dread of the children; the voice from the victims of the bombings; the silent cry. He also praises the forgiveness of the Japanese woman who forgave the American pilot who dropped the bomb. All of these statements point us toward the Japanese viewpoint. Human and losses are always tragic, but viewing them with a factually-accurate perspective is crucial.

Take for example, the woman who forgave the Americans. Did she also forgive her Emperor for the treacherous and unprovoked surprise attack on Pearl Harbor that killed 2,403 Americans and wounded 1,178, ⁸ thus bringing America into the war? Did she forgive Japan for declaring war on America when we were working diligently to stay out of the war and be uninvolved? Did she forgive the Japanese military leaders for keeping the war against America going long after the rest of the world had surrendered? America would not have dropped atomic boms without these three Japanese-initiated events. So why are the Americans the transgressors who need to be forgiven?

And empathizing with children is important. But shouldn’t we likewise imagine the cries of the American children whose fathers were mercilessly slaughtered by the Japanese in the Bataan Death March, or killed in the many other Japanese atrocities that in both brutality and scope parallel the war crimes perpetrated by the Nazis in Europe? Throughout the War Japan engaged in active genocides, including against its Asian neighbors in Korea, Manchuria, the Philippines, and China. (It is estimated that in China alone some ten million innocents were exterminated by the Japanese. ⁹) Japan’s military philosophy was barbaric with no respect for human life.

For example, Japanese officers reportedly held a competition to see which officer could kill 100 people with his sword first, with a runoff to determine a winner. ¹⁰ They callously burned alive American prisoners after capture. ¹¹ Others had their heads smashed in with sledgehammers. ¹² There are always brutalities and atrocities in war. But as historian Mark Felton termed it, with the Japanese “murder [was] the rule rather than the exception.” ¹³ There is a reason that after the war, war-crime trials were held in Japan and not just Germany.

President Obama’s acknowledgment that Hiroshima calls for a moral revolution is a common view among Progressives, who repeatedly blame America for much of the evil in the world. Even the 2014 study guide for the Advanced Placement Test for high school U. S. History (written by the College Board, headed by Progressive educator David Coleman) told students that “the decision to drop the atomic bomb raised questions about American values.” ¹⁴ Following public outrage, the College Board modified that statement to read: “The use of atomic bombs hastened the end of the war and sparked debates about the morality of using atomic weapons.” ¹⁵ The change was an improvement, but it still preserved the view that the use of an atomic weapon was symbolic of America’s lack of morality. Other sources echo that belief:

Truman’s decision was a barbaric act that brought negative long-term consequences to the United States. ¹⁶

The . . . use of such a weapon was simply inhumane. Hundreds of thousands of civilians with no democratic rights to oppose their militarist government, including women and children, were vaporized, turned into charred blobs of carbon, horrifically burned, buried in rubble, speared by flying debris, and saturated with radiation. ¹⁷

The American government was accused [by modern Progressive writers] of racism on the grounds that such a device would never have been used against white civilians. ¹⁸

There are many similar claims. But what is missing is the compelling evidence that given what was occurring in Japan at that time, employing the atomic bomb was actually the more moral thing to do. Two categories of proof fully demonstrate this: (1) The reason the atomic bomb was used, and (2) The manner in which it was used. Consider the definitive evidence for each category.

The Reason the Atomic Bomb was dropped on Japan

Interestingly, there are many legitimate parallels between the Japanese military of World War II and ISIS more recently. In addition to the Japanese practices of open beheadings, mass executions, and other grotesque forms of torture intended to generate fear and terror among those they were seeking to subdue and control, they also specialized in suicide bombers. In fact, they leveled more than 2,000 suicide bombing attacks against Americans during the war, resulting in substantial losses of American lives. ¹⁹ Also, the Japanese military forcibly took Korean women and used them as sex slaves for their soldiers ²⁰ in a manner similar to what ISIS terrorists do with non-Muslim women.

In World War II, America and the Allied Forces fought simultaneously on both the European and Pacific fronts. But late in the War they focused the bulk of their efforts on the European Theater until Germany and Italy finally capitulated. At that time, Japan, the remaining major Axis power, was losing battle after battle to Allied Forces in the Pacific but still refused to surrender along with their comrade nations.

With the war in Europe ended, Japan and the Pacific became the unitary focus of Allied military action. As American and Allied forces worked closer to Japan in victory after victory, they extended multiple informal opportunities to surrender to Japan before the official surrender declaration from the Potsdam Conference. But Japan rejected all offers. ²¹ The Allies therefore planned an assault on Japan similar to that which had ended the war in Europe.

They would conduct a D-Day style invasion followed by Allied troops incrementally fighting their way across the island until they finally took complete control, forcing the surrender that all sides knew was inevitable. Significantly, Japanese leaders fully understood that they could no longer win. But they wanted to extract as high a price as possible with their loss. Japanese leaders were defiant, determined to fight to the end regardless of the cost in human lives. As one foreign policy expert explained:

As U.S. forces in the Pacific advanced toward Japan, its people were committing suicide in hordes rather than face capture. Anticipating a land invasion, Japan’s leaders were preparing their people for a fight to the finish, conscripting boys as young as 15 and teaching them how to kill incoming U.S. troops and conduct kamikaze operations. ²²

(Notice yet another similarity between the Japanese military and ISIS: training youth for suicide bombing missions.)

The Allies drew up plans for “Operation Downfall” – the code name assigned to the planned invasion of Japan. As part of the preparations, they prepared estimated casualties, calculating the probable loss of lives, both Japanese and Allied.

General Curtis Lemay, commander of the B-29 force that would be central to any invasion of Japan, was informed that the operation would result in at least 500,000 American deaths. ²³ A study done for President Truman’s Secretary of War Henry Stimson estimated American casualties at 1.7 to 4 million (including up to 800,000 deaths), and from 5 to 10 million Japanese fatalities, depending on their level of determined resistance. ²⁴ The projections included several million more casualties for other Allied Forces, which included nations such as Great Britain, China, Canada, and Australia. Evaluations thus placed the body count at around 7 million on the low side, to 14 million on the upper end.

President Truman understood the scope of the new atomic weapon at his disposal. But the other nations had no such conception for such a bomb had never been used before. Truman therefore went to extraordinary lengths to warn the Japanese of what was to come if they did not surrender (amazing details on this will be presented shortly). He finally had a choice to make. He could continue fighting with traditional weapons until the Japanese finally surrendered, which was estimated to be another half year, costing millions of lives in the process. ²⁵ Or he could use an atomic bomb, which might result in 100,000 deaths per bomb. These deaths would be tragic but the numbers paled in comparison to the potential loss of millions of lives. The psychological shock of the use of such a weapon should rapidly push the enemy toward an immediate surrender. Given the situation, there was no moral dilemma. Truman chose to save millions of Japanese and Allied lives by using the atomic bomb.

The Manner in which the Atomic Bomb was Used on Japan

Prior to the decision to use atomic bombs, Allied Forces conducted incendiary bombings against Japanese military production areas. The Tokyo bombings of March 9-10, 1945, alone killed 100,000. ²⁶ (Note that this death toll from traditional warfare was higher than that caused by the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, or the one on Nagasaki.) Despite the high mortality numbers from traditional warfare, the Japanese not only refused to surrender but actually became more recalcitrant, preparing their people for continued fighting.

Months earlier, on June 15, 1944, the US military launched a bloody but successful weeks-long campaign to recapture the strategic island of Saipan. Located less than 1,500 miles from Tokyo, it provided a base from which Allied bombers could reach Japan and a key location from which to launch an invasion. A 50,000-watt radio station (KSAI) was also constructed there, so Allied bombers could track its radio broadcast waves as a beacon safely back to the tiny island in the middle of the Pacific.

Saipan also became the center of Allied communication. Utilizing the radio station, the US Office of War Information began broadcasting important information and messages directly to the Japanese people, bypassing their fanatical leaders. They also constructed a print shop. Prior to Allied bombings, B-29s dropped 63 million leaflets across Japan, warning citizens about the specific cities that had been targeted for bombing, and urging civilians to flee and avoid those areas. ²⁷ However, Japanese military officials ordered the arrest of any citizen who read the leaflets, or did not turn them into local authorities.

On the other side of the world Allied leaders gathered in Potsdam, Germany, on July 26, 1945, to establish terms of surrender for Japan. The resulting Potsdam Proclamation called for “disarmament and abolition of the Japanese military; elimination of military influence in political forums; Allied occupation of Japan; liberation of Pacific territories gained by Japan since 1914; swift justice for war criminals; maintenance of non-military industries; establishment of freedom of speech, religion, and thought; and introduction of respect for fundamental human rights.” ²⁸ If the Japanese rejected these terms, the result would be “prompt and utter destruction.” ²⁹

The Allies knew that Japanese leaders would say nothing to their people about this offer, so the radio station on Saipan began broadcasting the Proclamation directly into Japan even before it reached Japanese leaders through official channels. And B-29s also dropped 3 million leaflets (see some of these leaflets from the WallBuilders library here) telling the people about the Proclamation. But on July 27, Japan officially rejected the proposal, thus continuing the war. ³⁰

The next day, July 28, bombers dropped one million leaflets over the 35 Japanese cities (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki) targeted for bombing in coming days, urging citizens to evacuate those cities. That leaflet (with its picture of five B-29s releasing their cargo of bombs) specifically warned:

Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend.

In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes.

So, in accordance with America’s humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people.

The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately. ³¹

Understandably, the crews scheduled to bomb those areas were concerned for their own safety, for the leaflets not only told the Japanese military exactly what was about to occur but also where. Nevertheless, humanitarian concerns for Japanese civilians remained foremost in American thinking, even jeopardizing the lives of Allied pilots and crews.

America specifically avoided bombing the Emperor’s palace or the historic temple area of Kyoto. But after days of bombings, “Japan’s Air Defense General Headquarters reported that out of 206 cities, 44 had been almost completely wiped out, while 37 others, including Tokyo, had lost over 30 percent of their built-up areas.” ³² But despite the increasingly extensive devastation, Japan still refused to surrender.

Bombings alone had proved insufficient to end the war. The only remaining traditional warfare option was a full-scale land invasion of Japan, which could produce the millions of casualties predicted in the various official reports. Facing this prospect, President Truman therefore approved the B-29 Enola Gay dropping the atomic bomb “Little Boy” over Hiroshima. The devastation that occurred is a matter of historical record.

Japan still refused to surrender. President Truman publicly and explicitly warned Japan that unless they ended the war quickly, more such bombs would be forthcoming:

We are now prepared to obliterate more rapidly and completely every productive enterprise the Japanese have above ground in any city. We shall destroy their docks, their factories, and their communications. Let there be no mistake; we shall completely destroy Japan’s power to make war. ³³

B-29s then dropped five million leaflets across Japan, warning citizens:

TO THE JAPANESE PEOPLE:

America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet.

We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by men. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29’s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate.

We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city.

Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our President has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better, and peace-loving Japan.

You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.

EVACUATE YOUR CITIES ³⁴

The radio station on Saipan also began broadcasting warnings every fifteen minutes directly to the Japanese people. America had undertaken every means possible to prevent dropping the first bomb, and did so again with the second one. Yet even days after the bomb on Hiroshima, the Japanese leadership remained unmoved. So on August 9, 1945, America dropped a second atomic bomb, “Fat Man,” over Nagasaki.

By 2AM the following morning (August 10), following extensive debates by Japanese authorities, Emperor Hirohito ordered acceptance of the surrender terms of the Potsdam Declaration. At 7AM the Japanese Cabinet transmitted word to the Allies that they accepted most of the terms, but insisted that the Emperor remain the sovereign ruler of the empire. Allied leaders tentatively agreed to this change so long as “from the moment of surrender, the authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the state shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied powers.” ³⁵ They awaited Japan’s official acceptance of this provision.

While awaiting the Japanese response, the Allies temporarily halted further bombing of Japan. The decision to end the war was now back in the hands of Japan’s leaders, but the people still knew nothing of Japan’s official offer of surrender. So the radio station on Saipan began announcing the news to the people, and the printing presses went into high-speed production. On August 12, B-29s dropped five million leaflets telling the Japanese:

These American planes are not dropping bombs on you today. American planes are dropping these leaflets instead because the Japanese Government has offered to surrender, and every Japanese has a right to know the terms of that offer and the reply made to it by the United States Government on behalf of itself, the British, the Chinese, and the Russians. Your government now has a chance to end the war immediately. You will see how the war can be ended by reading the two following official statements. ³⁶

(The two statements included in the leaflet were the text of the Japanese offer to surrender, and the Allied response.)

On August 14, 1945, Japanese leaders accepted the terms and officially surrendered.

Conclusion

Neither bomb came as a surprise to the Japanese. They had been forewarned what would happen, and they chose a path of preventable destruction. Both bombs were dropped as a result of choices made by the Japanese leadership. Therefore, any “moral dilemma” that exists should center on Japanese decisions, not American ones.

By the way, Japan still has never officially apologized to America for the attack on Pearl Harbor. And Japan has other World War II skeletons in its closet that are just now being openly addressed. As one news service reported:

Japan and South Korea have only recently reached a compromise agreement to finally offer compensation and apology to the so-called “comfort women” compelled into sexual service in Japan’s wartime brothels. It remains a fragile agreement, not yet implemented, and many other wartime issues — such as the compensation for hundreds of thousands of Asians and Allied POWs dragooned into forced labor — remain unresolved. ³⁷

Also indicative of positive American morals, after the war was over America rebuilt Japan – something it had no obligation to do. American General Douglas MacArthur guided Japan through transformational reforms in military, political, economic, and social areas. ³⁸ An international military tribunal swiftly punished Japanese war crimes and war criminals and abolished official military Shintoism. America poured emergency food relief and economic aid into the nation, also extending $2.2 billion to Japan ³⁹ (about $15.2 billion today). Under American leadership, the people were raised, women elevated, the economy rebuilt, and the country democratized. The transformation under American leadership was so thorough that by 1952, Japan was openly accepted back into the world community of nations.

From the American side, what happened at Hiroshima demonstrates no need for any “moral revolution,” as President Obama called it. Contrary to the claims of critics, the use of the bomb did not show a lack of morality on the part of America. On the contrary. The true immorality would have been for America to allow the war to drag on for another year, costing millions of lives, when it could have been stopped quickly, ending further deaths. No civilized person should ever want to take innocent life but rather should always seek to preserve it. The use of the atomic bomb did exactly that, saving the lives of millions, both Japanese and Allied.

Originally written Summer, 2016. Updated October, 2024.

Endnotes

¹ There was a total of 60 million casualties during WWII (45 million civilian and 15 million military deaths). See “By the Numbers: World-Wide Deaths,” National WWII Museum, accessed June 24, 2016. Chinese civilian deaths alone numbered in the millions. See Micheal Clodfelter, Warfare and Armed Conflicts Fourth Edition (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company Inc., 2017), 367.

² See, for example, “Hiroshima and Nagasaki Death Toll,” UCLA, accessed June 24, 2016; “The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Chapter 10 – Total Casualties,” The Avalon Project, accessed June 24, 2016.

³ Jennifer Lind, “As Obama goes to Hiroshima, here are 3 principles for a successful visit (with no apologies),” Washington Post, May 26, 2016.

⁴ Margaret Chadbourn, “A Look at Whether Obama Should Visit Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” ABC News, May 9, 2016.

⁵ Lawrence J. Haas, “Don’t Apologize for Hiroshima: The president mustn’t express guilt over U.S. use of nuclear weapons during World War II,” US News, April 19, 2016.

⁶ Gi-Wook Shin and Daniel Sneider, “Should President Obama Visit Hiroshima?” The Diplomat, April 16, 2016.

⁷ “Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Abe of Japan at Hiroshima Peace Memorial,” The White House, May 27, 2016.

⁸ “Pearl Harbor by the Numbers,” Pearl Harbor, May 27, 2017.

⁹ Professor R.J. Rummel estimates that there were over 10 million Chinese civilian casualties during the Sino-Japanese war. – R.J. Rummel, China’s Bloody Century (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991), 103.

¹⁰ “The Contest to Cut Down 100 People,” google.com, English translations of 4 Japanese articles from 1937; see also Bob Wakabayashi, “The Nanking 100-Man Killing Contest Debate: War Guilt amid Fabricated Illusions, 1971-75,” Journal of Japanese Studies, Vol. 26, 307-340.

¹¹ “The Palawan Massacre: The Story from One of its Few Survivors,” Warfare History Network, from an article in the WWII Quarterly, Spring 2019, Vol. 10, No. 3.

¹² Michael Sturma, Surface and Destroy, The Submarine Gun War in the Pacific (University Press of Kentucky, 2011).

¹³ Mark Felton, The Slaughter at Sea, The Story of Japan’s Naval War Crimes (South Yorkshire, UK: Pen & Sword Books Ltd., 2007).

¹⁴ The College Board, AP United States History Course and Exam Description (September 2014), 71.

¹⁵ The College Board, AP Course and Exam Description: AP United States History (Fall 2015), 75.

¹⁶ “The Decision to Drop the Bomb,” U.S. History (accessed on June 20, 2016).

¹⁷ “Reasons Against Dropping the Atomic Bomb” History on the Net, accessed September 25, 2024.

¹⁸ “The Decision to Drop the Bomb,” U.S. History, accessed June 20, 2016.

¹⁹ Saul David, “The Divine Wind: Japan’s Kamikaze Pilots of World War II,” The National WWII Museum, May 19, 2020.

²⁰ Comfort Women Speak: Testimony by Sex Slaves of the Japanese Military, Includes new United Nations Human Rights report, ed. Sangmie Choi Schellstede (New York: Holmes & Meier, 2000).

²¹ Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori, The Cause of Japan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956), 313.

²² Lawrence J. Haas, “Don’t Apologize for Hiroshima: The president mustn’t express guilt over U.S. use of nuclear weapons during World War II,” US News, April 19, 2016.

²³ Thomas M. Coffey, Iron Eagle: The Turbulent Life of General Curtis LeMay, (New York: Crown Publishers, 1986), 147.

²⁴ Richard B. Frank, Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire (New York: Random House, 1999), 340; see also, Samuel J. Cox, “H-057-1: Operations Downfall and Ketsugo – November 1945,” Naval History and Heritage Command, January, 2021.

²⁵ Reports of General MacArthur: The Campaigns of MacArthur in the Pacific, Vol. 1 (1994 Reprint), “‘Downfall’ The Plan for the Invasion of Japan.”

²⁶ “Hellfire on Earth: Operation MEETINGHOUSE,” The National WWII Museum, March 8, 2020.

²⁷ Richard S. R. Hubert, “The OWI Saipan Operation,” Official Report to US Information Service, Washington, 1946, Richard S. R. Hubert Papers, Hoover Institution Library & Archives, charts pp. 88-89 .

²⁸ Josette H. Williams, “The Information War in the Pacific, 1945,” Studies in Intelligence (2002), Vol 46, No 3, referencing “Proclamation by the Head of Governments, United States, China, and the United Kingdom,” Potsdam, Germany, July 26, 1945.

²⁹ “Proclamation by the Head of Governments, United States, China, and the United Kingdom,” Potsdam, Germany, July 26, 1945.

³⁰ Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori, The Cause of Japan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956), 313.

³¹ Richard S. R. Hubert, “The OWI Saipan Operation,” Official Report to US Information Service, Washington, 1946, Richard S. R. Hubert Papers, Hoover Institution Library & Archives, charts pp. 88-89, cited in Josette H. Williams, “The Information War in the Pacific, 1945,” Studies in Intelligence (2002), Vol 46, No 3. For an image of this leaflet and its translation, see “WWII Japanese Leaflets,” WallBuilders, May 29, 2023.

³² OWI [Office of War Information] Daily Digest, series 7, no. 46, 23 August 1945 cited in Josette H. Williams, “The Information War in the Pacific, 1945,” Studies in Intelligence (2002), Vol 46, No 3.

³³ Harry S. Truman, “Statement by the President Announcing the Use of the A-Bomb at Hiroshima,” August 6, 1945, The American Presidency Project, accessed October 3, 2024.

³⁴ Lilly Rothman, “See a Leaflet Dropped on Japanese Cities Right Before World War II Ended,” Time, December 14, 2015.

³⁵ Richard B. Frank, Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire (New York: Random House, 1999), 302.

³⁶ Josette H. Williams, “The Information War in the Pacific, 1945,” Studies in Intelligence (2002), Vol 46, No 3.

³⁷ Gi-Wook Shin and Daniel Sneider, “Should President Obama Visit Hiroshima?” The Diplomat, April 16, 2016.

³⁸ “Occupation and Reconstruction of Japan, 1945-52,” Department of State, accessed June 24, 2016.

³⁹ Nina Serafino, et. al, U.S. Occupation Assistance: Iraq, Germany and Japan Compared (Congressional Research Services, 2006), 14, “Table 2. Japan: U.S. Assistance FY1946-1952.”

Civil War Artillery Goggles

c. 1860s Civil War Era, Artillery Soldier’s Screen-Side Glasses with Case, Choice Very Fine.

These goggles are made of colored lenses situated within wire mesh frames designed to protect the wearer’s eyes from any debris, fragments, or other foreign objects from flying into their eyes. Contained in a small metal case, this eyewear could prove to be invaluable on the battlefield or even in various types of civilian employment after the war itself.

Very scarce fully intact Civil War era Artillery Soldier’s screen-side glasses, about 5″ total width with 8″ cord straps. Complete with original Japanned tin case, 3.25″ x 1.5″. These were worn to protect the eyes from debris while firing a cannon. Blue glass lenses still intact and great condition. Rare and hard to find, especially in this condition. A useful, collectible Civil War display piece.

Pictures:

Related Artifacts:

Ketchum Grenade Civil War Hand Grenade Click Here

Amputation Saw Civil War Medical Implement Click Here

John Clem Collection12 Year Old Civil War Hero Click Here

Videos:

Dutch Van Kirk Signed Photograph

Theodore “Dutch” Van Kirk (1924-2014) was the navigator on the Enola Gay when it dropped the atomic bomb “Little Boy” on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II on August 6, 1945. As navigator, Van Kirk was responsible for guiding the plane to its target destination and confirming where exactly to drop the bomb. As the last surviving member of the crew, Dutch Van Kirk often spoke about the reasons behind employing the atomic bomb and how it led to the end of World War II. In the WallBuilders collection we have a picture of the destruction at Hiroshima inscribed by Dutch Van Kirk with the following statement:

Most people do not recall why we dropped the atomic bombs. It was forgotten after 64 years only remembering the large casualties they caused. We dropped the bombs to end the war and stop the killing by destroying military and military support facilities defending against an invasion. Earlier we dropped millions of leaflets which were largely ignored.

The leaflets Van Kirk refers to warned the Japanese citizens of the impending bombs and advised them to evacuate the cities targeted beforehand. (You can see some and read their translations at WallBuilders.)

Below is an picture of Van Kirk’s message:

What Does the Flag Mean?

U.S.C.T. and the Symbolism of the Flag in the Civil War

The flag of the United States of America is the perennial symbol of the nation, but its meaning is constantly under debate. Recently, several major media incidents have questioned the true value of the Stars and Stripes—specifically whether the flag symbolizes racism or freedom.[1] Certain high-profile activists and revisionists claim that since the American flag flew over the nation while slavery remained active, it still condones racism today.

Such a perspective, interestingly, is not entirely unheard of in our nation’s past. Several years before the Civil War, great abolitionist leader Frederick Douglass (himself an escaped slave) summarized the sentiments of black Americans towards the federal banner at that time, saying:

“While slavery exists, and the union of these states endures, every American citizen must bear the chagrin of hearing his country branded before the world as a nation of liars and hypocrites; and behold his cherished national flag pointed at with the utmost scorn and derision.”[2]

As long as slavery was permitted and protected by the Union flag Douglass carried an attitude similar to those of recent critics. However, Douglass’s statement is conditional upon the existence of slavery, thereby suggesting that abolition would elevate the symbolic nature of the flag and improve its reception by black Americans.

History reveals that Douglass was correct. Throughout the Civil War the men of the United States Colored Troops and those closely associated with the fight for freedom began to see the national flag in a different and positive light. Their patriotism and sacrifice redeemed the meaning of the flag, changing its reception in the black community from a symbol of slavery to one of liberty.

The journey of the flag and the black community during the Civil War largely began once black units were formed after the military opened its ranks to all people. Following custom, the Colored Troops, like many white units, received both a regimental and national flag, often from their local town, before going off to war.

For example, when the 20^th US Colored Regiment was sent out of their native New York, Charles King, the son of Founding Father Rufus King, bestowed, “the flag of the Union and of Liberty to the first regiment of colored troops that has marched from this city to defend both.”[3] One paper considered the scene so important that an engraving was made, saying that, “no scene of the war has been more striking or significant.…[as] the flag of the country waved over them in benediction.”[4]

In his speech, Charles King imbued the national flag with a special meaning before passing it into the protection of its freshly “sworn defenders and guardians.”[5] King relates the flag’s significance to that of their shared faith, explaining that:

“The religion to the flag is second only to the religion of the altar.…Hence he who is false to his flag is false to his altar and his God.”[6]

To imply a spiritual significance to the defense of the flag most certainly would have affected the listeners. He went on to explain that by joining the military and risking their lives for those still bound by slavery, they not only elevate the flag but themselves also. Declaring that:

“When you put on the uniform and swear allegiance to the standard of the Union, you stand emancipated, regenerated, and disenthralled—the peer of the proudest soldier in the land.”[7]

The speech received a warm reception by both the citizens in attendance and the soldiers of the 20^th Colored Regiment. The officer in charge received the flag saying:

“This beautiful banner symbolizes our country. It is this that makes death glorious beneath its starry folds—it is this that rouses the feelings of outraged honor when we see it trailed in the dust. How base and how dead to all sense of honor, must that wretch be whose brow burns not with shame and rage at the dishonor of the flag of his country.”[8]

Furthermore, in the lunch and procession following the presentation the soldiers of the 20^th praised the speeches of Charles King and Col. Bartram, reflecting on how, “that flag is a big thing, boys.”[9] The men were beginning to see the Union flag not as the banner which had allowed slavery and oppression, but rather as the standard by which they could personally advance freedom’s cause.

The 20^th were far from the only black soldiers to recognize the symbolic significance of receiving the national flag. For example, the 29^th Regiment out of Connecticut enjoyed a bestowal ceremony, where, “to the surprise of the regiment we were presented with the United States national colors, which greatly pleased the boys.”[10] The 1^st African Descent Regiment from Iowa were also presented with “a beautiful silk national flag” by the women of their state, “which was carried through the storms of battle, and returned at the close of the war to the State.”[11]

Most notably, however, the 1^st South Carolina Volunteer Regiment (later the 33^rd Colored) revealed their elevated affection to the national flag on many occasions. One evening a month before the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, several men from the 1^st began to give speeches to encourage the troops. Their commanding officer, Col. Thomas Higginson (a pastor and abolitionist) recorded the speech of Corporal Prince Lambkin, who was, “one of our color-guard, and one of our ablest men.”[12] Lambkin told his fellow slaves-turned-soldiers:

“Our masters they have lived under the flag, they got their wealth under it, and everything beautiful for their children. Under it they have ground us up, and put us in their pocket for money. But the first minute they think that ol’ flag meant freedom for we colored people, they pulled it right down, and run up a rag of their own. [Immense applause.] But we’ll never desert they ol’ flag, boys, never; we have lived under it for eighteen hundred sixty-two years [sic], and we’ll die for it now.”[13]

The speech was remembered by the Colonel as, “one of the few really impressive appeals for the American flag that I ever heard.” Less than a month after Lambkin’s speech, the 1^st South Carolina were presented the national flag on the day, “Lincoln’s immortal proclamation of freedom was given to the world.”[14] Col. Higginson explained that after receiving the large silk flag:

“Then followed an incident so simple, so touching, so utterly unexpected and startling, that I can scarcely believe it on recalling, though it gave the keynote to the whole day. The very moment the speaker had ceased, and just as I took and waved the flag, which now for the first time meant anything to these poor people, there suddenly arose, close beside the platform, a strong male voice (but rather cracked and elderly), into which two women’s voices instantly blended, singing, as if by an impulse that could no more be repressed than the morning note of the song-sparrow: “My Country, ‘tis of thee, Sweet land of liberty, Of thee I sing!”

People looked at each other, and then at us on the platform to see whence came this interruption, not set down in the bills. Firmly and irrepressibly the quavering voices sang on, verse after verse; others of the colored people joined in; some whites on the platform began, but I motioned them to silence. I never saw anything so electric; it made all other words cheap; it seemed the choked voice of a race at last unloosed. Nothing could be more wonderfully unconscious; art could not have dreamed of a tribute to the day of jubilee that should be so affecting; history will not believe it; and when I came to speak of it, after it was ended, tears were everywhere. If you could have heard how quaint and innocent it was!

Just think of it! The first day they had ever had a country, the first flag they had ever seen which promised anything to their people, and here, while mere spectators stood in silence, waiting for my stupid words, these simple souls burst out in their lay, as if they were by their own hearths at home! When they stopped there was nothing to do for it but to speak, and I went on; but the life of the whole day was in those unknown people’s song.”[15]

The men of the 1^st South Carolina bravely bore those flags throughout the war and, after victory, recalled with pride that, “it has never been disgraced by a cowardly faltering in the hour of danger, or polluted by a traitor’s touch.”[16] The success of the black divisions was measured, both by themselves and others, by their steadfast protection of the national flag through unflinching heroism and endless courage.

Nothing displays this more clearly than the numerous moments of bravery by black soldiers protecting the flag. No less than seven African Americans received the Medal of Honor for valiantly defending the national flag in battle.[17] The most famous example remains that of Sgt. William Carney who, though wounded twice, led the Massachusetts 54^th through the Battle of Fort Wagner despite the overwhelmingly desperate situation.[18]

Additionally, several men at the Battle of Chaffin’s Farm received the Medal of Honor for not allowing the colors to touch the ground. Sgt. Alfred B. Hilton took up both the flag and the regimental standard once the original color bearers were shot. Thereafter, when Hilton himself was severely wounded, Sgt. Christian Fleetwood caught the national flag before it fell to the ground, and carried it through the rest of the fight—with General Butler himself allegedly witnessing their bravery.[19]

Such noble actions, however, were far from rare in the black units. At the Battle of the Crater the 43^rd Colored Regiment gave ample proof of this for, “as each brave color bearer was shot down, another and another would immediately grasp the National emblem, all riddled with balls and plant it further on the enem[y’s] line,” until the flag was, “almost entirely cut up by the fire, and the Color Staffs splintered and broken.”[20] The list of heroic deeds in defense of the flag extends well beyond the few stories mentioned above, a fact which led USCT veteran and Civil War historian George Washington Williams to rejoice that, “the one flag of a great nation will float as the sovereign symbol of a free and united people.”[21]

The officers of these units particularly were struck by the devotion black troops showed to the flag under which so much oppression had been so recently practiced. For example, Lieutenant Joseph G. Golding of the 6^th Colored Infantry recalled that his men bravely fought and nobly sacrificed, “to the utmost, even to the laying down of their lives for us, for the flag, [and] for the perpetuation of the grandest nationality the sun shines upon.”[22] That unit specifically suffered a 57% casualty rate throughout the War. Similarly, when the 33^rd USCT mustered out at the end of the war, their commanding officer, Lt. Col. Trowbridge, explained in his final order that as a result of their efforts:

“Millions of bondsmen have been emancipated, and the fundamental law of the land has been so altered as to remove forever the possibility of human slavery being established within the borders of redeemed America. The flag our fathers, restored to its rightful significance.”[23]

Trowbridge explicitly applauds the USCT for helping to redeem the national symbol, elevating it finally to the standard which the Founding Fathers had envisioned.

A natural result following the tireless devotion of the soldiers to the flag was that the nation as a whole also began to judge the flag by the way the government pursued liberating the slave population and the treatment of the African American soldiers. A major issue surrounded the revelation that Confederates would mistreat, brutalize, and kill the black troops if they were captured through the course of the war. One officer remarked that, “they fought with ropes round their necks,” because for them it was either victory or death.[24]

In response to the tragedy of Fort Pillow and the growing evidence that black prisoners were systematically treated horribly, an article in Harper’s Weekly demanded retaliation on the honor of the national flag. The author concluded that:

“After due delay, if the Government should find that the natural suspicion of foul play is correct, then if its retaliation is not swift, sure, and deadly, if the rebels are not taught, as by fire, that every man who fights beneath the national flag is equally protected by the people whose sovereignty that flag symbolizes, we are simply unworthy of success.”[25]

Through the course of the Civil War the status of the flag and the meaning it carried directly corresponded to the issue of abolition and equal rights.

After the war, the black men who fought under the American flag and were freed by that banner reflected this redeemed symbolism through both word and deed. Significantly in the years immediately following, many of the newly elected black congressmen pointed to the brave service of the USCT and their valiant defense of the national flag as evidence of their patriotism and rights.

One of the first to do so was Representative Richard Harvey Cain. A prominent pastor as well as one of the first African Americans elected to national office, Cain explained in a speech supporting increased civil rights that he had hoped to fight in the War due to his desire to, “vindicate the Stars and Stripes.”[26]

For the redemption of the flag, Cain, and thousands like him, sought to serve under that standard in order to effect such a change. Speaking on behalf of the black community which elected him, Cain explained:

“We propose to identify ourselves with this nation….We will take the eagle as the emblem of liberty; we will take that honored flag which has been borne through the heat of a thousand battles.[27]

Now, after the Civil War, the national flag finally stands as a suitable symbol for his constituents. Cain suggests that the Star-Spangled Banner rightfully encompasses both black and white, concluding that:

“Under its folds Anglo-Saxon and Africo-American can together work out a common destiny, until universal liberty…shall be known throughout the world.”[28]

In the following session of Congress, another black Representative—John Roy Lynch—confirmed Cain’s sentiments through his defense of the Civil Rights Act of 1875. Born into slavery and freed only through the Emancipation Proclamation, Lynch’s perspective on the flag carries significant weight as he was once enslaved under its authority, then freed by it. In an eloquent expression Lynch proclaimed:

“I love the land that gave me birth; I love the Stars and Stripes. This country is where I intend to live, where I expect to die. To preserve the honor of the national flag and to maintain perpetually the Union of the States hundreds, and I may say thousands, of brave, and true-hearted colored men have fought, bled, and died. And now, Mr. Speaker, I ask, can it be possible that that flag under which they fought is to be a shield and a protection to all races and classes of persons except the colored race? God forbid!”[29]

Such a sentiment poignantly reflects the increasing veneration and regard for the national flag due to the results of the Civil War. Lynch had been born into slavery under the national standard, then liberated by those fighting for it, and now is himself defending the newfound meaning of the flag through the very institution of Congress which once had so powerfully operated against him.

Similarly, the continued importance of the aforementioned Medal of Honor recipient Sgt. Christian Fleetwood in the national black society gives valuable insight into how drastically the communal reception of the flag had changed on account of the war. Fleetwood’s bravery brought him public recognition to such a degree that he was, “known from one end of the Country to the other.”[30]

Settling into the Washington DC area once peace had been achieved, he capitalized on his influential standing and used his fame to train the next generation of black Americans to see the nation and flag the way he did. In addition to advocating for the role of African Americans in the military, he even formed and trained a black cadet corps. Fleetwood’s effort eventually led to the formation of the first black National Guard unit—paving the way for later units.[31]

However, perhaps Frederick Douglass, with whom we began, most resoundingly displayed how the actions of the USCT and the end of slavery redeemed the symbolism of the national flag and its reception by black Americans. Once abolition became an official war goal, Douglass began, in his own words, “to persuade every colored man able to bear arms to rally around the flag, and help save the country and save the race.”[32]

After victory and the successful emancipation of all slaves, the famed orator relates a story of sailing on the USS Tennessee specifically noting that for the first time he could rejoice to finally live, “under the national flag, which I could now call mine, in common with other American citizens.”[33]

In a later speech, Douglass ventures even further and announces that that the national flag truly is, “a glorious symbol of civil and religious liberty, leading the world in the race of social science, civilization, and renown.”[34] Douglass, like many others, realized that the American flag of 1865 was radically different than the one of 1855—its destiny proved one not of derision, as first believed, but rather of deliverance.

Ultimately, the brave sacrifices from the United States Colored Troops, and those who stood alongside them, successfully redeemed the symbolism of the Stars and Stripes—purging from its folds any sanction of slavery. America could now march into the next era under a unified flag fulfilling the promise of the Founding Fathers that all men were created equal.

Furthermore, the reception of national standard in the black community was revolutionized. Leaders like Douglass, Fleetwood, Lynch, and Cain all rallied to the flag instead of railing against it. After generations of steadfast resolve and four years of unimaginable courage, the entire nation—black and white—could join with the men of the 20^th and confidently say: “that flag is a big thing.”[35]

Endnotes

[1] Cf. Julie Spankles, “Chris Pratt Is in Hot Water for This Controversial T-Shirt & the Internet Has Thoughts,” Yahoo Lifestyle, July 17, 2019, https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/chris-pratt-hot-water-controversial-184007706.html (accessed February 19, 2020); Bill Chappell, “Nike Pulls Shoes Featuring Betsy Ross Flag Over Concerns About Racist Symbolism,” National Public Radio, July 2, 2019, https://www.npr.org/2019/07/02/737977542/nike-pulls-shoes-featuring-betsy-ross-flag-over-concerns-about-racist-symbolism (accessed February 19, 2020).

[2] Frederick Douglass, My Bondage and My Freedom (New York: Miller, Orton, and Mulligan, 1855), 438.

[3] “The Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment,” Harper’s Weekly, March 19, 1864, 178.

[4] “The Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment,” Harper’s Weekly, March 19, 1864, 178.

[5] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 16.

[6] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 16.

[7] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 17.

[8] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 18.

[9] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 19.

[10] J. J. Hill, A Sketch of the 29^th Regiment of Connecticut Colored Troops (Baltimore: Daugherty, Maguire, and Co., 1867), 21-22.

[11] Joseph Wilson, The Black Phalanx: A History of the Negro Soldiers of the United States (Hartford: American Publishing Company, 1897), 223, here.

[12] Thomas Higginson, The Writings of Thomas Wentworth Higginson (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1900), 3.149, here.

[13] Thomas Higginson, The Writings of Thomas Wentworth Higginson (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1900), 3.31, here. Higginson records the speech in the original spoken dialect, but the spelling has been updated above.

[14] Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp with the 33d United States Colored Troops, Late 1^st S. C. Volunteers (Boston: Susie King Taylor, 1902), 48-49.

[15] Thomas Higginson, The Writings of Thomas Wentworth Higginson (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1900), 3.54-56, here.

[16] Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp with the 33d United States Colored Troops, Late 1^st S. C. Volunteers (Boston: Susie King Taylor, 1902), 48-49.

[17] Cf., “Who Were These Heroes?” Negro History Bulletin 23, no. 3 (1959): 50-70.

[18] George Washington Williams, A History of the Negro Troops in the War of the Rebellion, 1861-1865 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1888), 199-202.

[19] Walter Beyer, and Oscar Keydel, Deeds of Valor: How America’s Heroes Won the Medal of Honor (Michigan: The Perrien Keydel Company, 1901), 434-435; James Clifford, “Christian Fleetwood.” On Point 13, no. 3 (2007): 21-24.

[20] Jeremiah Marion Mickley, The Forty-Third Regiment United States Colored Troops (Gettysburg: J. E. Wible, 1866), 74-75.

[21] George Washington Williams, A History of the Negro Troops in the War of the Rebellion, 1861-1865 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1888), 199-202, 236-237, 326, 333, 336-337.

[22] Candice Zollars, “6^th U.S. Colored Infantry: They Laid Down Their Lives for the Flag,” Military Images 33, No. 3 (2015): 28.

[23] Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp with the 33d United States Colored Troops, Late 1^st S. C. Volunteers (Boston: Susie King Taylor, 1902), 48.

[24] Thomas Higginson, The Writings of Thomas Wentworth Higginson (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1900), 3.337-338, here.

[25] “Treatment of Captured Colored Soldiers,” Harper’s Weekly, August 15, 1863, 515.

[26] The Congressional Record Containing the Proceedings and Debates of the Forty-Third Congress, First Session (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1874), 2.566.

[27] The Congressional Record Containing the Proceedings and Debates of the Forty-Third Congress, First Session (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1874), 2.903.

[28] The Congressional Record Containing the Proceedings and Debates of the Forty-Third Congress, First Session (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1874), 2.903.

[29] The Congressional Record Containing the Proceedings and Debates of the Forty-Third Congress, Second Session (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1875), 3.945.

[30] Roger D. Cunningham, “‘His Influence with the Colored People Is Marked:’ Christian Fleetwood’s Quest for Command in the War with Spain and Its Aftermath.” Army History, no. 51 (2001): 23.

[31] James Clifford, “Christian Fleetwood.” On Point 13, no. 3 (2007): 21-24.

[32] Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass Written by Himself (Hartford: Park Publishing Company, 1882), 382.

[33] Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass Written by Himself (Hartford: Park Publishing Company, 1882), 456.

[34] Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass Written by Himself (Hartford: Park Publishing Company, 1882), 471.

[35] “Twentieth U.S. Colored Regiment—Reception by the Union League—Speeches of Charles King and Colonel Bartram—Departure for the Seat of the War.” First Organization of Colored Troops in the State of New York, To Aid in Suppressing the Slaveholders’ Rebellion (New York: Baker and Goodwin, 1864), 19.

Celebrating America’s Military

Armed Forces Day — a day set aside to honor all those who are either currently serving or have served in all branches of our nation’s Armed Forces – occurs on the third Saturday of May.

In 1947 America’s military was combined under the Department of Defense. Two years later, the Secretary of Defense created Armed Forces Day to replace the separate celebrations of each military branch. The first celebration was held in 1950 and included parades in Washington DC, Berlin, and New York City. For this day, President Truman urged all Americans to:

display the flag of the United States at their homes…and to participate in exercises expressive of our recognition of the skill, gallantry, and uncompromising devotion to duty characteristic of the Armed Forces in the carrying out of their missions.

Other presidents and government officials since 1950 have issued proclamations and given speeches to celebrate Armed Forces Day, including General Dwight Eisenhower who reminded the nation:

It is fitting and proper that we devote one day each year to paying special tribute to those whose constancy and courage constitute one of the bulwarks guarding the freedom of this nation and the peace of the free world.

Armed Forces Day was set as the third Saturday of the month of May in 1961 with President Kennedy’s proclamation that encouraged Americans “as an expression of support for their armed forces and as a symbol of their unity in devotion to the preservation of our country, to display prominently the flag of the United States.”

For this special celebration day, you can show your support for our military by flying the US flag, thanking a military member you know, and sending messages of support to those serving.

Ten Facts About George Washington

From the $1 Bill to the capital of America, George Washington’s name appears more often than probably any other name in American history. Being the most prominent Founding Father, everyone learns how Washington led the Continental Army against the British during the War for Independence and eventually became the first President of the United States. But there are plenty of stories and facts that are rarely taught in schools today. Watch the video and then read below about ten facts you probably do not know about George Washington.

1. George Washington did not chop down a cherry tree.

“I cannot tell a lie,” a young George Washington is reported to have said—but his biographers sure can! The famous story originates from the 5^th edition of the popular biography The Life of Washington the Great by Mason Weems.¹ Published in 1806, seven years after Washington’s death, there are no primary sources attesting to its truthfulness. All things considered, its late appearance and the complete lack of evidence has led most to consider it apocryphal.

2. He was most embarrassed about his lack of education and his bad teeth.

The most persistent enemy to Washington were not his political or military opponents, but his teeth. By the time he was sworn in as the first President of the United States he only had a single original tooth left.² Over the course of his life he had a number of dentures made from a wide variety of materials.³ The dentures of the time were large, bulky, and burdensome which worked together to make Washington quite self-conscience about them leading him to be more introverted than perhaps he might have been.⁴

On top of this, George Washington did not have the same high level of education his older brothers received due to the death of their father when he was only eleven years old. This tragedy led Washington to become a surveyor (which incidentally provided the exact education he needed to accomplish the amazing things God had planned for him). When standing next to the genius level intellects of Jefferson, Adams, and others it was easy for Washington to feel at an embarrassing disadvantage to his more educated peers.⁵ That said, Washington was still incredibly intelligent on account of his extensive reading throughout his life in order to make up for his perceived lack of formal education.

3. He was nominated to be commander of the colonial army by John Adams.

“I do not think myself equal to the Command I am honored with.”⁶ It was with these words that the ever-humble George Washington accepted the unanimous appointment to command the soon-to-be-created Continental Army. The official vote happened on June 15, 1775, with John Adams credited as being the one who recommended and nominated Washington to the position.⁷ On the occasion, Adams wrote to his wife explaining how Congress elected the, “modest and virtuous, the amiable, generous and brave George Washington,” and solemnly proclaimed that, “the Liberties of America, depend upon him.”⁸

4. George Washington was described as being taller than the average man.

In an era when the average man stood at 5’7″, noted early biographer Jared Sparks clocked Washington in at an impressive 6’3″ tall.⁹ John Adams, later in life, wrote to fellow signer of the Declaration of Independence, Dr. Benjamin Rush, that Washington had, “a tall stature, like the Hebrew sovereign chosen because he was taller by the head than the other Jews.”¹⁰

A military observer repeatedly called attention to the vast stature of Washington, explaining, “it is not difficult to distinguish him from all others; his personal appearance is truly noble and majestic; being tall and well proportioned.”¹¹ He continues to write that Washington, “is remarkably tall, full six feet, erect and well proportioned…This is the illustrious chief, whom a kind Providence has decreed as the instrument to conduct our country to peace and to Independence.”¹² George Washington was a tall man with an even bigger purpose.

5. He encouraged his troops to go to church.

As General, Washington would issue orders throughout the army instructing them on daily operations. On June 23, 1777, he issued the following order:

“All chaplains are to perform divine service tomorrow, and on every other succeeding Sunday, with their respective brigades and regiments, when their situations will admit of it, and the commanding officers of the corps are to see that they attend. The Commander-in-Chief expects an exact compliance with this order, and that it be observed in future as an invariable rule of practice, and every neglect will not only be considered a breach of orders, but a disregard to decency, virtue, and religion.”¹³

Being a man of great piety and sincere religion himself, it is no surprise that Washington placed such an extraordinary emphasis on his soldiers’ corporate worship. In fact, when Washington believed the chaplains were not making regular church services a proper priority, he required all the chaplains to come to a meeting to address the issue and then report back to him.¹⁴

Washington’s devotion to Christ was so apparent in the camp that the Rev. Henry Muhlenberg, father of Major General John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg, remarked:

“His Excellency General Washington rode around among his army yesterday and admonished each and every one to fear God, to put away the wickedness that has set in and become so general, and to practice the Christian virtues. From all appearances this gentleman does not belong to the so-called world of society, for he respects God’s Word, believes in the atonement through Christ, and bears himself in humility and gentleness. Therefore the Lord God has also singularly, yea, marvelously, preserved him form harm in the midst of countless perils, ambuscades [ambushes], fatigues, etc. and has hitherto graciously held him in His hand as a [chosen] vessel. II Chronicles 15:1-3.”¹⁵

6. He forbade his officers to swear.

Along the same lines as the previous fact, Washington focused on making the American military not only righteous but also respectable. To this end, on July 4, 1775, he issued the following order:

“The General most earnestly requires, and expects, a due observance of those articles of war, established for the government of the army, which forbid profane cursing, swearing and drunkenness. And in like manner requires and expects, of all officers, and soldiers, not engaged on actual duty, a punctual attendance on Divine Service, to implore the blessings of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense.”¹⁶

7. He was the only President elected unanimously.

After the ratification of the Constitution, the first order of business was to fill the newly created positions of government. The most important question was, “who will be our President?” For the Americans of 1789, that was apparently an easy answer. “George Washington of course!” With that resolution, Washington, “by no effort of his own, in a manner against his wishes, by the unanimous vote of a grateful country.”¹⁷ In the history of the United States, there has been only one other unanimous vote for President — Washington again for his second term.¹⁸

8. George Washington added “So help me God” to the Presidential Oath of Office.

Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution states that when the President is sworn into office, he is to say the following oath:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

With his hand laid upon the open Bible, Washington repeated the oath. He then sealed the oath by with a solemn, “so help me God,” and reverently bowed down and kissed the Bible.¹⁹ One eyewitness to the event recalled that, “it seemed, from the number of witnesses, to be a solemn appeal to Heaven and earth at once.”²⁰

9. He was elected to be a vestryman at local churches.

In early American Episcopalian churches, vestrymen were, “a select number of principal persons of every parish, who choose parish officers and take care of its concerns.”²¹ This included making sure the poor, widows, and orphans were taken care of, and even extended to major decisions about the church as a whole.

George Washington was elected (perhaps his first election) to be a vestryman in two different parishes. In March of 1765, he was chosen in Fairfax Parish with 274 votes, and then four months later he was again chosen in Truro Parish with 259 votes.²² Washington was extremely active as a vestryman.²³

On one occasion, Washington even went toe-to-toe with George Mason (fellow future delegate to the Constitution Convention) about relocating the church to a new site. After an impassioned speech by Mason which seemingly settled the question, Washington unassumingly rose and used a surveying map to show where the new site would be and how it would be better for each parishioner. This sudden recourse to sound reason and just sensibilities restored the council to their senses and they voted with Washington to move the church to the new site.²⁴

10. George Washington was killed by his doctors.

This characterization might be a little uncharitable—the doctors were doing the best they could with the knowledge they had—but it doesn’t mean it’s not true. The old General fell sick after riding out on Mount Vernon during the cold rain. Soon, he was struggling to breathe. The following is taken from the journal of George Washington’s lifelong friend and physician, James Craik:

“The disease commenced with a violent ague, accompanied with some pain in the upper and fore part of throat, a sense of stricture in the same part, a cough, and a difficult rather than paint deglutition, which were soon succeeded by fever and a quick and laborious respiration. The necessity of blood-letting suggesting itself to the General, he procured a bleeder in the neighborhood, who took from his arm, in the night, twelve or fourteen ounces of blood.”²⁵

Medical science at the time thought that a number of sicknesses were caused because of some issue with the person’s blood itself. To fix the disease, therefore, a common “solution” would be to bleed a patient out in order to get rid of the bad blood.

Once more doctors had been called to the scene, Craik continues:

“In the interim were employed two copious bleedings; a blister was applied to the part affected, two moderate doses of calomel were given, and an injection was administered, which operated on the lower intestines—but all without any perceptible advantage; the respiration becoming still more difficult and distressing.”²⁶

Even more blood was taken, and now the doctors applied hot irons to his throat because they thought that an accumulation of blood in Washington’s throat was what caused the difficulty breathing. Calomel is a kind of mercury chloride, which, we now know to be quite toxic! This, along with the bleedings and the injections were a long way off from helping Washington recover. But the doctors weren’t done yet:

“Upon the arrival of the first of the consulting physicians, it was agreed… To try the result of another bleeding, when about thirty-two ounces of blood were drawn, without the smallest apparent alleviation of the disease… ten grains of calomel were given, succeeded by repeated doses of emetic tartar, amounting, in all, to five or six grains, with no other effect than a copious discharge of the bowels. The powers of life seemed now manifestly yielding to the force of the disorder. Blisters were applied to the extremities.”²⁷

More blood-letting, more toxic calomel, more blisters. The biggest variation in this round of treatments is that they gave Washington another poisonous substance—emetic tartar. Altogether, it served only to give the dying President diarrhea.

Finally, Dr. Craik relates the end to his friend’s suffering:

“Speaking, which was painful from the beginning, now became almost impracticable; respiration grew more and more contracted and imperfect, till… when retaining the full possession of his intellect, he expired without a struggle.”²⁸

A contemporary doctor estimated the total amount of blood drawn to be, “the enormous quantity of eighty-two ounces, or above two quarts and a half of blood in about thirteen hours.”²⁹ The same doctor goes on to accurately explain that:

“Very few of the most robust young men in the world could survive such a loss of blood; but the body of an aged person must be so exhausted, and all his power so weakened by it as to make his death speedy and inevitable.”³⁰

The average amount of blood in someone of Washington’s size and stature is around 210 ounces. If, as the doctor estimates, somewhere around 82 ounces were taken, then Washington lost nearly 40% of his blood. This amount is nearly tantamount to exsanguination (death by bleeding out), and when combined with the blisters, calomel, emetic tartars, and the various vapors, it appears to be the unfortunate conclusion that the doctors killed George Washington.³¹

Endnotes

1. Mason Locke Weems, The Life of Washington the Great (Augusta: George P. Randolph, 1806), 8-9.
2. “Washington Tooth Troubles,” Mount Vernon (accessed March 29, 2019).
3. “False Teeth,” Mount Vernon (accessed September 18, 2023).
4. “Washington Tooth Troubles,” Mount Vernon (accessed March 29, 2019).
5. “Education” Mount Vernon (accessed March 29, 2019).
6. June 16, 1775, Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress, Held at Philadelphia, May 10, 1775.
7. John Adams autobiography, part 1, through 1776, Adams Family Papers: An Electronic Archive, Massachusetts Historical Society.
8. John Adams to Abigail Adams, June 17, 1775, Adams Family Papers: An Electronic Archive, Massachusetts Historical Society.
9. Jared Sparks, The Life of George Washington (Boston: Ferdinand Andrews, 1839), 102n.
10. John Adams to Benjamin Rush, November 11, 1807, Founders Online (accessed March 29, 2019).
11. James Thacher, A Military Journal During the American Revolutionary War (Boston: Richardson and Lord, 1823), 37.
12. Thacher, Military Journal, 182-183.
13. George Washington, General Order, June 28, 1777, Records of the Revolutionary War (New York: Pudney & Russell, 1858), 330.
14. Washington, General Order, October 6, 1777, Records of the Revolutionary War, 345.
15. Henry M. Muhlenberg, The Journals of Henry Melchoir Muhlenberg (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1958), III:149, journal entry for May 7, 1778.
16. George Washington, General Orders, July 4, 1775, Library of Congress (accessed September 18, 2023).
17. Washington Irving, Life of George Washington (New York: G. P. Putman & Company, 1857), IV:516.
18. Annals of Congress (1873), 2nd Congress, 2nd Session, 874-875, February 13, 1793; Jared Sparks, The Life of George Washington (Boston: Ferdinand Andrews, 1839), 445.
19. Irving, Washington, IV:475.
20. “Philadelphia, May 8. Extract of a Letter from New York, May 3,” Gazette of the United States (May 9 to May 13, 1789).
21. Noah Webster, “Vestry-man,” American Dictionary of the English Language (1828).
22. Jared Sparks, The Life of George Washington (Boston: Ferdinand Andrews, 1839), 520.
23. “Churchwarden and Vestryman,” Mount Vernon (accessed April 1, 2019).
24. Sparks, Washington, 106.
25. James Craik, “From The Times, A Newspaper printed in Alexandria (Virginia), dated December, 1799,” The Medical Repository (New York: T. & J. Swords, 1805), III:311.
26. Craik, “From The Times” Medical Repository, III:311-312.
27. Craik, “From The Times” Medical Repository, III:312.
28. Craik, “From The Times” Medical Repository, III:312.
29. John Brickell, “Medical Treatment of General Washington,” Transactions of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia (Philadelphia: Printed for the College, 1903), 25:93.
30. Brickell, “Medical Treatment” College of Physicians of Philadelphia, 25:93.
31. For a more technical examination of the medical circumstances surrounding Washington’s death see, Dr. Wallenborn’s, “George Washington’s Terminal Illness: A Modern Medical Analysis of the Last Illness and Death of George Washington,” The Washington Papers (November 5, 1997).

* Originally posted: May 9, 2019

George Washington 1785 Letter

Below is an original letter in WallBuilders’ collection, from George Washington, dated February 1, 1785. This letter was written during a short period of retirement for Washington, following the War for Independence and before the Constitutional Convention. After resigning his military commission, he settled back in Mount Vernon following an almost continuance absence of eight years.

Mount Vernon 1st Feb. 1785

Gentleman,

You may think me very troublesome – and the reason I assign for being so (that I am of the opinion you can serve me better than any other) no good apology for the liberty I take.

My Miller (William Roberts) in now become such an intolerable serv, and when drunk so great a madman, that he never unwilling I am to part with an old servant (for he has been with me 15 years) I cannot with propriety on common justice to myself bear with him any longer.

I pray you once more, therefore, to engage & forward to me, a miller as seen as you may have it in your power; and whatever engagement you shall enter into on my behalf I will religiously fulfil. I do not stipulate for the wages at altho’ my Mill (being on an indifferent stream & not constant at work) can illy [sic] afford high wages.

My wishes to procure a servant who understands the manufacturing business perfectly – and who is sober and honest, that I may even at the expense of paying for it, have as little trouble as possible with him. If he understood the business of a Mill _____ and was obliged by his attitude to keep the Mill works in repair, so much the better. Whatever agreement you may enter into on my behalf, I pray you to have it reduced to writing, & specially declared, that there may be no misexception [sic] or disputes thereafter.

The House in which such Muller will live, is a very comfortable one, within 30 yards of the Mill (which works two pairs of stones one pair of them french Burns) – it has a small Kitchen convenient thereto and a good garden properly paled it. There is a Coopers shop within 50 yards of the Mill, with three Negro Coopers which will also be under the direction of the Miller. Whose allowance of meat, flour, & privileges of every kind, I would have ascertained, to prevent after claims. I do not object to the Mans having a family (a wife I could wish him to have) but if it was a small one, it would be preferable.

At any rate be so good as to let me hear from you, that I may know on what to depend, as it is no longer safe for me to entrust my business to the care of Willi’m Roberts. It only remains now for me to ask your sanguineness for this trouble & to assure you of the esteem with which I am

Gentm

Your friend & very Humble

G. Washington

Mess. Lewis’s

Siege of Yorktown

Ending of a War

The Siege of Yorktown is recognized as the final major military action in the War for Independence. This three-week long battle (September 28-October 19, 1781) secured American independence after 6 years of active fighting. Some interesting aspects surrounding the siege of Yorktown makes this victory even more amazing.

For example, a black man, James Armistead, played a major role in securing the victory. A Virginia slave who wanted to help his country, four months before the battle, working with General Marquis de Lafayette, he successfully infiltrated the camp of British commander Lord Cornwallis, serving as a spy for the American forces. Armistead was able to collect intelligence on British movements and sent it back to George Washington. Lafayette later petitioned for Armistead’s freedom (in Virginia, it took an act of the legislature to free a slave for meritorious service), and after being freed, Armistead was granted a retirement pension for his military service.

Cornwallis was heavily outnumbered (there were some 17,600 American/French troops against his 8,300 British troops), so on October 16, he attempted a last-ditch attack. (In the WallBuilders’ Collection we have an unexploded mortar shell–pictured on the left.) Under the cover of darkness, the British attempted to flee but a storm arose, forcing them to remain.

Running short of supplies and with reinforcements not arriving, the British surrendered on October 19. George Bancroft, the “Father of American History,” recorded how the Continental Congress responded upon hearing the good news:

When the letters of Washington announcing the capitulation [surrender] reached Congress, that body, with the people streaming in their train [that is, following them], went in procession to the Dutch Lutheran church to return thanks to Almighty God.

And John Hancock issued a proclamation announcing the victory and calling for a time of thanksgiving and prayer to God Almighty. (We have an original of this proclamation in the WallBuilders Collection.)

So it was in October 1781, that the battle of Yorktown was won, and Americans openly thanked God for His role in protecting America. Now is a good time for us likewise offer thanks for the blessings He has bestowed on our nation.

Christmas

“Ghosts of Christmas Past”

(from Charles Dickens “Christmas Carol” in 1843)

At Christmas, people all over the world pause to remember the birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ. We gather with family, exchange gifts, and hopefully read the Christmas story from the Bible (Luke 2:1-20). It’s a day of celebration! In 1950 during the Korean War, President Harry Truman reminded the nation of the importance of Christmas, and also urged them to remember those who served us in the military and would not be home for Christmas:

Many have forgotten the humble surroundings of the nativity and how, from a straw-littered stable, shone a light which for nearly 20 centuries has given men strength, comfort, and peace. At this Christmastime we should renew our faith in God. We celebrate the hour in which God came to man. It is fitting that we should turn to Him. Many of us are fortunate enough to celebrate Christmas at our own fireside. But there are many others who are away from their homes and loved ones on this day.

Our history abounds with examples of those who could not be home for Christmas. Usually this was because of an ongoing war, but there were other reasons as well. In fact, there have been times when they could not be home because they were not even on the planet!

The astronauts of Apollo 8 (the first manned mission to the moon) entered orbit around the moon on Christmas Eve, 1968. (Pictured here is one of the photos they took, showing Earth rising above the moon on Christmas Eve.) While circling the moon, the three astronauts hosted a live telecast in which all three read from Genesis 1 and then Frank Borman delivered a special Christmas greeting.

WallBuilders Collection includes a document signed by Frank Borman with the text of the Christmas Eve message. Also included is a prayer recorded by Borman on Christmas Day, 1968, which read in part:

Give us, O God, the vision

Which can see Thy love in the world

In spite of human failure.

This document is an amazing example of how Christmas has been celebrated not only here on Earth but also in space as well!

Explore

Engage

Initiatives

A Midnight Ride to Lexington

Endnotes

A Moral Revolution?

The Reason the Atomic Bomb was dropped on Japan

The Manner in which the Atomic Bomb was Used on Japan

Conclusion

Endnotes

Civil War Artillery Goggles

Pictures:

Related Artifacts:

Videos:

Endnotes

1. George Washington did not chop down a cherry tree.

2. He was most embarrassed about his lack of education and his bad teeth.

3. He was nominated to be commander of the colonial army by John Adams.

4. George Washington was described as being taller than the average man.

5. He encouraged his troops to go to church.

6. He forbade his officers to swear.

7. He was the only President elected unanimously.

8. George Washington added “So help me God” to the Presidential Oath of Office.

9. He was elected to be a vestryman at local churches.

10. George Washington was killed by his doctors.

Endnotes

QUICK LINKS

OTHER LINKS

SOCIAL LINKS

Explore

Engage

Initiatives