King, Irving H. George Washington's Coast Guard: Origins of the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service, 1789-1801, (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1978.)
Lewis, James A. Neptune's Militia: The Frigate South Carolina during the American Revolution, (Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1999.)
Myers, Albert Cook. Immigration of Irish Quakers into Pennsylvania, 1682-1750: With Their Early History in Ireland, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co.,1969.)
Private User. "Captain James Montgomery (1747-1810) Genealogy", (www.geni.com, last modified - April 19, 2017.)
At some point just prior to or after the cessation of hostilities, James Montgomery was released from his British-imposed parole. He then would have been an individual involved in a prisoner cartel as he was actually returned to patriot lines. Yet, none of this information is recorded in any source known to the writer of this blog. His sole imprisonment during the American Revolution is not even recorded except through inference of the single document found within the collections of the Public Records Office in London, England and entitled "Declaration of James Montgomery". A rather oblique reference is made to this document in Lewis's work, Neptune's Militia, page 194, foot note 4. He was still a young man, being only thirty-six years old at this point in time. But, at thirty-six years of age, he was nothing short of a combat-hardened, thoroughly experienced sea captain, having had several different patriot ships-of-war under his command during the course of the American Revolution and numerous valuable British and Loyalist prize ships documented to his credit.
More than likely, after his exchange at the end of the American Revolution, he returned to his adopted city of Philadelphia, PA. According to Private User's article, "Captain James Montgomery (1747-1810) Genealogy", his growing family there in Philadelphia, PA included his second wife, Hester Montgomery, and their three young daughters, Elizabeth, twelve years old; Frances, three years old; and Sarah, slightly over one year old. He had much to live for after the war had secured the independence of his adopted country. And, as if this was unusual for James Montgomery, this future included the sea.
Not much is known or recorded concerning the activities of James Montgomery after the cessation of hostilities between Great Britain and the newly-independent United States of America. But, even though his life seems to be obscured by the passage of so much time, it would seem that in the late 1780s, James Montgomery was about to be drawn back into the spotlight of history.
According to King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 3, "...in New York on the morning of April 30, 1789, George Washington, a splendid symbol of our new nation, stepped forward and took the oath of office as the first President of the United States.". In his first inaugural address, President Washington expressed some reservations and doubts concerning his abilities to direct the new country. Again, according to King's work, page 4:
"...he had to make the experimental new government work while protecting the liberty of the nation's citizens. No working administrative branches of government existed. Britain and Spain still occupied American territory, and the nation had but a very small army, while the navy no longer existed. Secession threatened in the West. The treasury was empty. The nation was burdened by debt to its own citizens and the the citizens of other nations. No revenue was coming into the treasury; and although Congress quickly passed an import tariff for revenue, no organization existed to collect the duty...
The necessary organization had to be created by the first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton...".
Further along in King's work, pages 5-6, the following passage focuses specifically on the creation of the Department of the Treasury under the direction of the first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton:
"The Treasury Department was the creation of an act of Congress of September 2, 1789. The Treasury began as the largest department in the government, and by 1801 over half of the federal civilian employees were located there. The organic act of 1789 that created the department gave it an enormous array of most important duties...
Congress, even prior to passing the organic act, had vested in the Treasury Department administrative responsibility for collecting customs duties, running the lighthouse service, and registering and clearing vessels. Before the Federalists left office in 1801, the department's list of duties had increased greatly. Included among the additional duties were: surveying the nation's lands; paying military pensions; purchasing army supplies; enforcing the Proclamation of Neutrality of 1793; enforcing the Embargo of 1794; enforcing state quarantine laws; and providing medical care for sick and disabled seamen. As the duties of the Treasury Department multiplied, Hamilton delegated a great deal of authority to the customs collectors. Because they came to administer a large number of civil servants and many governmental services, the collectors became very powerful persons indeed.
In appointing collectors of the customs, Washington seems to have given preference to veterans of the Revolutionary army. Leonard White, a leading historian of public administration under the Federalists, had traced the backgrounds of twenty of the early collectors and has found that sixteen of the twenty had served in the army.".
King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, pages 6-7, goes onto cite many of the more famous collectors of the customs who worked for the Revenue Cutter Service. The text cites:
"....Benjamin Lincoln, collector of the port at Boston from 1789 to 1809..., ...John Lamb, collector of the port of New York from 1789 to 1797..., ...Otho H. Williams, collector at the port at Baltimore from 1789 until his death in 1793..., ...Jedediah Huntington, collector of the port at New London, Connecticut from 1789 to 1818..., and ...John Habersham, who served as collector of the port of Savannah, Georgia from 1789 until his death in December 1799...".
The few men named here are only the most famous of the custom's collectors of their day. There are numerous, lesser known men who also served faithfully, with great diligence, and were hard-working. One of these men was Sharp Delany of Philadelphia, PA. According to King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 8:
"...Sharp Delany of the port of Philadelphia was not the best known collector in the nation in 1789, but he should be the best known collector today to students of the Revenue Cutter Service... He did serve as a collector for a decade, and during his tenure Delany played a most important role in the creation of the Revenue Cutter Service...".
(Note: The writer of this blog feels the need to cite all of this information as a type of groundwork being laid for the remainder of this specific post concerning James Montgomery and his role as a captain in the Revenue Cutter Service, the precursor of today's modern United States Coast Guard. But, the section of Sharp Delany is of particular significance because the writer of this blog means to highlight the dispute that took place between Sharp Delany as the collector of customs for the port of Philadelphia, PA and James Montgomery, one of the cutter's captains in the Revenue Cutter Service.)
According to King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, pages 10-11, the account continues in a manner more specific to the duties and formation of the Revenue Cutter Service:
"Many of the collector's duties were directly associated with commerce and trade. The collectors had to bring imported goods under their control and make sure that duties were paid. Registration, licensing, and inspection of vessels were collector's responsibilities, as was clearing ships engaged in foreign trade. But collection of customs duties and prevention of smuggling were the most important of the collector's' jobs in the early days of the Federalist era, for the nation desperately needed the revenue that import duties were supposed to raise. Collection of tariff duties, in addition to being important, was a most difficult task, a task that would lead to the creation of the Revenue Cutter Service.
By 1789 smuggling was not only a well established national custom; it had acquired recognition as a meritorious enterprise. Centuries of avoiding hated British restrictions on American colonial trade, decades of intensified effort against British maritime officials during the era of the Revolution, and the necessity of continued smuggling after independence in order to trade with the British empire schooled American seamen in the art of avoiding tariffs. Goods were shipped from around the world and were off loaded onto coastal islands or onto small boats to be taken past collector's eyes under cover of darkness. Manifests carried false statements about the nature, quantity, and quality of goods aboard. Local customs officials and merchants were in collusion to defraud the government. And when all else failed, force was sometimes resorted to.
Nature had shaped a coast of harbors, inlets, rivers, and offshore islands that further complicated the custom officers' efforts to collect the revenue. Smugglers had many harbors of safe refuge, and the West Indies, for centuries a haven for smugglers, lay not far off the nation's coast.
During the Confederation Period, the several states had tried to prevent smuggling and had tried to collect tariffs. The states had their own customs laws, collectors, and naval officers. Some state officers employed revenue boats and barges in their work within the harbors of their states. The Virginia assembly had authorized two inspection boats, the Patriot and the Liberty, to cut down on smuggling and to enforce a very sophisticated set of state mercantile regulations. In 1786 Charles Lee explained to the Council of the State of Virginia that his experience as the naval officer for Virginia's South Potomac District had led him to believe that smuggling could not be stopped.".
Again, King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, pages 12-13, goes on to indicate that:
"Fully aware of the burden that faced him and his collectors, Hamilton sought information from them about their problems in securing tariff revenue, planning to use the information in gaining congressional support for additional customs legislation... With a similarly practical purpose in mind on 2 October 1789, Hamilton asked the collectors their opinion about the need of boats to secure the revenue...The Collectors' replies explained that smuggling had been rampant under state control... ".
The communication of these opinions by his collectors of customs led Alexander Hamilton to the actions he took before Congress as illustrated in King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 15:
"On 23 April 1790, Hamilton had presented Congress a bill calling for the establishment of the United States Revenue Marine service with an initial fleet of ten small cutters to protect the revenue. In defending his proposal for 'boats for securing the collection of the revenue', Hamilton argued that information from several sources had proven the necessity of having boats. Boats, the Secretary insisted could not 'fail to contribute, in a material degree to the security of the revenue, much more than will compensate for the expense of the establishment...'.".
King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, pages 16-17, continues to precisely illustrate Hamilton's efforts to bring about the establishment of the first revenue service of the United States:
"Hamilton proposed the employment of ten boats to enforce the revenue laws and to prevent smuggling:
'two, for the coasts of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, one for Long Island Sound; one for New York; one for the Bay of Delaware; two for the Chesapeake (these of course to ply along the neighboring coasts) one for North Carolina; one for South Carolina; and one for Georgia'
'Boats of from thirty-six to forty feet keel' Hamilton thought, would 'answer the purpose, each having one Captain, one Lieutenant, and six mariners, and armed with swivels'. The secretary expected to build such boats, fully equipped, for one thousand dollars per boat; he further estimated the total annual expense for operating the ten boats at $18,560-$13,560 for salaries, $3000 for provisions; and $2000 for 'Wear and Tear'.
Congress passed Hamilton's Revenue Cutter bill on 4 August 1790, and empowered the President of the United States:
'to cause to be built and equipped, so many boats or cutters, not exceeding ten, as may be necessary to be employed for the protection of the revenue, the expense whereof shall not exceed ten thousand dollars, which shall be paid out of the product of the duties on goods, wares and merchandise, imported into the United States, and on the tonnage of ships and vessels.'
In the same bill Congress authorized forty officers, a master, first, second, and third mate for each cutter and made them 'officers of the custom'. This bill, a product of the dire need of the nation, the treasury department, and the collectors of the customs, was the birth certificate of the Revenue Cutter Service, the eighteenth century ancestor of today's United States Coast Guard.".
The narrative continues in King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 18, addressing the actual selection process to determine the captains of each revenue cutter:
"Realizing that the newly created Revenue Cutter Service would be only as good as the men who commanded the vessels, Hamilton told Congress:
'the utility of an establishment of this nature must depend on the exertion, vigilance and fidelity of those to whom charge of the boats shall be confined. If these are not respectable characters, they will rather serve to screen, than detect fraud.'
President Washington shared Hamilton's concern, and as a result the President and the Secretary sought information about candidates from many sources but kept close personal control over the final selection process. And Washington retained for himself exclusive right to appoint masters of the cutters.".
The text begins to address the process of narrowing down the field of candidates to actual commanders of the revenue cutters. It continues further on pages 19-20 of King's work:
"As soon as they became aware of the job openings, leading American merchants and businessmen gave their support to candidates for the cutter assignments... James Montgomery and Isaac Roach were supported by 'several respectable names' prior to their appointments as master and first mate of the Philadelphia cutter General Greene. In their personal correspondence Washington and Hamilton discussed the recommendations of America's leading citizens, so that we can be certain that businessmen did influence cutter officer appointments.".
The narrative continues in King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 25, with the actual submission by Alexander Hamilton of names for the role of master of the revenue cutters of the individual states:
"By 29 September 1790, Hamilton had gathered from many sources throughout the nation an enormous amount of information about candidates for master's jobs. In a letter to washington, the Secretary of the Treasury listed the leading candidates and the cities and states they hailed from:
Hopley Yeaton - New Hampshire
John Foster Williams - Massachusetts
Richard Law - Connecticut
Patrick Dennis - New York
James Montgomery - Pennsylvania
Simon Gross - Maryland
Richard Taylor - Virginia
William Hull - Charleston [South Carolina]
On 6 October 1790, Washington returned the same list of names, in the same order, to Hamilton with the order:
Not being possessed of any commissions, I have to request...that you will signify to the undermentioned persons my intention to appoint them to command the revenue Cutters on the stations opposite their respective names, and that you will furnish them with the necessary instructions for proceeding to superintend the building and equipment of their several Vessels.'.".
According to King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 26, "...Washington actually signed the commissions of the first 'Masters' of the 'Cutter[s] in the Service of the United States, for the Protection of the Revenue' on 21 March 1791.". There were seven men whose names were recorded as having been commissioned by President of the United States George Washington on that date. James Montgomery was among those first seven men to be commissioned as "Master" of the "Cutter[s] on the Service of the United States, for the Protection of the Revenue...".
King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, pages 26-32, offers a type of group biography for this initial group of revenue cutter captains (or "Masters", as they were known to their contemporaries). The writer of this blog will employ some of these citations to create a brief synopsis of the life of James Montgomery as compared to the remainder of the first revenue cutter masters. According to King's work, pages 26-27:
"The first masters of the revenue cutters had in common the fact that their integrity and good character were attested to by prominent collectors of the customs, by former Revolutionary War officers, and by businessmen and politicians. But what was their background prior to becoming masters of the new nation's first ocean-going service?
Most of George Washington's revenue cutter officers were knowledgeable seamen with command experience. Several were captains of merchant ships before the outbreak of the American Revolution....
The text continues in King's work, page 27:
All of the first ten revenue cutter officers served the nation in the American Revolution, and all but one of them served at sea as naval, marine, or privateering officers...
A direct reference is made to the experiences of James Montgomery in King's work, page 30:
"Another of the first revenue cutter officers received his military training in a state navy. James Montgomery, a captain in the pennsylvania Navy, commanded the state vessels Ranger, Chatham, General Montgomery, and General Greene. Numbered among his captures was the 300-ton ship Thetis, and included in his wartime experiences was a successful cruise for British prizes in company with the Continental frigate Deane.".
(Note: In working with the sources cited above in the bibliography of this particular post, the writer of this blog has encountered the names of the first four patriot ships-of-war referenced in the above citation concerning James Montgomery. But, he has never encountered a single reference to the British prize ship, "...the 300-ton ship Thetis...", in any of the accounts concerning the life and activities of Captain James Montgomery during the American Revolution. This may be that the name of this British prize ship has not been recorded in any of the previous sources cited. It also could be that the name of this British prize vessel has become confused with another capture by Captain James Montgomery. But, it is also possible that this might be a mistake and that this ship and its purported part in the life of James Montgomery never existed.)
The narrative continues further in King's work, pages 31-32:
"Some of the revenue cutter officers had acquired additional valuable experience as officials in the customs' service of their state and/or had held jobs in the federal customs service prior to being commissioned masters in the Revenue Cutter Service... Following the revolution, James Montgomery accepted a subordinate job in the federal revenue service at Philadelphia with the understanding that he would be appointed the master of a revenue cutter if such a job should become available. Washington, when he considered candidates for command of the Pennsylvania cutter, the General Greene, found that both Montgomery and Isaac Roach were naval heroes of the revolution and were equally well qualified for the job. But Montgomery's experience in the revenue position weighed in his favor; Washington commissioned Montgomery master and commissioned Roach first mate.".
The remaining two references to Captain James Montgomery are both of a service-type of nature. The first reference to Montgomery in King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, is found on pages 41-42 and addresses the building of the revenue cutter General Greene for the Philadelphia station. This entry is as follows:
"On 22 January 1791, Hamilton expressed another wish by authorizing 'a cutter to be built for the Delaware station under the supervision of Captain Montgomery'. Thus the schooner General Greene was built at Philadelphia under the supervision of her master, but she cost over fifteen hundred dollars. The General Greene was commissioned on 5 August 1791, and remained in the service of the nation until 1798, when she was replaced by the second General Greene, 'a new...vessel, sufficient to carry eight four pounders.".
Thus, it would seem that the first revenue cutters commissioned by Washington and Hamilton were built under the supervision of the very captains who would command these cutters at sea. The proportions of the individual cutters were given previously in this post and were strictly adhered to in the construction of these revenue ships. But, from the information shared immediately above the cost of the first General Greene exceeded the maximum cost by about five hundred dollars. But, expenses need to be made if properly outfitted and equipped revenue cutters were to be built and the revenue was to be collected in a consistent and precise manner.
The second reference to James Montgomery addresses the kinds of services the revenue cutters were called upon to perform. These were not always those directly associated with the collection of revenues from ships entering the port of Philadelphia, PA. According to King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, page 118, the cutters and their crews were often called upon to perform very different duties other than the collection of the revenues from ships entering the port of Philadelphia, PA. This incident deals with the mate of the revenue cutter, General Greene, Isaac Roach, but, still includes a reference to Captain James Montgomery in solving the predicament described here:
"The particular skills of Isaac Roach, the first mate of the revenue cutter General Greene, were applied to a quite different maritime problem. in May 1792 the Delaware Bay pilots struck for higher wages and thus stopped almost all shipping into Philadelphia. Hamilton was fearful that the strike would hurt the nation's economy and that the pilots might damage beacons and buoys in the bay; so he called upon officers of the General Greene, especially Roach who had been a bay pilot, to solve the problem. Commercial traffic was soon restored by a system worked out by Captain Montgomery of the General Greene. Ships were piloted from the mouth of the bay to Bombay Hook by a pilot named Dawson, who was not on strike; and the General Greene escorted the vessels between Bombay Hook and Philadelphia. Roach, of course, was actively involved working with the pilots; and by 22 May the pilots, their grievances settled, had returned to work.".
This event was not related to the collection of duties but, in light of the extreme situation of the strike of the bay pilots, necessitated the actions executed by the revenue cutter General Greene and her captain and crew. Goods were still brought into the city of Philadelphia and no other damages or destruction seem to have been committed by the striking bay pilots. Due to the devotion to their work and their active efforts, Captain Montgomery and the crew of the revenue cutter General Greene maintained order on the Delaware Bay and up the Delaware River to Philadelphia, PA. For the remainder of her years in service as a vessel of the United States Revenue Cutter Service serving on the Pennsylvania station, the General Greene, her captain and crew served diligently and well.
This is all the information provided in King's work, George Washington's Coast Guard, concerning Captain James Montgomery of the revenue cutter, General Greene. But, there is another incident that is not referenced in King's work but, does seem to have indeed taken place and involves James Montgomery as a commanding officer in the United States Revenue Cutter Service. This incident is referenced in series of letters dated between March 12, 1795 and December 6, 1797 and contained in the website "Founders Online". These letters can all be accessed at "founder.archives.gov" and were last modified on November 26, 2017. These letters' chronological citations are as follows:
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, March 12, 1795"
"From James Montgomery to Oliver Wolcott, September 19, 1796"
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, September 20, 1796"
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, September 23, 1796"
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, November 29, 1796"
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, January 7, 1797"
"To George Washington from James Montgomery, February 17, 1797"
"To John Adams from James Montgomery, April 25, 1797"
"To John Adams from James Montgomery, May 6, 1797"
"To John Adams from James Montgomery, November 15, 1797"
"To John Adams from James Montgomery, December 6, 1797"
The first letter cited above is brief and contains the essence of the disagreement James Montgomery has with those he feels have insulted him. The letter's first sentence is fraught with James Montgomery's anger and sense of insult. The full text of this brief letter is as follows:
"Philadelphia March 12th, 1795
Sir,
I beg leave to resign my Commission as Captain of the Revenue Cutter as the Base and unprecedented treatment I have received from the Collector has been such that it is unless redressed incompatible with the feelings of a Man of Honour and a Gentleman to submit to Conscious of having never deviated in the Smallest instance from the strictest Duty (and my abilities are certainly not to be doubted) I can no longer brook the Continual Ill Usage I am constantly receiving from the Collector I wish not to impede public service But I beg leave to add that if Mr Delany is permitted with Impunity thus to exercise the Insolence of Office I can no longer hold the Commission I have had the Honour of receiving from you I am with the Highest Sentiments of Respect your most obedient Humble Servant
James Montgomery"
(Note: The individual referenced as "...the Collector...Mr Delany..." is a fellow Irish immigrant to Philadelphia, PA known as Sharp Delany. According to the Wikipedia article, "Sharp Delany", page 1, his place of birth is in dispute but, believed to be either County Monaghan or Queen's County, Ireland. According to the same source, his date of immigration to Philadelphia is also in uncertain. Again, according to the same source, in one of the first records of his residence in America, he married (Ann) Margaret Robinson on September 7, 1763 in Trinity Episcopal Church in Philadelphia, PA. At the outset of the American Revolution, he was involved in the provincial government. According to Founders Online, National Archives; "To George Washington from Sharp Delany, April 20, 1789", unnumbered footnote at the bottom of page 1, "...he served as a captain in the Pennsylvania militia in 1776 and as a major of the Philadelphia City Battalion in 1777, and in 1779 he was a colonel of the 2nd Battalion of the Philadelphia militia.". According to the Wikipedia article, "Sharp Delany", page 1, "...on March 15, 1784, Sharp Delany was appointed Collector of Customs under the State of Pennsylvania, and was first appointed to that position at the Federal level by George Washington in 1789, a position he held until his death in 1799.".
According to the Wikipedia article, "Sharp Delany", page 2, "...in October 1789, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton asked the various collectors of customs about the need for boats to protect and ensure revenue collection. Sharp Delany replied that he was already using a vessel for that purpose and fully endorsed the concept. On August 4, 1790, now celebrated as the Coast Guard's birthday, Congress passed Hamilton's Revenue Cutter Bill...Since Sharp Delany was evidently the first United States official to employ a vessel for the purpose of enforcing customs laws, a 1976 Naval Institute Proceedings article suggested he is the father of the Coast Guard.
Numerous other sources state that Sharp Delany held the position of Collector of Customs for the port of Philadelphia from his initial federal appointment under George Washington in 1789 until his death on May 13, 1799. But, a reference to the "Founders Online, National Archives" documents indicate otherwise. The document cited as the letter "from Alexander Hamilton to Oliver Wolcott, Junior, June 25, 1798", directly states that "...I understand that the Collector of Philadelphia will speedily offer his resignation...". The reason for this speedy resignation is found in a footnote to the "Founders Online, National Archives" document "To Thomas Jefferson from Albert Gallatin, February 11, 1804". This footnote simply states that "...Sharp Delany, customs collector at Philadelphia, was forced to resign in 1798, after it was found he owed the Treasury at least $86,000, which he could not repay.". A footnote to the "Founders Online, National Archives" document "To Thomas Jefferson from Frederick Muhlenberg, February 11, 1801", states that "...the office of revenue collector for the district of Pennsylvania..." would remain unoccupied from the resignation of Sharp Delany until the appointment of George Latimer to the same position by President John Adams on June 28, 1798.
According to Creede's article, entry for "Find a Grave Memorial: Col. Sharp Delany (1739-1799)", former Collector of Customs for the port of Philadelphia, Sharp Delany died on May 13, 1799 and is buried in Saint Peter's Episcopal Churchyard in Philadelphia, PA. His plot number is recorded as Section 4b, Grave 165. According to the same article, at least four of his eleven children predeceased him.)
(Subnote - Concerning the lineage of Sharp Delany: an explanatory note contained in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article, "Sharp Delany", page 1, concerns the disputed birthplace of Sharp Delany. According to this source:
"Sharp Delany was likely born in Queen's County, Ireland (present day County Laois). Ballyfin, Queen's County, was the home of his paternal grandfather, Martin Delany, and his father, Daniel Delany, who also resided in Clonin, Queen's County. Also, Sharp Delany's maternal grandfather, Isaac Sharp, resided in Killinure, Queen's County. Sharp Delany's maternal great-grandfather was the noted Dublin Quaker, Anthony Sharp, for whom Sharp was named.".
According to Myers's work, Immigration of Irish Quakers, page 385, the following information is provided confirming the above statements concerning the lineage of Sharp Delany as well as his relationship to his ancestors Isaac Sharp and Anthony Sharp:
"Isaac Sharp, son of Anthony Sharp, of Dublin, came to New Jersey about 1702-3, and settled at Blessington, now Sharptown.
He was Judge of Salem Court and served as a member of the assembly from 1709 to 1725. About 1726 he returned to Ireland and resided on his estate "Roundwood", in Queen's County, where he died in 1735. He married in 1704, Margaret Braithwaite, of Salem, and had children:
Anthony
Isaac (of Blessington, Salem County, N.J., died in 1770. He was also Judge of Salem Court)
Joseph
Sarah
Rachel (married Daniel Delaney, of Queen's County, Ireland, by whom she had children:
Sharp (the very same subject of this rather extensive footnote)
William
Martin
Of Note: Myers's source utilizes the spelling of "Delaney" for the last name rather than "Delany" as utilized in the remainder of the sources cited in the post.
Concluding, Justifying Remarks: As a historical aside, Isaac Sharp's son has a very distinguished lineage that follows him. According to the Wikipedia article, "Isaac Sharp", page 1, "Isaac's son Joseph Sharp was the grandfather of Moses Austin and the great-grandfather of Stephen F. Austin and Emily Austin Perry.". The writer of this blog has been fascinated with the number of Quakers who are directly or indirectly associated with the frigate South Carolina. For instance, Stacy Potts, a prominent Quaker of Trenton, NJ was the friend and patron of John Henderson, Lieutenant of Marines on board the frigate South Carolina. The correspondence between Stacy Potts and John Henderson are examined in the posts respectively dated "02/07/2016" and "03/02/2017". Sharp Delany, a lesser subject of this post and the nemesis of James Montgomery of the Revenue Cutter Service and former associate of Alexander Gillon of the frigate South Carolina, was from prominent Quaker roots. Finally, Isaac Sharp was the maternal grandfather of Sharp Delany and Moses Austin and the great-grandfather of Stephen F. Austin, the "Father of Texas". And, finally, the Pennsylvania revenue cutter actually commanded by James Montgomery, the General Greene, as named for a Quaker, General Nathaniel Greene, who actively took up arms for the patriot Cause and, as a direct result, was "read out" of his Quaker meeting house due to their professed pacifistic leanings.)
There exists no clear indication or even implication as to what constituted the basis for the statement made by James Montgomery as to the "...the Base and unprecedented treatment I have received from the Collector...". James Montgomery goes on to complain of "...the Continual Ill Usage I am constantly receiving from the Collector...". This letter, addressed to the then-President of the United States of America, George Washington, does not specifically outline the exact nature of this insult or offense offered to James Montgomery by Collector of Customs Sharp Delany. Yet, the intensity of James Montgomery's passionate appeal to be vindicated by the President seems to indicate there must have been some serious issue in existence between the two men. Slightly over six months after expressing his sense of injured honor in the letter to George Washington, James Montgomery wrote a much-more brief missive to Oliver Wolcott, stating the same sense of injured honor and insults having been heaped upon him by Pennsylvania Collector of Customs Sharp Delany. Again, the true nature of the perceived insult is not clearly stated, even in this second letter drafted by James Montgomery.
Indeed, it is in the subsequent two letters that the real reason for the insult as perceived by James Montgomery, captain of the revenue cutter, General Greene. These letters are both from James Montgomery and addressed to George Washington and are dated "20 September 1796" and "23 September 1796", respectively. Included in the text of the letters addressed by James Montgomery to George Washington are references to Montgomery not being called upon to oversee the construction of the new cutter be replace the older cutter, General Greene. The newer cutter was also named the General Greene, sometimes being designated as the General Greene II in order to distinguish it from the earlier constructed vessel. James Montgomery indicates that as the intended captain of this new cutter, he should have been included in the supervision and oversight of the construction of the cutter. In an enclosure dated "September 17th 1796" to the letter of "23 September 1796", James Montgomery clearly states that this "...omission..." must lie with the Collector, meaning the Collector of Customs for the port of Philadelphia, Sharp Delany. James Montgomery also states that he sees it "...as an Insult I am no ways deserving of...".
James Montgomery continued to petition George Washington for redress of this perceived insult to his honor in subsequent letters dated "29 November 1796", "7 January 1797", and "17 February 1797". In the first cited letter, James Montgomery postulates that the a possible reason for his detractors not coming forward to explain themselves is that "...Perhaps they wait for a New President of the United States who may not know me...". As will be seen, this well may have been the case.
The next four letters are indeed addressed to John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America. These four letters are dated "25 April 1797", "6 May 1797", "15 November 1797', and "6 December 1797", respectively. In the first sentence of the first letter, James Montgomery states that he knows that "...there are several applicants for the Command I now hold of the Revenue Cutter...". He goes on to state that he believes this situation to have arisen due to "..the encouragement of the Collector to different applicants...". He ends the letter with a strong, direct plea to the new President:
"My Character has been basely traduced and joined to the Favour I have inn my former letter of your Excellency's continueing me in my Command I intreat you will have the Goodness to grant me the Satisfaction of knowing I am exculpated from those Charges...".
Yet, the very next chronologically dated letter begins with James Montgomery in a state of indignation and effectively demanding an explanation from the President of the United States:
"In Consequence of a Letter from Secretary Wolcott in which he informs me by your determination my Commission as Captain of the Revenue Cutter is annulled and that the Public Interest requires it should be done I beg leave to request an explanation of those Words as it imply's a degree of Crimination on my Conduct that as a Man of Honour and a Citizen i am entitled to an explanation of I likewise request the favour of having all my letters and Certificates returned as I mean to lay them before the Public as the Public Interest is aid to require my Dismission I likewise make it my request that your Excellency will let me know my accusers and what i am accused of inimical to the Public Interest...".
Thus, James Montgomery's application as captain of the new revenue cutter was passed over and his "...Commission as Captain of the Revenue Cutter ....annulled..." and another was appointed as captain of the new revenue cutter, General Greene II, for the port of Philadelphia, PA. The next two letters, dated "15 November 1797" and "6 December 1797" were continued pleas for the return of the vouchers and certificates he had sent to the President of the United States. Also, the tone of James Montgomery's letters to John Adams seems to have lessened in their forcefulness and to have almost begun to sound hopeless of the situation of his injured honor ever being rectified or restored. There is no indication that this situation was ever resolved within the lifetime of James Montgomery.
In the same way that not much information exists addressing the early life of James Montgomery, there also exists scant information concerning the later life of Captain James Montgomery. According to Private User's article, "Captain James Montgomery (1747-1810)", he was married twice, ostensibly the first marriage being to Margaret Montgomery and his second marriage being to Hester Montgomery. Neither of these women's maiden names are recorded. He fathered at least three children, all daughters - Elizabeth, Frances, and Sarah. It is almost impossible to determine which mother these daughters were born of but, it is a possible assumption that the oldest child, Elizabeth, was born of Margaret Montgomery in 1771 and that her mother died shortly afterwards. James Montgomery then would have remarried to have a wife to help with his growing child. He would have selected Hester who would have subsequently born him Frances on March 7, 1780 and Sarah on January 25, 1782. This simple assumption rests on the fact that there is an nine years gap between the first daughter, Elizabeth, and the second daughter, Frances, but only a two year gap between Frances and Sarah. It is quite possible that James Montgomery's first wife, Margaret died at some point after the birth of her daughter, Elizabeth, and James Montgomery married a second time, with his second wife, Hester, bearing him two additional daughters.
We do have evidence that James Montgomery was a member of the original State Society of the Cincinnati of Pennsylvania. According to "The State Society of the Cincinnati of Pennsylvania", "...the society is the nation's oldest patriotic organization, founded in 1783 by officers of the Continental Army and their French counterparts who served together in the American Revolution.". A reference to alphabetical listings "Pennsylvania Cincinnati Military History - Officer List: M" finds the entry for "Captain James Montgomery". Evidently, he was an original, founding member who actually joined in his physical lifetime.
Captain James Montgomery died on March 4, 1810 at the age of sixty-three years old. According to Private User's article, "Captain James Montgomery (1747-1810)", he is interred in an undetermined cemetery in Philadelphia, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.