Delete comment from: Boston 1775
The following is my opinion only, and not intended for offense. :)
So, Adm Montagu was on the wharf the day after demanding that someone "had to pay the fiddler." But Montagu may have said it the night before as well. Your version is certainly plausible, for it's common to look back several years prior and get some of the facts jiggered. But, I certainly believe Montagu was motivated to put himself in the best light possible with his superiors--it being his career! His version that you quoted last article is laden with trying to allay blame from himself. He implies (italics) that he was on the ship without saying it, and that's significant. He lays blame on countless others for not informing him. And another important implication he states is that his only option would be to use canon fire on civilians. Not use marines. It's more plausible that Montagu lied about being on land than it is that Hewes lied to me. Hewes version gives multiple specific details....which can be mixed up in both Hewes telling and Thatchers understanding of what was said, but the fact that he's so detailed, even stating who said what as well as Montagu's physical actions like raising/closing the window, makes his version more believable to me. It's equally plausible that his Tory friend owned more than one place, like a guest house or rental, or another friend of his Tory friend where they both might stay. Or Thatcher may have confused the "end of the wharf" details given by Hewes as well.
If Hewes version is true, it doesn't necessarily mean that Montagu knew what those "Indians" had been doing as they sneaked past his house painted in coal. He may have had the conversation that night, or early morning, as they walked by without knowing the cause of the concealment. And when Pitts was bold in his response, and with many like minded men also obviously up to no good, he thought his personal safety more important than picking a fight, especially if he had no marines with him at the time. Perhaps a female companion at the second residence of his friend would cause him to be without his entourage, and give further motivation not to divulge his presense nearby to his superiors.
It's hard to sparse the intricacies of the puzzle, but I'm not converted to Montagu's version.
Dec 21, 2023, 9:50:59 AM
Posted to “Who was to pay the fidler”?