THE BUILDER APRIL 1918
A DEFENSE OF THE STORY OF OLD GLORY
BY BRO. JOHN W. BARRY, GRAND MASTER, IOWA

Editor Builder: Your favor enclosing a letter from a California
subscriber received. His letter calls attention to the Flag number
(October) of the Geographic Magazine, wherein it contradicts
sharply in some particulars my story of "Old Glory" so handsomely
published in THE BUILDER a short time ago. He wants to know which
is right.

His question is proper, for the obligation of THE BUILDER to its
subscribers in such matters is unquestioned and as the author of
the Story of "Old Glory," it is squarely up to me to answer. Not to
answer would be untrue to the purpose of an organization calling
itself a "research society."
JOHN W. BARRY, Grand Master.

The Flag number of the Geographic Magazine is so praiseworthy in
many particulars that an adverse criticism is made only in
self-defense and in vindication of the established facts of history
and will be limited to the principal discrepancies. 

"UNION FLAG" RAISED JAN. 1, 1776--NOT ON JAN. 2

The Geographic Magazine (page 289) says, "Washington raised the
Grand Union Flag Jan. 2,1776, the day the Continental Army began
its official existence," whereas THE BUILDER says the date was Jan.
1, 1776. Which is right? The final authority is the "Orderly Book"
of George Washington in his own hand-writing. It reads as follows:

"Head Quarters January 1, 1776. 
Parole--The Congress. 
Countersign--America.

This day, giving commencement to the new Army, which in every point
of view is entirely Continental" (1) etc., etc. This proves
conclusively that THE BUILDER is right and the Geographic wrong.

THE FLAG OF LOYAL INDIA

On Jan. 4, 1776, Washington in writing to Joseph Reed, his
secretary, then at Philadelphia, among other things says: "We gave
great joy to them (the Red Coats, I mean) without knowing it or
intending it, for on that day, the day which gave being to our new
Army, but before the proclamation had come to hand we had hoisted
the Union Flag in compliment to the United Colonies. But behold, it
was received in Boston as token of the deep impression the speech
had made on us. And as a signal of submission. So we learn by a
person out of Boston last night. By this time I presume they think
it strange that we have not made formal surrender of our lines
(2)."

There is no clue in Washington's statement giving the remotest idea
as to what this "Union Flag" really was. Commenting on this, Benson
J. Lossing, an eminent American Historian, says (3):

"Why the hoisting of the Union Flag in compliment to the colonies
should have been received by the British as 'signal of submission,'
was a question historians could not answer until 1855, when the
writer of this work discovered among the papers of General Philip
Schuyler a drawing of the Royal Savage with the Union Flag at its
mast-head."

This drawing in colors of the flag on the Royal Savage, together
with the contemporaneous writing of Gen. Schuyler and others,
showed definitely that the "Union Flag" raised by Washington was
the flag of the English East India Company shown by the Geographic
Magazine as No. 364.

It was the flag of loyal India--a flag which had been well known
for 69 years. So the "red coats" took it as "a token of submission"
when Washington hoisted an English flag so long and well known to
them.

NO SUCH THING AS COLONIAL STANDARD

THE BUILDER carries the idea that this "Union Flag" was promptly
abandoned because it was an English flag. The Geographic says (page
288): "This was the flag (364) which afterward figured so
extensively in the literature of the day as the Congress Colors,
from the fact that it first floated over the Navy controlled by
Congress. Also known as the Grand Union Flag and the First Navy
Ensign, it was the Colonial standard from that day until it was
superseded by the Stars and Stripes, in 1777."

Which is right?

The Geographic Magazine does not quote its authority except to say,
"How long the Grand Union Flag was in use has never been definitely
established; but official records of the navy fail to show that any
other ensign was used until after the Star Spangled Banner's
adoption by Congress," (page 295).

Simply from the fact that the "official records of the navy" fail
to show that any other ensign was in use, the Geographic Magazine
discards all other evidence and states that no other flag was in
use. To offset the testimony of Trumbull and of Peale, both eye
witnesses, with reputations for fidelity to fact, positive evidence
of a decided character should be introduced. There is many a fact
of history which does not appear on the official records.

Avery says (4): "After the Declaration of Independence the British
Union was removed from the colors of the new nation." This from a
recognized authority sustains the statement of THE BUILDER. It is
very much to be regretted that the Geographic Magazine gives
practically no references but so far as I can find, there is no
authority of any kind to sustain the claim "that the Grand Union
Flag was the Colonial Standard from that day until it was
superseded by the Stars and Stripes in 1777." Indeed a British flag
as the "Colonial Standard" after the Declaration of Independence
would be repugnant to every sense of propriety. At a time when the
people were destroying the statue and pictures of the king--in fact
bent on the destruction of everything suggesting British rule, it
would certainly be a manifest absurdity to have used a well known
British flag as the standard of the new nation for a year and a
half.

The historic fact seems to be that there was no such flag as "a
Colonial Standard"--that a variety of flags came into use following
the Declaration of Independence, including the stars and stripes.
So that on June 14, 1777, when Congress adopted the stars and
stripes, that emblem was actually before Congress and so well known
that there was no discussion and the newspapers made no reference
to the event. Indeed it was not published until Sept. 2, 1777, when
Dunlap's Pennsylvania Packet, a weekly newspaper, published the
flag resolution and then without comment. On this point THE BUILDER
is sustained by a great mass of evidence.

The Geographic Magazine goes on thus:

"Whatever their origin, there is no persuasive evidence in the
official records of the time which would lead to the conclusion
that the Stars and Stripes were in use before the resolution of
June 14, 1777. It is true, however, that the paintings of Trumbull
and Peale do point to its earlier use. But, as to the flags
appearing in their paintings, it should be recalled that an
anachronism could be readily excused in the case of Trumbull,
because he had left the colonies while Washington was before Boston
and was abroad for seven years. Peale's picture of Washington
crossing the Delaware, with respect to colors carried, is believed
to be a case of 'artist's license.' "

This statement contains many errors. There are many authorities on
John Trumbull for he was a most active patriot in many ways. But
probably the most generally available is the Britannica (5). It
shows that John Trumbull took military training as part of his
college course, joined the forces at Boston as adjutant of the 1st
Connecticut; became one of Washington's aids. In 1776 became Gates'
adjutant general and resigned from the service in FEBRUARY, 1777.
But in 1778 he joined Sullivan as a volunteer in the Rock Island
campaign and did not go to Europe until 1780 or 1781; that later
Congress employed him for $32,000 to paint the four pictures now in
the rotunda of the capitol at Washington. The resolution provided
that he should paint the events he had witnessed. So Trumbull,
having been an active participant, is a competent witness. His
reputation as a painter was everywhere recognized and rests on his
FIDELITY to historic FACTS. Speaking of his painting, "Washington
at Princeton," Trumbull says (6): "Every minute article of dress,
down to the buttons and spurs, were carefully painted from the
different objects." Princeton was fought Jan. 3, 1777, six months
before Congress adopted the stars and stripes so there was no more
reason for showing Old Glory there than there was for showing it in
his painting of the battle of Bunker Hill except the one
all-important fact to Trumbull, namely, that Old Glory was NOT at
Bunker Hill and WAS at Princeton Jan. 3, 1777.

Trumbull's reputation for fidelity to fact, his own statement that
his painting is true to fact, and the further fact that he was an
eye witness and competent to testify, repudiates the supposition
that he has permitted an anachronism in his painting.

ERROR IN ASSIGNING LEUTZE'S PICTURE TO PEALE

As to Charles Wilson Peale, the Geographic Magazine falls into
another serious error. "Washington Crossing the Delaware" was not
painted by Peale but by Emanuel Leutze who was not born until 1816
and therefore not a competent witness to events before his time.
However, his picture is true to historic fact in that it does show
the stars and stripes.

The Peale picture is a very different work and was bought by
Congress because of its HISTORIC accuracy. It is a full length
portrait of Washington at Trenton. It now hangs at the head of the
Grand Staircase of the Senate wing of the Capitol at Washington,
D.C. At Washington's feet are captured flags and other trophies
while to the right Old Glory waves in triumph. It was painted in
1779 by Charles Wilson Peale who commanded a company at the battle
of Trenton and he was therefore a competent witness.

Some years ago, his son Titian R. Peale wrote a letter quoted by
both Preble and Canby. Among other things he said: "The trophies at
Washington's feet I know he painted from the flags then captured,
which were left with him for that purpose. He was always very
particular in matters of historic record in his pictures; the
service sword in that is an instance and probably caused its
acceptance by Congress."

He tells us that his father commanded a company at the battles of
Germantown, Trenton, Princeton and Monmouth and then says: "I am
sure represented the flag then in use--not a regimental flag but
one to mark the new republic." Is there anything here that sounds
like "artist's license"?

If this indeed be "anachronism" for Trumbull and "artist's license"
for Peale, isn't it strange that each unknown to the other should
record in living colors the stars and stripes in use at Trenton and
Princeton in 1776-7? The Geographic Magazine to say the least is a
little inconsistent to mention "the carving on Selden's powder
horn" as authority (See page 292) and reject Trumbull and Peale.

THE MAKER OF THE FIRST STARS AND STRIPES
While the Geographic Magazine makes no suggestion as to who did
make the first "Old Glory," yet it denies that honor to the only
one that ever claimed it, but admits that in 1777 she was engaged
in the making of flags. "The well known story of Betsy Ross, so
called maker of the Stars and Stripes, is one of the picturesque
legends which has grown up around the origin of the flag, but it is
one to which few unsentimental historians subscribe. There was,
however, a Mrs. Ross, who was a flag-maker by trade, living in
Philadelphia at the time of the flag's adoption." (See page 297.)

Yes, Mrs. Elizabeth Ross, popularly known as Betsy Ross, made flags
from 1776 to 1827.

BETSY'S STORY IN BRIEF

Washington, accompanied by Robert Morris and George Ross, uncle of
her late husband, called on her "shortly before the Declaration of
Independence." Washington showed her the design of a flag he wanted
made. She took the job and the flag was so satisfactory that Robert
Morris, chairman of the "secret committee" on the conduct of the
war, and George Ross, signer of the Declaration of Independence and
uncle of her late husband, ordered her to make all the flags she
could and that they would pay for the bunting themselves. Betsy
continued the making of flags thus begun until 1827, assisted much
of the time by her four daughters and other members of the family.
In 1827 the oldest daughter, Clarissa Sidney, took over the
business and continued it until 1857. Numerous participants have
made affidavits duly attested establishing the Betsy Ross story.
These affidavits, complete and convincing, are published in "The
Evolution of The American Flag (7)." These affidavits, together
with other corroborating evidence, place the Betsy Ross incident on
an assured historic foundation.

FRANCIS HOPKINSON CLAIMS TO DESIGN NOT MAKE

The Geographic Magazine offers no disproof of the Betsy Ross story
except to refer to Francis Hopkinson as "a more authentic designer
of the flag" and quotes in full a bill he filed for such service
and for devices for the currency, etc. True, but Hopkinson nowhere
claims to have MADE the flag--only helped design it, and it was in
1776 he was in Congress. He was familiar with heraldry and it may
be that he gave Washington the design having the six-pointed stars,
for in heraldry a five-point was not considered a star but a mallet
or spur. But when Betsy suggested a five-point star because she
could make it with one clip of her scissors, Washington, who never
claimed to know anything of heraldry, at once made the change. We
see the effect still in our coinage for the stars around the head
of the goddess of liberty are six-pointed while on the other side
where the stars represent states, they are five-pointed. Look at a
half dollar for yourself.

So this Francis Hopkinson incident tends to confirm and not
disprove the Betsy Ross story for she claims only to have MADE the
first stars and stripes flag, giving Washington credit for the
design.

MONEY PAID BETSY FOR MAKING FLAGS
Practically all flags during the Revolution were supplied by the
states or by individuals. So in contrast to Hopkinson's
unrecognized bill as designer, here is one of actual money "paid to
Betsy Ross as maker of flags:

"State Navy Board, May 29, 1777 (8).
Present William Bradford, Joseph Marsh 
Joseph Blewer, Paul Cox--
An order on William Webb to
Elizabeth Ross, for fourteen pounds twelve shillings, 
two pence for making Ships Colours & c, put into William Richards'
Store. 14-S12-D2."

Here is about $70 paid for the labor of making flags. Even today
the slowness of such matters in getting by the red tape to the pay
stage would suggest that at least some of the money was earned well
back in 1776. Further, as Pennsylvania did not adopt a state flag
until Oct. 9, 1799, it is not unreasonable to conclude in view of
other known facts, that "Ships Colours" means the stars and
stripes.

WASHINGTON IN PHILADELPHIA, MAY 22 TO JUNE 5, 1776 (9)
Betsy Ross and her daughters were not of a literary turn of mind
but were devout Quakers devoted to the arts of the needle. Their
recollection of the date of the visit of Washington, Morris and
Ross is given only approximately as "a short time before the
Declaration of Independence." It is therefore necessary to show
that Washington was in Philadelphia at that time, which is
established by letters he wrote from there at the time and by a
number of entries in the Journal of Congress.

The Journal of Congress for May 16, 1776, contains a resolution
instructing its president, John Hancock, to request Washington to
come to Philadelphia to consult regarding "the ensuing campaign,"
and the manuscript of the Hancock letter to Washington is now in
the Library of Congress. In response Washington accompanied by his
wife arrived May 22 and remained until June 5, 1776, but was not
again in Philadelphia until Aug. 2, 1777.

On May 31, he wrote to his brother saying that the attitude of
England had become such that there remained but one choice--
Independence (10). On May 28 he wrote in detail to Major General
Putnam at New York. Among the other things he urged that he "Speak
to the several Colonels and hurry them to get their colors done"."
So the records not only prove that Washington was in Philadelphia
at the time indicated by Betsy Ross but in addition that he was
mindful of the need of flags, particularly as he recognized that
the only course was "independence."

THE FLAG HOUSE
In 1898 an association was formed to buy the Betsy Ross flag house
and maintain it as a shrine of liberty free to all the people. The
charter members number many to whom even "unsentimental historians"
would bow in deference in matters historic.

STARS AND STRIPES USED FREELY DURING REVOLUTION

The Geographic Magazine says that the "stars and stripes was not
carried in the field by the land forces during the Revolution." It
is true bunting was scarce and flags few and usually individual
meaning not supplied by the Congress. While company "colors" were
carried yet the headquarters of all land forces, all forts and
ships did show "Old Glory." Further the Geographic Magazine
contradicts itself by showing the stars and stripes carried by the
3d Maryland regiment. See flag 411, page 339 and described on page
352. It is the same flag shown by THE BUILDER as 32. It is one of
the few if not the only flag of the Revolution still preserved. It
is carefully guarded in the State House at Annapolis and bears on
the case the legend "No. 1 Old Glory (12)." What the Maryland
regiment did, it is more than probable other regiments did also.
Thus THE BUILDER is sustained and the Geographic Magazine refuted
even out of its-own pages.

Another proof is the Bennington flag No. 395, page 339 and
described on 348. This flag is not only the stars and stripes but
the stars are arranged around the year 1776, probably the date the
flag was put in service.

THE GEOGRAPHIC MAGAZINE OVERLOOKS THE FLAG OF 1818

Finally the Geographic Magazine omits the flag adopted April 4 and
approved by the President April 13, 1818, and substitutes another,
thus again erroneously contradicting THE BUILDER and perverting
history. No. 8 in the Geographic Magazine is given as the flag
before Congress in 1818, whereas No. 22 in THE BUILDER was the flag
adopted and the ONLY one before Congress at the time.

After pages of discussion which seemed to get farther and farther
from agreement, Congress referred the whole flag problem to Samuel
Chester Reid (13), commander of the Armstrong. He solved it by
returning to the original 13 stripes and adding a Star for each
additional state. Mrs. Reid made the sample flag and it was
presented with her husband's report to Congress and was adopted
without change, April 4, 1818, and in compliment to Mrs. Reid, its
maker, the new flag was raised over the Capitol April 13, though
the law did not go into effect until July 4, 1818. The Mrs. Reid
flag then adopted had its 20 stars arranged in the form of one
large star (14) and this form of Old Glory was the ONLY one known
to the interior of the country for many years. Preble says: "This
form was used for many years by the Military Department whereas the
Navy Department adhered to parallel lines." True, Congress made no
requirement as to the arrangement of stars because it adopted a
specific flag then on exhibition before them. It was a parallel to
the action of Congress on June 14, 1777, in adopting a flag then
before them and well known. Congress never specified the
arrangement of the stars or stripes. So there came to be used so
many forms and proportions that there were 66 variations in use by
the various government departments. This led President Taft in 1912
to issue an order covering the whole subject (15). It is assumed
that page 312 of the Geographic Magazine is in harmony therewith.

Of this form of the flag so unfortunately omitted by the Geographic
Magazine, the historian James Schouler says (16):

"The new flag of the United States, hoisted April 13, 1818, fol the
first time over the chamber of assembled representatives at
Washington, WITH ITS TWENTY STARS SO DISPOSED AS TO FORM ONE GREAT
STAR in the center of the azure field while the long red and white
stripes danced in the breeze, spoke a parable. That spangled host,
soon to be increased in number, spoke of a Union to be progressive
and perpetual, while the thirteen stripes recalled the founders
whose memory must ever be cherished."

As stated at the outset these errors are not pointed out in any
spirit of captious criticism. Indeed, they are sincerely regretted
and it is earnestly hoped the Geographic Magazine will correct them
in an early issue.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: "The Story of 'Old Glory'--The Oldest Flag," by
Brother John W. Barry, the present Grand Master of Iowa, was first
published in Volume II of THE BUILDER, in 1916. This article has
been reprinted in pamphlet form in two styles of binding, red
buffing at $1.00 and paper at 35c per copy. A frontispiece in
colors showing the evolution of the American Flag accompanies each
pamphlet.)

(1) Vide American Archives, 4th Series, vol. IV, p. 568, also
Avery, vol. V, p. 307.
(2) Vide American Archives, 4th Series, vol. IV, p. 750.
(3) Vide Cyclopedia American History, vol. II, p. 1432.
(4) Vide Avery, vol. VI, p. 68.
(5) Vide Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th Ed., vol. XXIII, p. 944.
(6) Vide Washington Irving's Washington, vol. IV, p. 327.
(7) Vide Evolution of the American Flag, Appendix C.
(8) Vide Pennsylvania Archives, 2d Series, vol. I, p. 164.
(9) Vide Journal of Congress for May 16, 24, 25th.
(10) Vide Ford's Writings of Washington, vol. IV, p. 105. 
(11) Vide American Archives, vol. VI, p. 637. 
(12) Vide Battle Flags, Clinton L. Riggs, p. 5. 
(13) Vide Preble, p. 339 Vide American Encyclopedia, vol. VII, p.
251.
(14) Vide also Britannica, vol. XX, p. 905. Vide 14 Niles Register
for 1818.
(15) Vide Executive Order, vol. 1637, Oct. 29, 1912, Taft. 
(16) Vide History of U. S., James Schouler, vol. III, p. 106.

The real history of mankind is that of the slow advance of resolved
deed following laboriously just thought.
--Ruskin.

