Joseph Warren was the embodiment of the American colonists’ struggle to secure their rights within the British empire. In June of 1775, Warren had just turned thirty-four. He was a widowed father of four young children and an esteemed Boston physician. His political leadership in Massachusetts started in 1765. A protege of Samuel Adams, Warren’s influence began through his writings and orations as a staunch defender of the right of self-government for the American colonists. He served enthusiastically as leader of the Boston Committee of Correspondence, chairman of the Committee of Safety, and ultimately president of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress. The extent of his influence as grandmaster of ancient freemasons throughout North America remains obscure. Warren took part in every major event in Massachusetts including the Liberty incident, the Boston Massacre (after which he treated the wounded), and the Tea Party. He co-authored the Solemn League and Covenant and authored the Suffolk Resolves, which was unanimously endorsed by the First Continental Congress. Warren called the militia to confront the British in Lexington and Concord then worked tirelessly to bring military and governmental order out of chaos in the weeks leading to his ultimate sacrifice on Breed’s Hill. He was the essence of Liberty. Early scholars carefully laid the foundation in their presentation of Joseph Warren’s life by adhering to the available historical record. The realization of a ledger and letters previously unknown offered new information to contemporary biographers about two females associated with Warren. Inferences made using this documentation suggest Warren had intimate relationships with them. The first was Sally Edwards, who was pregnant and unwed. Warren put her in the care of a fellow physician. The second was Mercy Scollay, nanny to Warren’s children. The inferences made by these contemporary authors failed to relate the historical circumstances surrounding these associations. The responsibility of all historians is to introduce their subject through a prescribed conduct of accountability to historical fact and circumstances. Neglect to do so in contemporary accounts of Warren have put at issue the character of this man.[1]
Though fourteen counties in the United States were named for Joseph Warren, by the mid-nineteenth century little more was known of him than the tale of his heroic death. Historian, editor, author, and politician Richard Frothingham was the first to document Joseph Warren’s extensive role in the formation of ideas and actions in pre-revolutionary Massachusetts and the earliest weeks of the American Revolution. Frothingham’s comprehensive biography, Life and Times of Joseph Warren (1865), identified Warren’s profound service as a “Father of the Republic.”[2] Frothingham made no mention of Dr. Nathaniel Ames’ medical ledger and diary accounts of Warren placing Sally Edwards in his care. In regard to Mercy Scollay, Frothingham stated, “…Warren was betrothed to this lady for a second wife.” His cited documentation for this was “Loring’s Orators, 49.” Loring gives no cited documentation for his statement of betrothal.[3]
John Cary completed a dissertation on Joseph Warren at the University of Illinois in 1959.[4] Cary recognized that 20th century historians focused mainly on Congress’s reasoning and actions in the creation of the Declaration of Independence and establishment of the new nation. This emphasis shifted the reality of Warren’s pivotal role in the American Revolution (and that of so many others) into obscurity. To remedy this, Cary devoted himself to the study of Warren, ultimately writing a scholarly biography entitled Joseph Warren: Physician, Politician, Patriot, published in 1961. Cary added additional documentation on Warren’s political and professional involvement. He made no mention of Sally Edwards, though he did expand on the legend that Mercy Scollay was betrothed to Warren, citing a letter from Scollay to John Hancock.[5] Warren purposefully destroyed most of his personal writings, and a fire later consumed what little remained. What Frothingham and Cary did not have was documentation of Warren’s private life. He was thought to be the author of a poem and epitaph published after the death of his wife Elizabeth. Other than that, most information of his private life was passed down in church and newspaper records of marriages, christenings, and deaths. Extensive details of this portion of Warren’s story remain obscure.
When Cary’s biography on Warren was published, I, as an elementary school student, became aware of Joseph Warren through historian Esther Forbes’ novel Johnny Tremain (1948). Forbes’ work kindled in me an enthusiasm for the American Revolution. Her presentation of Warren (and Josiah Quincy Jr.) fascinated my young mind. I would not hear of them again throughout my formal education. It was not until adulthood that I was introduced to the biographies by Frothingham and Cary. These inspired me to write a work of biographical fiction, Liberty’s Martyr: The Story of Dr. Joseph Warren (2009), in the hope of presenting his extraordinary story to those not likely to pick up a work of nonfiction.
Physician Samuel Forman became interested in Joseph Warren through accounts of Warren’s total immersion in the activities and leadership of Massachusetts leading up to and in the early weeks of the American Revolution. Forman noted that Warren maintained a prominent medical practice and instructed his apprentices throughout this turbulent period. He wrote a biography on Warren in 2012 and stated that he wanted to address questions that he viewed as unanswered.[6] Forman presented new information on Warren’s medical practice through the study of his ledgers and attempted to clarify details of his death. He offered conjectures into Warren’s personal life through the accounts of Sally Edwards in Dr. Nathaniel Ames’ medical ledger and diary as well as recently discovered letters written by Mercy Scollay.[7] From these documents, Forman inferred that Warren fathered Edwards’ child, and greatly expanded, based merely on Scollay’s letters, the brief implications made by earlier biographers of Warren’s betrothal to her.[8]
A year after the publication of Forman’s biography, author Nathaniel Philbrick released Bunker Hill: A City, a Siege, a Revolution. In his preface, Philbrick stated his reason for writing this book: “…I hope to provide an intimate account of how over the course of just eighteen months a revolution transformed a city and the towns that surrounded it, and how that transformation influenced what eventually became the United States of America.” Philbrick presented Joseph Warren as the protagonist in his narrative. Not only did Philbrick include Samuel Forman’s biography on Warren in his bibliography, but he noted two conversations with Forman regarding Warren’s relationship to Sally Edwards.[9] Philbrick adhered to the implications made by earlier biographers of Warren’s betrothal to Mercy Scollay and seemingly accepted Forman’s expanded view.
Little is known about Sally Edwards—and less of her association with Warren. He arranged medical care and lodging for Edwards with his friend and colleague Dr. Nathaniel Ames of Dedham. On April 8, 1775, Ames paid a visit to Warren. Ames then created an account in his medical ledger under the heading, “Doctr Joseph Warren.” A fee is entered on April 8 “for “two Journeys to Boston.” On April 10, Ames entered another fee under the same account and identified the fee, “For boarding his fair incognita pregnans.” A diary entry on May 11, reads, “Dr. Warren here.” On June 28, Ames entered a fee for medical services in the Warren account “To deliver her of daughter.” In November, Ames charged a fee for a “gauze cap for the child’s christening.” Various fees are entered by Ames for the boarding of this young woman and her child, and the cost of a wet nurse.[10] Ames’ medical ledger did not clearly identify the patient. It was through Ames’ diary, transcribed by Robert Brand Hanson in 1998, that the connection to Sally Edwards was made. On May 12, 1776, Ames wrote, “Sall Edwards left my house having made much mischief in it.” Hanson noted that in one entry to the “Doctr Joseph Warren” account in the medical ledger, Ames noted next to the payment, “for Sal’s board.” This notation coupled with the charge listed in the ledger for a christening cap for the baby in November 1775 encouraged Hanson to check Dedham church records. He discovered that a mother named Sally Edwards had her daughter baptized on November 19. The last mention in Ames’ ledger of fees for the care of Sally Edward’s child was in 1779.[11]
The aforementioned is the extent of Warren’s documented association to Sally Edwards. In 2012, speculation by Forman on Warren’s reason for placing Edwards in Ames’ care began in spite of this limited documentation. The suggestion was that Ames created the account for Sally Edwards under the name of “Doctr Joseph Warren” because Warren fathered Edwards’ child. It was further inferred by Philbrick in 2013 that Edwards herself was a child of thirteen and that Warren placed her in Dedham to conceal his secret. The name Sally Edwards was mentioned again more than a year after Joseph Warren’s death. Debasing accounts of Edwards were communicated in letters by Mercy Scollay, who has been presented as Warren’s betrothed in every Warren biography regardless of the fact that a betrothal was never known to be stated or documented by either Warren or Scollay.[12]
Forman attempted to reveal a portion of Joseph Warren’s personal life with his brief introduction of Sally Edwards. His narrative of Warren’s paternity was, “Joseph Warren organized the obstetrical care for Sally Edwards, a pregnant teen, in early April of 1775…Warren’s close identification with the proceedings, and posthumous continuation of charges to his account suggest but do not prove Joseph’s paternity.”[13] Though Dr. Ames’ documentation offers no insight into Edwards’ age, Forman identified her as a “teen.” No other consideration was given by Forman as to the many possibilities for Sally Edwards’ plight. Might she have been a victim of rape? In the autumn of 1774, when Edwards would have conceived, there were approximately 3,000 British soldiers in Boston. The town’s population was about 16,000. The ratio was one soldier to every five residents.[14] Could Edwards have been impregnated through incest or even a consensual encounter after which marriage was not possible? Regardless of the circumstances of her being impregnated, in colonial Boston the birth of a child out of wedlock would be considered disgraceful. Edwards and her family would likely be shunned. Her probability of marriage to a decent man would be lessened.
Philbrick developed Forman’s narrative on Sally Edwards. Though he wrote, “There is also the possibility that Sally Edwards had become pregnant by another man, and that Warren was providing her with a discreet safe haven,” Philbrick’s next sentence was, “In all likelihood, however, in mid-to late September 1774, when Warren was caught up in the excitement of the Powder Alarm and the Suffolk Resolves, he got a young woman named Sally Edwards pregnant.” Philbrick further implied (acknowledging Forman’s support in his notes) that this was probably the Sally Edwards who would marry Paul Revere’s eldest son in 1782. Philbrick goes on to suggest, with no documentation, that Edwards was a nanny to the Warren children prior to Mercy Scollay.[15]
A one paragraph account presented in 1874 by Joseph Warren’s nephew, Dr. Edward Warren, was referenced by Forman and Philbrick to support their premise of Joseph Warren being the father of Edwards’ child: “I have attended a lady who was born in Dedham on the 17th of June 1775. Dr. Joseph Warren was engaged to attend her mother in her confinement. It is stated that he visited her on that morning, and finding she had no immediate occasion for his services, told her that he must go to Charlestown to get a shot at the British, and he would return to her in season.”[16] Based on this account, Forman and Philbrick offer the possibility that Warren went to check on Sally Edwards before going to Breed’s Hill. Forman responded to the account with, “If Joseph were the father…He would have never met his fifth child. A family tradition, recorded by a Warren descendant a century later, suggests that he tried unsuccessfully to do so.” Philbrick stated, “We’ll never know for sure whether or not Warren visited Sally Edwards on June 17, but we do know that Dr. Nathaniel Ames delivered her a baby girl, which meant that Edward Warren’s patient might have been Joseph Warren’s illegitimate daughter.”[17] Though Forman and Philbrick use Edward Warren’s account to favor their narrative that Joseph Warren was likely the father of Sally Edwards’ child, neither acknowledged that the woman Dr. Edward Warren attended gave the specific date of her birth as June 17, 1775. This differs from Forman’s account, which lists June 29, 1775 as the date Edwards delivered her daughter (even though the entry of the birth in the Ames ledger is June 28).[18] Philbrick stated that Sally Edwards gave birth “eleven days after the battle.”[19] Of particular interest in regard to Edward Warren’s account is that Dr. Ames made no mention in his diary of Joseph Warren visiting on this momentous day.
To give a clear picture of the intensity of Joseph Warren’s last twenty-four hours it is important to address all he was involved with, as well as this hearsay account. What is known is that Joseph Warren presided over a meeting of the Provincial Congress in Watertown on the evening of June 16.[20] Pressure was on him to establish a military medical department. According to Dr. John Jeffries—a long-time friend—Warren summoned him to secretly meet at a wharf in Boston the night of the 16th. Warren attempted to persuade Jeffries to accept the position of surgeon general of the American medical department. Jeffries refused.[21] Elbridge Gerry, a friend and fellow delegate to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, shared a room with Warren in Watertown. Gerry stated that Warren told him privately that he intended to participate in the battle.[22]
The Watertown Historical Society has in its collection a letter which states that Warren attended a laboring woman the morning of June 17: “Gen. Warren on the morning of Bunker Hill stopped at the house [Oliver Wendall Holmes birthplace, Cambridge, MA] on his way down from Watertown and Newton, having spent the night at Newton in attendance on a case of childbirth, and the day before at Watertown in attendance in the legislation.”[23] Warren was not in attendance for the morning meeting of the Provincial Congress in Watertown on June 17, but he did preside over the meeting of the Committee of Safety at the Hasting’s House in Cambridge that same morning.[24] Dr. David Townsend, a former apprentice of Warren’s, offered an account of Joseph’s whereabouts in the mid-afternoon of June 17, 1775. Townsend states that he found Warren at the Hasting’s House in Cambridge where he was resting in an attempt to alleviate a headache.[25]
Can the accounts of Dr. Jeffries, Elbridge Gerry, the laboring woman in Newton, the Dedham patient of Dr. Edward Warren, and Dr. Townsend work together to give a possible chronology of Warren’s last day? It is feasible that after the June 16 evening meeting of Congress in Watertown, Dr. Warren went to a wharf in Boston to meet with Dr. Jeffries. After this meeting he may have slept a few hours in Watertown alongside Elbridge Gerry before possibly being summoned to attend a laboring patient in Newton. From there, where did he go?
Is it reasonable that as president of the Provincial Congress and chairman of the Committee of Safety—on the morning of a major battle in which he intended to participate—Warren decided to check on Sally Edwards in Dedham even though Ames, a competent physician, was presiding over her care? From the Newton/Watertown area to Dedham, as the crow flies, is about twelve miles. It would take approximately one hour to travel this distance at a canter on horseback.[26] After establishing that Sally Edwards was doing well, did Warren then travel, as the crow flies, fifteen miles from Dedham to Cambridge? This ride, at a canter, would take over one hour. Would Warren, having possibly been up the night before, purposely tie up two hours on such a crucial day to make an unnecessary trip to Dedham, or would he, with the major responsibilities upon him that morning, have headed straight to Cambridge? This would not negate the story of Edward Warren’s patient. Rather than her being the daughter of Sally Edwards, might she have been the daughter of the woman Joseph Warren was said to have attended in Newton in the early hours of June 17?
According to Philbrick, Forman shared with him in “a personal communication” that Dr. David Townsend may have been complicit in a lie to conceal Warren’s visit to Edwards on
June 17 by falsely stating he was with Warren that day. Philbrick claims that Forman said Townsend was, “covering for Warren, who maybe did go to Dedham that morning.”[27] The problem with this theory is that Townsend’s statement was that he saw Warren the afternoon of the 17th; therefore Townsend’s account does not indicate that he was “covering for” Warren’s whereabouts on that morning as Forman suggests. To further undo this theory, it has been documented that Warren took his position as chairman at the morning meeting of the Committee of Safety in Cambridge.[28]
Though there were multiple women and girls named Sally Edwards residing in and around Boston in 1775, Philbrick and Forman focused on the one who would eventually marry the son of Paul Revere. They alleged that the pregnant patient with Dr. Nathaniel Ames was the daughter of Dolin and Rebecca Edwards. She was born in 1761 and baptized on September 20 that same year. Her father was a mastmaker in Boston. Sally was the second of five children. Her mother died in 1771. Dolin died in 1773.[29] If she was impregnated in 1774, she may have just turned thirteen. In the Massachusetts Bay Colony, legal guardianship was required until the age of fourteen. Sally, by law, was a minor—a child. Given her young age, her probable vulnerable mental state following the death of her parents, and the colony on the brink of war, all scenarios of her being impregnated are grievous.[30] Why would Philbrick and Forman take the inferential leap of Joseph Warren taking sexual advantage of a child rather than offer consideration to numerous other scenarios? Forman states on his website, “The young doctor may have been attracted to teenagers. His first spouse was barely seventeen at marriage…Sally Edwards, a female whose obstetrical care he arranged secretly in 1775, may well have been an underage teen.”[31] Philbrick refers to Sally Edwards as Warren’s mistress: “He left behind a fiancée (one of his patients) and a mistress he’d recently impregnated.” The word “mistress” implies that the sexual relationship was consensual. A child under the age of legal majority cannot consent.[32]
Dolin Edwards’ brother Robert also had a daughter named Sally born in 1761. This Sally married Isacc Wilkins. She, too, would have been thirteen years old in 1775 and considered a child.[33] There was a third Sally Edwards born in Boston and baptized on September 24, 1758 (seemingly a twin, as her brother Benjamin was baptized with her). If she survived childhood, she would have been sixteen years old in 1775. She was the daughter of Edward and Elisabeth Edwards. Edward Edwards was listed as a patient in Dr. Joseph Warren’s medical ledger. Other than the recording of this Sally Edwards’ baptism, there is no known documentation pertaining to her.[34]
The reasoning fueling Philbrick and Forman’s belief that Joseph Warren was the father of Sally Edwards’ child is that Warren put her in the care of Nathaniel Ames and that he made payments to this account.[35] Could there be other explanations for Warren placing Edwards with Ames? Like Warren, Ames had many obstetrical cases in his practice, including several unwed patients. If Edwards was indeed thirteen years old, she was in a high-risk pregnancy. If she were Warren’s patient, would he not want her in the care of a physician competent in obstetrics and away from the complexities, prying eyes, and subsequent condemnation of those in Boston? Perhaps Joseph Warren never even met Sally Edwards. Her plight may not have come to his attention until early April of 1775, after which he simply made arrangements for her care. Forman makes an undocumented claim on his website that the payments to Ames for Edwards and her baby came from Warren’s estate.[36] Did Warren use his own money to cover the charges for Edwards and her baby? According to the Ames ledger, payments were made under the name of Warren and his former apprentices David Townsend and William Eustis.[37] The payments, though made by them, do not determine that the money came from any of these physicians. Might it be possible that the family of Edwards—or the actual father of the child—gave Warren, Townsend, and Eustis the money to pay the bill? If this was the Sally Edwards that married Paul Revere’s son, might the younger Revere have been the father? Warren and Revere were intimate friends.[38] There was one payment entered in Ames’ ledger that was not of currency. This payment (of a medical book Warren had owned) was made after Warren’s death by William Eustis. Should this be considered evidence that Warren was therefore responsible for Sally Edwards’ debt? Warren was dead and did not give the book to Ames—Eustis did—and perhaps Eustis had purchased it from his former teacher.
Statements were later made about a Sally Edwards on July 27 and December 8, 1776, in two letters authored by Mercy Scollay. In these letters Scollay referred to this Sally Edwards as “the little hussy” and “that little vixen of a girl.”[39] Whether or not this was the same Sally Edwards placed in the care of Dr. Ames is not known. Nor is it known why Scollay affixed such libelous terms to this girl.
In 2018, Christian Di Spigna authored a fourth biography on Joseph Warren denouncing Forman and Philbrick’s conjecture of Warren’s paternity to Edwards’ child. Di Spigna’s work added insight to Warren’s finances and magnified his role in the Battle of Bunker Hill. Like Forman and Philbrick, Di Spigna seemingly sought to fill in the blanks of Warren’s personal life by amplifying the legendary narrative of betrothal between Scollay and Warren.[40]
What is known of Joseph Warren’s association with Scollay? Her father, John Scollay, was a Boston Selectmen and Warren’s friend. Dr. Warren was physician to the Scollay family. Mercy Scollay made numerous visits to his surgery. There was always a fee charged.[41] Mercy Scollay was thirty-four years old in 1775. Scollay never married. She lived with her parents. She used a crutch, indicating a physical disability.[42] In the spring of 1775, with news of British reinforcements enroute, many Whig families left Boston. Scollay’s parents remained. Warren moved his valuables and some of his furniture out of Boston and made plans with Dr. Elijah Dix, a colleague in Worcester, to place his children under Dix’s care. Scollay accompanied the children.[43] There is no documentation to indicate why Warren sent his children to Worcester or why Scollay went with them. Conceivably, he wanted his children far from the coming conflict and easy reach of the British. As for Scollay, perhaps she did not want to stay with her parents in British-occupied Boston—to become nanny to Warren’s children offered her the opportunity to leave.
Upon learning of Joseph’s death, Scollay asserted custody of his orphaned children.[44] There is no known account of Warren giving Scollay legal custody of his children or of any binding relationship acknowledged by him. Scollay never stated in her letters that she was betrothed to Warren. Warren’s mother and brothers had no knowledge of such an arrangement. There is no historical reference from Scollay’s family or Warren’s friends validating the claim—including Warren’s minister, Dr. Samuel Cooper, who was in communication with Warren until his death.[45]
Forman and Di Spigna used excerpts from Scollay’s letters as confirmation of a betrothal. Reading these letters in their entirety, with a clear understanding of the individuals mentioned as well as the circumstances surrounding the timing of said letters, gives the reader an awareness beyond the legendary implications of earlier biographers. These unsubstantiated implications were, it seems, the basis from which Forman and Di Spigna advanced their presumptive narrative of a romance between Warren and Scollay .[46]
Forman and Di Spigna lauded Scollay’s determination, communicated in her letters, to keep the Warren orphans and obtain financial support. They used comments from these letters as confirmation of a pledged relationship. Yet, if this romantic tale were true, it portrayed Warren’s supposed secret connection to Scollay as cruel and reckless. His children became enmeshed in a tug of war between Scollay and the Warren family. Warren’s mother and brothers, while dealing with the grief of their immense loss and facing the horror of war, found themselves entangled in a custody battle that Scollay made public. Had Warren been in a committed relationship with Scollay, his failure to make it known was negligent. To bind Scollay, possibly disabled with no source of income, to the obligation of raising four children would have been irresponsible.
Forman claimed, based on a hearsay account, that while at a social gathering in 1774 Warren flirtatiously challenged Scollay to write a satire on the female love of dress. Mercy Otis Warren (no relation to Joseph Warren) wrote the satire.[47] In his biography, Forman disregards Mercy Otis Warren’s authorship and puts forth his fiction that Joseph Warren, through this imagined flirtatious challenge, publicly displayed a romantic interest in Scollay.[48] Di Spigna made claim that the tale of two windowpanes are proof of Warren’s betrothal to Scollay. Di Spigna wrote that Scollay “…etched her name on a glass windowpane with the diamond ring Warren gave her – a permanent testament to what had once existed between the engaged couple…” And that Warren “…had engraved his own name on a window in the old Marshal Fowle house, just prior to his death on the battlefield.” There is no documentation of either Warren or Scollay having had such a ring. The historical societies in Worcester and Watertown are not aware of existing windowpanes or photographs of these panes.[49] Forman, Di Spigna, and Philbrick expand their assertion of betrothal on claims Scollay made in her letters to Dr. Elijah Dix and his wife Dorothea, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock, as well as comments made in response to her letters by Samuel Adams and Benedict Arnold. Forman and Philbrick asserted that Warren’s reference to Scollay as “family” in a letter dated April 10, 1775, solidifies a status of betrothal: “…my children & family I hope will arrive at Worcester by next Thursday Night…”[50] In this letter, Warren clearly separates “my children” from “& family.” Therefore, Scollay being included in Warren’s use of the word “family” may have indicated that she was the children’s nanny.[51]
Can there be any doubt that following the death of Joseph Warren the emotions of his mother and brothers were raw? Joseph Warren died intestate. The immediate needs and responsibility of his children, possessions, and debt would fall upon them. Following Joseph Warren’s death, his mother made a trip to Worcester to see her grandchildren. After this visit, Scollay began to publicly claim custody of the Warren orphans. The first known reference is in a letter she wrote to Dr. Dix on August 17, 1775. She stated, “I’ve seen the two Mr Adamses Mr Hancock and Dr Cooper but find nothing can be done respecting the children till a Judge is appointed and I cannot hold them one moment after the relations claim their right.”
Scollay also seemed to imply that she should have had authority over dispensing with Warren’s belongings: “—My first enquiry was for Mr Hancock whom I was lucky eno’ to find—I told him that I had learnt since I came down what was doing with the few effects my poor friend [Joseph Warren] was possesst of out of Boston—that John W—n had sold every feather bed to General Washinton [sic] and for ought I know every thing else—” Scollay went on to claim, “Mr H-—k appeared much affected at my relation, said his brother had no right to doo those things without proper authority and would certainly be calld to account for those proceedings.”[52] “John W—n,” referred to in the letter, is Joseph Warren’s youngest brother Dr. John Warren.[53] He apprenticed under Joseph Warren for his medical training. John Warren lived in his brother’s home with his sister-in-law Elizabeth and his nieces and nephews. He was part of the household when Elizabeth died and stayed with his brother during those tumultuous weeks of sorrow and restructuring his family life. When Scollay wrote this letter, Dr. John Warren was a medical officer in the Continental Army.[54] Scollay stated that John Warren “had no right” to sell his brother’s feather beds and claimed that Hancock agreed. There is no account, other than Scollay’s, of Hancock agreeing or of him confronting John. Nor were the feather beds sold. The mattresses were not taken when Washington left Massachusetts in early April 1776.[55] Given the all-consuming state of affairs at this time, it is inconceivable that Scollay would trouble Hancock about feather beds.
Of note is an entry in the diary of Dr. Samuel Cooper, minister to the Warren family, made on August 18, the day after Scollay’s aforementioned letter was written. Cooper wrote, “…Mercy Scollay and General Warren’s little Daughters lodg’d with us.” Cooper clearly stated that the “little Daughters” were General Warren’s. Though he had access to Warren before his death, Cooper did not imply any relationship between General Warren and Mercy Scollay.[56]
Scollay wrote within the same August 17 letter, “…I’ve not been to Roxbury and believe I shall not attempt it… I think my dear little girls too valuable to risque for the sake of seeing those who care so little for them.” Scollay’s denunciation that Mary Stevens Warren, her sons, and her extended family had little concern for the children seems to distort reality and demean the very individuals whom Joseph Warren trusted and loved.
The second letter in the Scollay papers was written after her return to Boston. This undated letter was to Dorothea Dix. The third letter, to Dr. Dix, also from Boston, is dated April 26, 1776. Three weeks earlier, John and Eben Warren located the body of their brother on Breed’s Hill. On April 8, a great crowd gathered for Joseph Warren’s funeral. Scollay’s father John was a pallbearer.[57] Mercy Scollay made no mention in these aforementioned letters of this significant event. What she did mention is worth noting:
If I saw any Prospect of sutable provision being made for my dear little charge it would animate me I think but in short the Father can no longer be servicable, and all his former exertions in the cause of his country seems obliterated from the minds of those who I tho’t would be foremost, to pay a grateful tribute to his memory, which they could not, more effectually than to promote any scheme for the benefit of his belovd offspring.
If one considers the backdrop of when these letters were written, Scollay’s complaints seem rash and detached from reality. The British, only a few weeks earlier, had evacuated Boston after destroying property and supplies. Families who had fled were returning. General George Washington and Congress were uncertain of the British Army’s next move. All was in a state of chaos. Only three weeks prior, a “grateful tribute” to Warren’s memory was held. The participants in his funeral could hardly be deemed guilty of having “obliterated” from their minds Warren’s “former exertions in the cause of his country.” Their minds at this moment were strained with consequential matters. Scollay’s sense of immediacy to have funds made ready for the orphans seems odd given the complexity of the circumstances. And, the orphans were no longer Scollay’s “charge” as they were now in the care of and supported by their deceased father’s family.
Scollay also put forth in this letter what seems like a promotion of her importance. She stated, “…since I came to Town Dr Bulfinch waited on me.” Her implication was that Bulfinch sought her out to discuss his proposal to open a Smallpox Hospital before presenting it to the General Court. This was a plan that Bulfinch and Warren considered, and set money aside for, many years earlier. Scollay shared in this letter to Dr. Dix that there would be a profit from this hospital, and that Warren’s children would be beneficiaries.[58] Dr. Bulfinch’s proposal to the General Court was rejected—but one must question whether Bulfinch shared this information with Mercy.[59] Involving a woman in such a conversation without her husband or father present would be rare based on Colonial customs. Yet Scollay, a spinster, claimed to have had the personal attention and affecting the emotions of prominent men such as Bulfinch, John Hancock, Samuel and John Adams. She claimed that she initiated contact with these men—or in the case of Bulfinch, he sought her out. Scollay never mentioned her father in regard to these contacts. Why would Dr. Bulfinch go to Scollay? Her father was a Boston selectman. It seems more feasible that Bulfinch went to Selectman John Scollay rather than his daughter. A second matter of particular interest in this letter is Scollay’s statement to Dr. Dix: “…I impatiently long to see the dear little ones and have papa’s and mama’s promose that I shall; but they think I ought to wait till the young Philosopher has been to see me which he has not yet done…” The “young Philosopher” would have been a therapist of sorts.[60]
Scollay’s fourth letter, in which she related a conversation with Dr. John Warren, was dated May 10, 1776, and addressed to Dorothea Dix. John Warren, now a head surgeon in the Continental Army, had orders to set out for New York two days after this letter was written. Scollay wrote of her perception of John’s manner and a seemingly private conversation she claimed to have had with him. “I tho’t he seemd reservd and expected he would say something on former subjects, which he at last did by telling me he understood I had said I tho’t myself very ungenerously treated by him, and the rest of the Family that I had a prior claim to the children…” In Scollay’s first letter, written two months after Joseph’s death, she stated that she went to Joseph’s friends, seemingly to gain the support of these influential men against his mother and brothers. Is it any wonder that the Warren family, going through their own grief and personal struggles, treated Scollay “ungenerously?”
Scollay also claimed in this letter that she told John Warren,
…some of my family had reported there was a connexion between this Brother and me which he was ignorant of, and was much surpriz’d that his brother should never mention such a design to him—I was a little nettled at his manner of speaking and told him twas an affair of too much delicacy for me to converse upon but had his Brother continued here, he might have been better inform’d perhaps by this time…
Scollay did not identify who in her family reported this “connexion.” Scollay shared that she was “a little nettled” with John’s reaction after she told him this. Her response indicates that he may have asked her for more information. She implied she was unwilling to offer this information, and told him if “his Brother continued here, he might have been better inform’d perhaps by this time…” The problem for John was his brother was dead and could not defend himself against Scollay’s claims or substantiate them. She went on to tell John, “…as to my being ungenerously treated I should always think so and was greatly hurt by an insinuation of his Brothers to your husband, that my anxiety respecting the children might be owing to my haveing no place to be at myself…” This statement indicates that both Eben and Sam Warren, John’s remaining older brothers, went to Dr. Dix and voiced their concern. Scollay was a spinster who relied on a crutch. She had little hope of having a family of her own. Joseph’s orphans gave her a ready-made family. Could there be any truth in their concern? If she could convince the Warren family her claims were true, she would need income to raise the children. The potential of proceeds from Dr. Bulfinch’s smallpox hospital, money from Congress, and donations from Joseph’s friends would provide the income. Scollay ended her account of John’s visit with, “…we parted good friends….” It appears that John did believe they parted on friendly terms, and seemingly the Warren family now empathized with the pain Scollay was feeling in not being with the children. There is no indication that the Warrens ever doubted her love and concern for them—only her claim to custody.
Only two weeks later, on May 21, 1776, Scollay sent a seven page letter to John Hancock in Philadelphia. She opened with, “Will Mr. Hancock permit an obscure friend to intrude upon him….”[61] When this letter was received, Hancock was grieving the passing of his aunt who had raised him. As president of the Continental Congress, he was under enormous stress in dealing with the horror of what the colonies were facing, overseeing the writing of the Declaration of Independence, preparing for its potential consequences in Europe, and readying the army for imminent battle. Scollay offered condolences for Hancock’s loss, and then stated, “Shall I give you a little [underlined by Scollay] History of myself since I saw you, then ask your advice, and solicit your assistance?” This question was followed by five pages of dramatic scenes of the Warren orphans being taken from her by their uncle Eben; her great emotional suffering; disparagement of Eben and his mother with accusations of neglect; and schemes to have the children in her permanent care. “Oh, Mr. Hancock,” Scollay wrote, “my pen here refuses to paint the scene, and my eyes are surcharged with tears as recollection brings to view the Dear little creatures clinging around my neck and begging everybody not to let uncle Eben take them from Miss Mercy…I offered to take youngest immediately as my own…This offer was likewise rejected….” This letter was written months after the children went to live with their grandmother. In that time Joseph’s family had gone through the gruesome circumstances of locating his body and arranging a proper burial.[62] They had worked at settling the children. They dealt with the perplexity of Joseph’s debt. And, Mary Stevens Warren also had to deal with the emotions of sending yet another son off to war.
Scollay’s complaint to Hancock of the orphans’ grandmother and Uncle Eben was,
—They have had no schooling since they left me, and Josey tho’ eight years old can little more than tell his letters, his uncle told me he had provided a school for him at Roxbury but…he cries when his grandmother mentions anything to him about going and the old Lady’s misplaced fondness is such that she can’t bear to grive him and he takes advantage of that weakness and I’m afraid will not be prevailed on to pursue any studies.—The old Lady treats me with a great deal of tenderness and says there’s no one she should (rather) have than me to superintend their Education, uncle Eben behaves pretty well I fear will be loth the children should come to Boston least any monies should go beside his pocket—this is between ourselves—. My wish is this; tell me if I’m right that after the danger from the small pox and further Invasions from our enemies is at an end and the little folks may be brought to Boston, Josey and Dicky placed with some school master where I can often see them and know what progress they make—the two little girls I would wish to have under my care and would exert every talent I’m Mistress of for their benefit…[63]
Josey and Dicky, ages eight and six, had already gone through a great deal of turmoil and heartache. Yet, Scollay proposed these young boys be taken from the support and comfort of their family and placed in the home of a stranger. Their grandmother understood the importance of a good education. Both Joseph and John attended Harvard (John did not read until the age of ten).[64] Perhaps she was giving Josey time to heal emotionally. If what Scollay was stating about Josey missing school was true, it did not last. He would go on to attend Harvard. Her insult against Eben regarding spending money on the children and request for Hancock’s secrecy was inappropriate. There is no reason to believe Hancock knew Eben personally.
Scollay winded down her letter to Hancock with, “…nothing I should think too hard a task for the service of those dear Children and look on myself religiously bound by the promises I made my Friend that in case he fell a victim to the rage of Power I would be the Protecteress of his little offspring.” Did Scollay make these promises directly to Joseph prior to her accompanying the children to Worcester? Were they stated in a letter? Were they utterances made without him even being present? She failed to relate Joseph’s response, if there was one, to these promises she claimed to have made. Not only did Scollay involve Hancock through this letter, but she requested that he share what she wrote with Samuel and John Adams: “…ask their advice in conjunction with yours.” Again, almost a year prior, Scollay had been told by Hancock, the Adamses, and Rev. Cooper that only a judge could determine her claim to the children. There is no known response from John Hancock to this letter.
The Warrens probably did not know about Scollay’s debasing letter. As stated in Scollay’s letter to Dorothea Dix on July 27, 1776, when the smallpox inoculation was offered in Boston, Mary Stevens Warren placed the three youngest children in the care of the Scollays. “…You have heard I suppose before this that my Dear little children are again with me, and are under inovulation for the small pox….” Scollay expressed pleasure in caring for the three children. Yet, her turmoil in not having the oldest child in her care—and her animosity toward the woman that was caring for this child—was revealed in the next paragraph. Though the paragraph is long, it exposes Scollay’s seeming patronization of Joseph’s mother as well as Scollay’s scheming; bitterness; gossip; and a need to be validated:
…but was you not surprix’d when nurse told you that Betsy was to have it with Mrs M—s little boy—I knew you would be, and in order to increase your astonishment beleive me I was the cause of it. –Me thinks I see you role your eyes up, and say, is it possible Miss Scollay could be so imprudent, she told me she was a hipocrite and she has now evidencd it by her conduct; after such duplicity of behaviour what am I to think of her—but stop my dear before you censure your Friend too highly, hear her vindication and the reasons she had for her conduct and then applaud or condemn her—When the selectmen had taken of the prohibition concerning inoculation I became uneasy about my little folks, fearing their Grandmama would be unwilling they should be brought into Town; however I detirmend to doo all in my Power to persuade her; I was detaind for some days and could not go over but as soon as I could I went, and at the south end met uncle Eben comming in for me and said his mother wanted to see me very much—when I arrived at the old Ladys she told me Mrs M—r had sent out that morning and desired to have Betsy come and have it with her little boy, but she did not chuse to give her consent till she had heard what my mind was concerning the matter—I did not hisitate to give my consent and now will tell you my reasons; in the first place I thot tho’ she was no friend to me, in some of her whimcial moments she might befriend the dear little girl; in the next place it might stop the censures of the World respecting old storys, when the old Lady countenaced her, and lastly I tho’t as they referd it to me I had better not say much least they should think I was prejudiced and I was not unaquainted with her art, the old Lady ask’d me if I was against going to see Betsy there intimating that she should be unwilling to have her go without I would visit her; I told her she might depend on it I would see Betsy let her be where she would, that I was not much accquainted with the Lady, and there was some places I had rather frequent than that house, but I would visit Betsy even there—the dear little girl begd I would go with her when she came to Town to be inoculated and I promised her I would not doubting she would treat me with civility I accordingly went; and was treated with the most audacious insolenc; I need only say she put on all her haughty airs behaved ungenteely that uncle Eben who was present resented it for me, and told me he should not blame me if I never went to her house again—Indeed I never have been, but have sent to enquire after Betsy and the messengers have been treated with as much politeness as your Friend –
“Mrs M—r” was probably Betsey Cary Miller. Scollay’s claims of Mary and Eben Warren’s remarks to her were only that—claims. Scollay’s statement, “…in the next place it might stop the censures of the World respecting old storys…,” may indicate an established animosity toward Betsey Miller with no explanation. Of interest is the fact that Betsey Miller wrote a letter to John Warren on July 22, 1776, five days before Scollay’s scathing letter was written to Dorothea Dix. Miller’s letter offers a different view.
Sir—it is with pleasure I inform you, your niece Betsey is with me. She was inoculated for the small-pox fourteen days agone, and is likely to have it very light. It was with some difficulty I was favored with her company, as Miss Scollay thought it most proper to take her herself. While in my family, she shall be treated with all the tenderness in my power. I have sent repeatedly for the children to come and see me, but am denied, and shall not repeat the request. I hear they are not to return to Roxbury, but to board at Mr. Scollay’s. Should that be the case, I don’t expect ever to have the pleasure of seeing them. However, if this is for their good, I desire to submit. I had thoughts of keeping Betsey this summer, if agreeable to you and her friends at Roxbury, to go to school, and fixing her up in a proper manner, as she is in want of many things. I have not forgot the last words of your dear brother, concerning the children…[65]
Betsey Miller indicated she spoke with Joseph Warren about his children shortly before his death. Her written concern for the well-being of the three youngest children and expression of sadness in not being able to see them reveals an attachment to the family. Miller also exhibited a familiarity with John in the informal closing signature, “Yours, Betsey Miller.”
Scollay’s libelous attack of Miller in the July 27 letter continued—and included another: “…she has taken Sally Edwards who may (you know I was so concernd about) to live with her and has already learned her to be as impudent as herself and the little hussy treated mama…in the most saucy manner you can conceive…” Is this the Sally Edwards that gave birth in June of 1775? According to Dr. Nathaniel Ames, Sally Edwards left his home on May 12, 1776, two months before Scollay’s letter.[66]
Scollay’s letter to Dorothea Dix dated December 9 is a continuance of Scollay’s seeming egotism and gossip:
..I have been to see my little ones twice since I came home and found them well and as glad to see me as ever; the last time I was there the old lady beg’d me to come and spend two or three days with her for she had got a great deal to say to me, and I found out afterwards by Sarah that the old lady has been in a great deal of trouble, owing to that wicked woman and the Miss Minots who are her confederates, and they have made that little vixen of a girl, Sally Edwards the instrument of their Malice—I had not time to learn the particulars but find there has been some storys told of poor Sarah, detrimental to the memory of my departed friend, forged and propogated by that artfull woman and her accomplices, Eben has been over to her about it, and there has been a great muster among them—thankfull am I that my neck is out of the collar, and were it not for my concern for the memory of my dear friend, and the anguish it gives his mother I shouldnot be very sorry to have uncle E—n pesterd a little, in order to convince them who are true friends—Betsy is still permitted to remain there and under the tuition of madm and her chamber maid is taught to dispise her pious Grandmother….”
The identity of Sarah is not known. The “artfull” and “wicked woman” is Betsey Miller, and now the “Miss Minots” are labeled as her “accomplices” and “confederates.” The Minot family was well-known and respected in Boston. When the Warrens needed a place to bury Joseph, it was one of the Minots who offered his family tomb.[67] Scollay implied that Eben spoke to Mrs. Miller about the stories being told that Scollay claimed were, “detrimental to the memory” of his brother Joseph. Surely if Eben thought Joseph’s daughter was being told disparaging things about her dead father, would he not have removed her from this home?[68] There is no supporting reference to Betsey Warren being taught to “dispise her pious Grandmother….”[69] Scollay’s imputation of Sally Edwards as “the little hussy” in the July 27 letter was now expanded with her comment, “that little vixen of a girl.” Scollay’s descriptions indicate Edwards was a child. Is Scollay’s use of the word hussy an indication that she knew or heard rumors that this child had a baby? If so, Scollay’s reaction to such a tragic occurrence offers no mercy for the victimization of this girl. Scollay also requested that the contents of this letter remain secret: “… This letter must be read only by you, and your other self in confidence, because there is many things between us which is of no consequence to anyone, that dont love me so well as I flatter myself you doo…”
On March 18, 1777, Samuel Adams wrote to Scollay from Philadelphia:
I admire your Fidelity to our departed Friend, discovered in your unceasing Anxiety for the Education and future Well-being of his Children. A few Days before I left Boston in October last, I had an opportunity of conversing with one of the Mr. Warrens upon the subject. I told him what we had proposed for Miss Betsy; but there seemed to be a Difficulty in removing her from the place where she had been invited to live, upon the Love of Friendship to her late father and had been treated with so much civility and kindness…[70]
In May of 1777, Scollay continued to vilify Betsey Miller and claimed to have finessed her ability to influence Mary Stevens Warren. In a letter to Dorothea Dix she stated,
…I know it will give you pleasure to hear that the old Lady is my fast friend and treats me with a tenderness, not inferior to that she bestows on her own Children; I spent last week with her… and have her promise that my little favorite Polly shall spend next winter with me if the times are less distracted than now—she is greatly distressd about Betty’s continuing with that woman, and seems to have as great a dislike to her moral character as you or I have, but her sones are fearfull of offending a woman, who has art enough to make them beleive she is a most valuable friend—I have not yet talkd with John Warren on the subject, but as the old Lady is desirous I should I intend the first opportunity I have, to deliver my sentiments with the greatest freedom and doubt not being heard with candor, as his behaviour is much alterd from what it was owing I beleive to the kind offices of my good friend Mr Adams from whome I have lately had a very kind letter of thanks for my fidelity to his friend, and promises to assist me in everything in his power—Mr Hancock will be in Town next week then I suppose we shall know where Josey’s place is fixd for his Education, and if he retains the same sentiments which he did at Worcester I shall beg him to help me with regard to the others…
In July of 1777, Dr. John Warren accepted a post to oversee the military hospital in Boston. He married in November. The newlyweds took the children of his brother Joseph into their home.[71]
On August 6, 1778, General Benedict Arnold sent a letter to Dr. David Townsend, who was serving as an army surgeon. Arnold informed Townsend that he sent $500 to Mercy Scollay for the education of the Warren orphans. There is no known reference of whether Scollay passed that money on to the Warrens for this purpose. Nor has it been established if Scollay initiated contact with Arnold to seek the funds.[72]
Samuel Adams’ letter written on December 20, 1779, to Joseph Warren’s friends Elbridge Gerry and James Lovell references the children:
Since my last letter to you, I have had an opportunity of conversing with Dr. John Warren, brother of our deceased friend, concerning the situation of his children. He tells me, that the eldest son was, as early as it could be done, put under the care and tuition of the Rev. Mr. Payson, of Chelsea…The lad still remains with him. The eldest daughter, a miss of about thirteen, is with the doctor; and he assures me, that no gentleman’s daughter in this town has more of the advantage of schools than she has at his expense…The two younger children, a boy of about seven years, and a girl somewhat older, are in the family of John Scollay, Esq., under the particular care of his daughter, at her most earnest request….Miss Scollay deserves the greatest praise for her attention to them. She is exceedingly well qualified for her charge; and her affection for their deceased father prompts her to exert her utmost to inculcate in the minds of these children those principles which may conduce “to render them worthy of the relation they stood in” to him.[73]
Benedict Arnold continued sending money to Scollay toward the care of the Warren orphans totaling 2909.9 sterling—equivalent to $3685.24 then and to approximately $92,500 today.[74] Scollay’s July 2, 1780, letter to him stated, “…and as I don’t presume upon any further supplies from you personally I have given up the little boy to his uncle…the little girl is still with me and as her schooling is paid for the ensuing quarter, I shall keep her till that time expires….”[75]
Scollay’s known subsequent letters make no mention of the Warren children. Her seven page letter to John Hancock dated May 21, 1776, is included in the microfilm collection of the Hancock family papers at the MHS, though the original letter resides in the papers of John Collins Warren (son of John Warren and nephew of Joseph). Might Hancock have given the letter to Dr. John Warren?[76] Perhaps the Warrens became aware of her attacks on their character and manipulative behavior reflected in the letters through Hancock. On October 30, 1781, John Warren went before the Court to take guardianship of the four children. His brothers Eben and Sam signed the documents as well.[77] Seemingly, the Warren family did not make a public issue of Mercy Scollay’s claims and attempts to gain custody of the children. For years they allowed her to be part of the children’s lives. Ultimately, the Warrens’ felt a need to have full legal standing through a private guardianship hearing.[78]
It is of interest that even John Warren’s youngest child, Edward, may have been unaware of the tumult Scollay caused in the five years after Joseph’s death.[79] Loring, Frothingham, Edward Warren, and Cary did not have access to Scollay’s letters to the Dixes. Seemingly, their portrayal of betrothal to Warren was based on Scollay’s written accounts to Hancock and Samuel Adams claiming what appear to be unreciprocated promises made to Joseph Warren and her petitions for custody of his children. Forman, Philbrick, and Di Spigna had full access to Scollay’s letters. They seemingly adhere to her unsubstantiated claims and disregard her schemes for possession of the children, thus negating the extenuating circumstances of the times and emotional struggle of the Warren family. In doing this, they present Scollay—not the Warren family and the children themselves—as the victim.
“Within a year after the death of [Joseph] Warren, it was resolved, by the Continental Congress, that his eldest son should be educated at the public expense; and two or three years later, it was further resolved that public provision should be made for the education of the other children, until the youngest should be of age.”[80]It was further resolved byCongress that the half-pay of a general officer be granted for the children’s care from the time of their father’s death and continue until the youngest child “shall be of age.”[81] Credit for Congress’s resolution for the education and financial care of the Warren children in both Di Spigna and Forman’s biographies is given to Scollay’s influence and persistence. What was not recognized is that the demands on Congress were colossal. Joseph Warren’s close friends presented the resolutions to see to the education and financial care of his children when the time was right.
The authors of current nonfictional work on Dr. Joseph Warren seemingly neglected to honor the historical record. Mercy Scollay was presented, with no supporting documentation, as being betrothed to Warren, having legal claim to his children, and having gained from Congress financial stability for the orphans. To accomplish this, credit was given to her for verse authored by Mercy Otis Warren; tales of engraved windowpanes purported to be “…a permanent testament to what had once existed between the engaged couple…”; and promises she claimed to have made to Warren with no mention of his response to said promises.[82] Little consideration was given by these authors to the Warren brothers’ concern that Scollay may have been unwittingly using the children to obtain a family of her own. The portrayal by Di Spigna, Forman, and Philbrick that Joseph Warren irresponsibly made his children the legal obligation of a woman with no means of support paints a picture of a negligent parent and callous man. That he would hold back this important information from his mother and brothers implies a sense of disrespect and cruelty.
In the case of Sally Edwards, minimal documentation within the medical ledger of Dr. Nathaniel Ames, with no regard to the historical setting or significance of the time, was used to propose a derogatory and disturbing narrative. The casual attitude presented in the relationship of Warren to Edwards depicts a thirteen-year-old as a consenting sexual partner rather than a victim of the physical and emotional scars such an act and subsequent pregnancy would inflict on one so young.
Early Warren biographers Richard Frothingham and John Cary lamented, but accepted, what they considered a lack of personal information pertaining to Dr. Joseph Warren.[83] Samuel Forman, Nathaniel Philbrick, and Christian Di Spigna attempted to fill this gap. Yet, the manner in which they presented new material pertaining to Warren’s medical practice and private life to achieve that objective did not warrant the type of inferential leaps made. Seemingly, they did not realize that the outcome of their pursuit came at the cost of a good man’s reputation.
[1]Nathaniel Ames, Ledger Book 1765-1822, Dedham Historical Society, 100; Mercy Scollay, Mercy Scollay Papers, 1775-1824, History Cambridge.
[2]Historical Trustees 11-20, Boston Public Library, Accessed 8/7/2024, https://www.bpl.org/about-the-bpl/board-of-trustees/historical-trustees-2/ ; Richard Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, , (Little, Brown, & Company, Boston, MA, 1865), V-VIII.
[3]Frothingham, Life and Times, 543; James Spear Loring, Hundred Boston Orators, (John P. Jewett and Company, Boston, MA, 1853), 49.
[4]Illinois University Library, Accessed 8/8/2024, https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/items/56327.
[5]John Cary, Joseph Warren: Physician, Politician, Patriot, (University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1964), 217; Scollay letter to Hancock, Scollay makes no mention of betrothal or a mutually binding relationship in this letter.
[6]Samul Forman, Dr. Joseph Warren: The Boston Tea Party, Bunker Hill, and the Birth of American Liberty, (Pelican Publishing Company, Gretna, 2012), dust jacket back flap, 9-11. Though Forman asserts a list of questions in his foreword were unanswered prior to the publication of Dr. Joseph Warren, these questions were addressed in both Frothingham’s Life and Times, and Cary’s Joseph Warren.
[7]Scollay, Scollay Papers.
[8]Loring and Frothingham implied, with no cited documentation—and Cary with reference to a letter that does not mention a betrothal or mutual bond, that Scollay was betrothed to Warren. Their brief implications were based, seemingly, on a story passed down through the years.
[9]Christian, (Viking, New York, NY, 2013), xvi, 319-320n, 340n.
[10]Ames, Ledger Book, 100; Robert Brand Hanson, ed. The Diary of Dr. Nathaniel Ames of Dedham. Massachusetts. 1758-1822. (Picton Press. Camden. ME. 1998).Page 280 notes “Dr. Warren here,” with no further explanation.
[11]Ames, Ledger, 100; Hanson, Diary, 278, 307, Hanson states in 307n, “This appears to be the end point of the mystery surrounding Dr. Warren’s farmed-out patient; with this entry by Dr. Ames, she vanishes from any further trace at Dedham”; Dedham. Massachusetts Vital Records, 1620-1850, Volume: Dedham Church Records, 211.
[12]Scollay, Scollay Papers; Mercy Scollay letter to John Hancock, May 21, 1776, 6, Microfilm edition of the Hancock family papers, reel 2, Massachusetts Historical Society (hereafter referred to as MHS); Samuel Adams to Mercy Scollay, March 18, 1777, Miscellaneous Manuscripts, MHS.
[13]Forman, Dr. Joseph Warren, 185.
[14]Michelle Snidal, Rape in Revolutionary America, 1760-1815, B.A. Thesis, (University of Lethbridge, 2019), Accessed 2024/07/12, https://www.coursehero.com/file/220520919/Snidal-Michelle-MA-2021pdf/
[15]Philbrick, Bunker Hill, 101-102, 320n. In 320n Philbrick states in , “…it appears almost certain that at some point in September 1774, Joseph Warren got a young woman named Sally Edwards pregnant.” This is immediately followed by, “An alternative explanation could be that Warren had arranged obstetrical care for a friend.”
[16]Edward Warren, The Life of John Warren: Surgeon-General During the War of the Revolution, (Noyes, Holmes, and Company, Boston, MA, 1874), 22. Edward Warren was simply relating the story of a patient. The inference that this could have been Warren’s daughter is solely that of Forman and Philbrick.
[17]Philbrick, Bunker Hill, 216.
[18]Forman, Dr. Joseph Warren, 185; Ames, Ledger, 100.
[19]Philbrick, Bunker Hill, 216.
[20]Frothingham, Life and Times, 509.
[21]New England Journal of Medicine, “A Tory Surgeon’s Experiences”; Cary, Joseph Warren, 218-219.
[22]Austin, Life of Elbridge Gerry, I:79; Alexander Everett, Life of Joseph Warren, (Marsh, Capen, Lyon and Webb, Boston, 1839), 60-61.
[23]Letter from Dr. Bennett F. Davenport to Mr. Chas. F. Fitz, December 12, 1903, Watertown Historical Society.
[24]Frothingham, Life and Times, 509-513, Cary, Joseph Warren, 219.
[25]Clifford K. Shipton, Sibley’s Harvard Graduates, Vol. XVII 1768-1777, (Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston, 1975), 442.
[26]How Far is it Between, Free Map Tools, Accessed 2024/06/23, https://www.freemaptools.com; Annakah Stadlwieser, Equine Odometers: How Far Can Horses Travel in a Day? Horse Rookie, Accessed 2024/06/23, https://horserookie.com/how-far-can-a-horse-travel/.
[27]Foreman, Dr. Joseph Warren, 185. Philbrick, Bunker Hill, 340n. Forman’s website furthers the theme of Warren’s former apprentices being complicit in their teacher’s “secret.” with an insinuation that Dr. William Eustis knew Sally Edwards’ child was Warren’s daughter: “Future Governor William Eustis Refuses to See a Three Year Old,” Internet Archive Wayback Machine, October 17, 2015, Accessed 2024/07/13, http://www.drjosephwarren.com/2014/09/future-governor-william-eustis-refuses-to-see-a-three-year-old/.
[28]Frothingham, Life and Times, 509-513, Cary, Joseph Warren, 219.
[29]“Boston, MA: Church Records, 1630-1895,” The Records of the Churches of Boston. CD_ROM. Boston, Mass.: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2002. (Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2008.) https://www.americanancestors.org/DB31/rd/7624/108/8720119, 108; Boston, MA: Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1822 (Thwing Collection). Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1800 and The Crooked and Narrow Streets of Boston, 1630-1822. CD-ROM. Boston, Mass: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2001. (Online database, AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2014.), Accessed 2024/07/12, https://www.americanancestors.org/DB530/i/14226/38013809, 7464-7465; Headstone of Rebecca Edwards, Copp’s Hill Burying Ground; Suffolk County, MA: Probate File Papers. Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2017-2019. (From records supplied by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Archives. Digitized images provided by FamilySearch.org), Accessed 2024/07/12, https://www.americanancestors.org/DB2735/i/48699/15461-co3/69572226.
[30]Suffolk County, MA: Probate File Papers, Suffolk cases 16000-17999, 17585:1-3.
[31]Forman, December 2014, “Sandwiched Between Omens of Discord and Rum, the Infamous Mrs. Loring Announces Marriage Vows,” Accessed 2024/07/12, https://www.drjosephwarren.com/2014/12/Sandwiched-Between-Omens-of-Discord-and-Rum-the-Infamous-Mrs.-Loring-Announces-Marriage-Vows/.
[32]Tony Horwitz, Smithsonian Magazine, May 2013.
[33]Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1800, 7485.
[34]“Boston, MA: Church Records, 1630-1895; Forman, “Dr. Joseph Warren’s Patients – Alphabetical E-K,” June 2013, Accessed 2024/07/12, https://www.drjosephwarren.com/2013/06/dr-joseph-warrens-patients-alphabetical-e-thru-k/. Only three females named Sally Edwards are introduced in this essay. There were more in and around the Boston area.
[35]Nathaniel Ames, Ledger, 100.
[36]Forman, August 2012, “That Little Vixen is the Instrument of their Malice,” Internet Archive Wayback Machine, October 16, 2015, Accessed 2024/07/12, https://web.archive.org/web/20151016220516/http://www.drjosephwarren.com/2012/08/that-little-vixen-is-the-instrument-of-their-malice/; Christian Di Spigna addresses Forman’s claim by citing that in 1783, Warren’s brothers were settling Joseph’s debt and made a payment to Dr. Ames. This payment was not associated with Sally Edwards, as her account was paid off in 1779. Christian Di Spigna, Founding Marty: The Life and Death of Dr. Joseph Warren, the American Revolution’s Lost Hero, (Crown, New York, 2018), 273-274n.
[37]Nathaniel Ames, Ledger, 100.
[38]Of interest is that on June 17, Warren traveled with Townsend on his way to Breed’s Hill and then intercepted Eustis on Bunker Hill. Might he have communicated to them that should anything happen to him, they were to continue conveying these payments to Ames—from whatever source they were being paid— for the care of Edwards and her child? If this were so, both physicians, like Warren, would be bound to keep Edwards’ case confidential.
[39]Scollay, Scollay Papers, July 27, 1776, December 8, 1776.
[40]Di Spigna, Founding Marty, 273-274n, 203-208.
[41]Joseph Warren, account book, May 4, 1774-April 1775, John Collins Warren papers, MHS.
[42]Scollay, Scollay Papers, May 10 and December 10, 1776.
[43]Frothingham, Life and Times, 473-475; Christie’s Auction Catalog, June 9, 1999, Joseph Warren letter to unnamed recipient, April 10, 1775, Accessed 2024/06/09, https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-1522597; Scollay, Scollay Papers, April 26, 1776.
[44]Scollay, Scollay Papers, August 17, 1775, May 10, July 27, December 9, 1776, May 21, 1777. Scollay letter to Hancock.
[45]Cary, Joseph Warren, 205.
[46]Philbrick claims a betrothal as well.
[47]Hannah Winthrop to Mercy Otis Warren, September 27, 1774, Warren-Adams Letters, MHS, v 1, 33; Mercy Otis Warren, Poems, Dramatic and Miscellaneous, (I. Thomas and E. T. Andrews. At Faust’s Statue no. 45, Newbury Street, 1790), 208-212.
[48]Forman, Dr. Joseph Warren, 185-187, 371-375, 411-412.
[49]Di Spigna, Founding Martyr, 203, 285; Worcester Fire Society, Reminiscences, 25; Watertown Historical Society, Watertown’s Military History, 71. It seems that if one were to make such an engraving as “a permanent testament” of their engagement, they would enter the name of whom they were engaged to as well.
[50]Joseph Warren letter to unnamed recipient. This letter was photographed in 1999. Its current location is unknown; Forman, Dr. Joseph Warren, 187, 394-395n; Philbrick, Bunker Hill, 112, 321n.
[51]In 1755, the definition of “family” was “Those who live in the same house: household.” A Dictionary of the English Language, by Samuel Johnson. 1755. Accessed 2024/07/11. https://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/1755/family_ns; In 1828 the definition was, “The collective body of persons who live in one house and under one head or manager; a household, including parents, children and servants.” Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, 5431, Internet Archive, Accessed 2024/07/20, https://archive.org/details/noah-websters-1828-dictionary-ellen-g-white-estate.
[52]Scollay, Scollay Papers, August 17, 1775.
[53]Joseph referred to his brother as “Jack.” Warren, Life of John Warren, 41.
[54]Cary, Joseph Warren, 31-32, 122-123.
[55]George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence: Samuel Thatcher to Timothy Austin, March 28, 1776, accessed 2024/07/07, https://loc.getarchive.net/media/george-washington-papers-series-4-general-correspondence-samuel-thatcher-to-ebdac4.
[56]Samuel Cooper, Diary of Samuel Cooper, 1775-1776, (American Historical Review, VOL. VI NO. 2, January 1901, MHS. Warren had been elected major general by the Massachusetts Provincial Congress on June 14, but had not yet been officially commissioned at the time of his death.
[57]Frothingham, Life and Times, 524.
[58]Henry R. Viets, A Brief History of Medicine in Massachusetts, (Houghton, Mifflin Press, Boston and New York, 1930), 79.
[59]Scollay letter to John Hancock.
[60]Amy M. Schmitter, “17th and 18th Century Theories of Emotions,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Accessed 2024/07/13, URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/emotions-17th18th/>.
[61]Scollay letter to John Hancock.
[62]Frothingham, Life and Times, 522.
[63]Underlined words were by Scollay.
[64]Warren, Life of John Warren, 11.
[65]Warren, Life of John Warren, 84-85.
[66]Hanson, Diary, 307.
[67]Frothingham, Life and Times, 524.
[68]Mercy Otis Warren had offered to take Betsey Warren into her own home. Betsey chose to stay with Mrs. Miller, Frothingham, Life and Times, 543-544.
[69]Mary Stevens Warren is praised in books authored by her grandchildren. Warren, John Warren, 5; Rebecca Warren Brown, Stories of General Warren, (James Loring, Boston, 1835),15-19.
[70]Samuel Adams letter to Mercy Scollay, March 18, 1777, Miscellaneous Manuscripts, MHS.
[71]Warren, John Warren, 167; Frothingham, Life and Times, 545.
[72]Benedict Arnold letter to Dr. David Townsend, August 6, 1778. David Townsend Papers, 1775-1781, MHS.
[73]Samuel Adams, Letter to Elbridge Gerry and James Lovell, December 20, 1779, Manuscripts and Archives Division, The New York Public Library, Accessed 2024/07/08, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/412050f0-1ece-0134-4e90-00505686a51c; According to Edward Warren, his father was with the Continental Army in Rhode Island during the summer of 1778. During this time his mother was gravely ill with mastitis following the birth of her first child. This may have been the reason the two youngest children of Joseph Warren were sent to be cared for by the Scollay family. Warren, Life of John Warren, 178-185.
[74]CPI Inflation Calculator, Official Data Foundation/Alioth LLC, Accessed 2024/07/13, https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1779?amount=3600.
[75]George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence: Mercy Scollay letter to Benedict Arnold, July 7, 1780. Manuscript/Mixed Material, Accessed 2024/07/08, https://www.loc.gov/item/mgw424233/.
[76]John Hancock returned to Boston in October of 1777.
[77]Suffolk County, MA: Probate File Papers, Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2017-2019, (From records supplied by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Archives. Digitized images provided by FamilySearch.org), 17584:1-17587:3, Accessed 2024/07/13, https://www.americanancestors.org/databases/suffolk-county-ma-probate-file-papers/image?pageName=17584:1&volumeId=48700&rId=1416907270.
[78]Suffolk County, MA: Probate File Papers, Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2017-2019, (From records supplied by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Archives. Digitized images provided by FamilySearch.org), 17584:1-17587:3, Accessed 2024/07/13, https://www.americanancestors.org/databases/suffolk-county-ma-probate-file-papers/image?pageName=17584:1&volumeId=48700&rId=1416907270.
[79]Edward was the nineteenth child of Dr. John and Abigail Warren. He was only eleven when his father died. By the time Edward was twenty, his grandmother, Warren uncles, and the three eldest children of Joseph were dead. The youngest child, Polly, likely had no memory of her father. She was Scollay’s “favorite” and was in her care until the age of eight. What influence Scollay’s persistence for custody and possible stories may have had on her young mind is unknown. Edward Warren was seventy when the biography of his father was published. Warren, Life of John Warren, 424.
[80]Everett, Life of Joseph Warren, 80.
[81]Frothingham, Life and Times, 544.
[82]Forman, Joseph Warren, 371-375; Di Spigna, Founding Martyr, 25; Unfortunately, letters from Dr. and Dorothea Dix to Scollay have not been found. Therefore, it cannot be determined if they actually supported her claims and schemes.
[83]Cary, Joseph Warren, viii-ix.
