Soldiers in King Philip's war. Containing lists of the soldiers of ...

183
the Captains and most of the company were slain. The anonymous
writer above referred to, says the Indians set fire to the woods and
thus forced the disastrous retreat. Thirteen only out of the company
escaped to "Noyes's mill," and there held the enemy in check.
In the mean time Cowell withdrew his party from their dangerous
situation, went back and buried their dead comrades, and then rode
around into the town by another way in time to rescue Capt. Pren-
tice's troopers, and afterwards, with others in company, the men at
the mill. It was probably about noon when Capt. Wadsworth became
actively engaged with the Indians, and thus withdrew their
attention from both Cowell and Haines's garrison. The Watertown
company arrived at about the same time, followed the Indians over
the river, and made a brave fight to get to the hill where Capt.
Wadsworth was engaged in his desperate struggle, but such fearful
odds were against them that they were forced to fall back to Goodenow's
garrison, " it being ner night." After dark they went to
the "mill," probably with the troopers and Coweli's men, and
brought off the soldiers there. The troopers sent from Charlestown
with the Indian company under Capt. Hunting, must have arrived
quite late in the afternoon. These are the main facts, in brief, of
the Sudbury fight. The next day the Watertown company, with
Capt. Hunting's Indians, buried the dead. The site of the battlefield
where Capt. Wadsworth so long held the Indians at bay, is upon
what is now called " Green Hill." Here in 1730, fifty-four years after
the battle, Rev. Benjamin Wadsworth, fifth son of Capt. Samuel, and
at that time president of Harvard College, erected a monument to
the memory of his father and those that fell with him. It is to be
regretted that President Wadsworth accepted the erroneous date
given by Mr. Hubbard, 124 which has been perpetuated upon the new
monument erected in 1852.
It is a regret that we are unable to know positively the numbers
of English engaged. The number with Capt. Wadsworth upon the
" Hill " was probably near fifty. The most definite statemeut is
,24 The investigations of Mr. Drake first exposed the error which Mr. Hubbard made in
his history (see New Eng. Hist, and Genealogical Register, vol. vii. p. 221). Gov.
George S. Boutwell, who delivered the historical discourse at the dedication of the new
monument, Nov. 23, 1852, and at that time assigned the date April 18, replied in 1866
(see Register, vol. xx. p. 135) to Mr. Drake's article, and contended that the date given
in his discourse was the true one. The Historic Genealogical Society then took the matter
in hand, and appointed a committee, Gen. A. B. Underwood and Frederic Kidder, who
made a thorough and exhaustive report at the society's meeting, October, 1856, which was
published in the Register, vol. xx. p. 341, proving beyond question that the date April
21st is the true date of the fight. Contemporary Official Records, the highest evidence of
all, testify in every case to this date, while the evidence for the 18th is only found in Mr.
Hubbard's history and in several books of remarkable events kept by some prominent men
of the colony, who, it is evident, not unfiequently made their entries some time after the
occurrence of the events, and who, in this case, probably adopted the date of Hubbard.
John Hull, for instance, whose letter-extract above, written within a few days, gives the
date the 21st, in his diary of notable events puts it down as on the 18th. Major Daniel
Gookin, Rev. Increase Mather, the writer of the " Present State of New England," and other
authorities, agree with the official Records in giving the 21st. Subsequent historians, until
Mr. Drake, simply quote Hubbard's date.
It is a great satisfaction to the present writer to add the new testimony of the petition of
5he inhabitants of Sudbury.
,