their respective states thanked them publicly and voted them swords for their services.  Campbell, next year, went down to join Greene’s army, did gallant work at Guilford Courthouse, and then died of camp-fever.  Sevier and Shelby had long lives before them. [Footnote:  Thirty years after the battle, when Campbell had long been dead, Shelby and Sevier started a most unfortunate controversy as to his conduct in the battle.  They insisted that he had flinched, and that victory was mainly due to them.  Doubtless they firmly believed what they said; for as already stated, the jealousies and rivalries among the backwoods leaders were very strong; but the burden of proof, after thirty years’ silence, rested on them, and they failed to make their statements good—­nor was their act a very gracious one.  Shelby bore the chief part in the quarrel, Campbell’s surviving relatives, of course, defending the dead chieftain.  I have carefully examined all the papers in the case, in the Tenn.  Historical Society, the Shelby, MSS., and the Campbell MSS., besides the files of the Richmond Enquirer, etc.; and it is evident that the accusation was wholly groundless.

    Shelby and Sevier rest their case: 

1st, on their memory, thirty years after the event, of some remarks of Campbell to them in private after the close of the battle, which they construed as acknowledgments of bad conduct.  Against these memories of old men it is safe to set Shelby’s explicit testimony, in a letter written six days after the battle (see Virginia Argus, Oct. 26, 1810), to the good-conduct of the “gallant commander” (Campbell).

2d, on the fact that Campbell was seen on a black horse in the rear during the fighting; but a number of men of his regiment swore that he had given his black horse to a servant who sat in the rear, while he himself rode a bay horse in the battle.  See their affidavits in the Enquirer.

3d, on the testimony of one of Shelby’s brothers, who said he saw him in the rear.  This is the only piece of positive testimony in the case.  Some of Campbell’s witnesses (as Matthew Willoughby) swore that this brother of Shelby was a man of bad character, engaged at the time in stealing cattle from both Whigs and Tories.

4th, on the testimony of a number of soldiers who swore they did not see Campbell in the latter part of the battle, nor until some moments after the surrender.  Of course, this negative testimony is simply valueless; in such a hurly burly it would be impossible for the men in each part of the line to see all the commanders, and Campbell very likely did not reach the places where these men were until some time after the surrender.  On the other hand, forty officers and soldiers of Campbell’s, Sevier’s, and Shelby’s regiments, headed by General Rutledge, swore that they had seen Campbell valiantly leading throughout the whole battle, and foremost at the surrender.  This positive testimony conclusively settles the matter; it outweighs that of Shelby’s brother, the only affirmative witness on the other side.  But it is a fair question as to whether Campbell or another of Shelby’s brothers received De Peyster’s sword.]