Before this correspondence had taken place, strong and specific charges of misconduct had been made against General Lee by several officers of his detachment, and particularly by Generals Wayne and Scott.  In these, the transactions of the day, not being well understood, were represented in colours much more unfavourable to Lee, than facts, when properly explained, would seem to justify.  These representations, most probably, induced the strong language of the second article in the charge.  A court-martial, over which Lord Stirling presided, after a tedious investigation, found him guilty of all the charges exhibited against him, and sentenced him to be suspended for one year.  This sentence was, afterwards, though with some hesitation, approved, almost unanimously, by congress.  The court softened, in some degree, the severity of the second charge, by finding him guilty, not in its very words, but “of misbehaviour before the enemy, by making an unnecessary, and, in some few instances, a disorderly retreat.”

Lee defended himself with his accustomed ability.  He proved that, after the retreat had commenced, in consequence of General Scott’s repassing the ravine, on the approach of the enemy, he had designed to form on the first advantageous piece of ground he could find; and that, in his own opinion, and in the opinion of some other officers, no safe and advantageous position had presented itself until he met General Washington; at which time it was his intention to fight the enemy on the very ground afterwards taken by that officer.  He suggested a variety of reasons in justification of his retreat, which, if they do not absolutely establish its propriety, give it so questionable a form as to render it probable that a public examination never would have taken place, could his proud spirit have stooped to offer explanation instead of outrage, to the Commander-in-chief.

His suspension gave general satisfaction through the army.  Without being masters of his conduct as a military man, they perfectly understood the insult offered to their general by his letters; and, whether rightly or not, believed his object to have been to disgrace Washington, and to obtain the supreme command for himself.  So devotedly were all ranks attached to their general, that the mere suspicion of such a design, would have rendered his continuance in the army extremely difficult.

Whatever judgment may be formed on the propriety of his retreat, it is not easy to justify, either the omission to keep the Commander-in-chief continually informed of his situation and intentions, or the very rude letters written after the action was over.

[Sidenote:  The thanks of congress presented to General Washington and his army for their conduct in the battle at Monmouth.]

The battle of Monmouth gave great satisfaction to congress.  A resolution was passed unanimously, thanking General Washington for the activity with which he marched from the camp at Valley Forge, in pursuit of the enemy; for his distinguished exertions in forming the line of battle, and for his great good conduct in the action; and he was requested to signify the thanks of congress to the officers and men under his command, who distinguished themselves by their conduct and valour in the battle.