Will Schryver wrote:I have been, to say the least, very surprised to discover that virtually nothing published after the 19th century concerning the “Morrisite War” bothered to present a representative sampling of the abundant sworn-in-court eyewitness testimony that both contradicts the Morris and Dow accounts, but does so overwhelmingly.
Dow's was an eyewitness account.
There is very good reason that Burton was acquitted of the charge of murdering the Bowman woman: he was clearly innocent.
If Burton was "clearly innocent," why did he 'go on the lam' to avoid the initial prosecution?
Multiple independent witnesses confirm that, after the supposed surrender, Joseph Morris incited his people to resist Burton and the handful of men he took into the fort with him ...
Query: why would Morris try to get his people to resist Burton
after they had already surrendered their arms? And why would the Morrisites try to get the arms they had
just given up and were now under armed guard? This makes no sense, in my opinion.
(The man closest to the action was certain it was a shot from Stoddard that went through Morris' sleeve and struck the woman.)
Dow was very close to Burton, and had a different story.
Multiple eyewitnesses affirm that Bowman never spoke to Burton, nor did Burton curse the woman and then shoot her in the face.
Two women, including Bowman, were killed in the melee; I'm not sure which one supposedly cursed Burton -- I'll have to look.
Reading the transcript of the testimony at Burton's murder trial, it becomes rather obvious that the entire story of Burton cursing the woman and shooting her in the face is a blatant fabrication.
You'll recall that Joseph Morris's brother wrote in his diary that he too read the entire transcript and newspaper accounts of the trial, and he could find no reason to justify what Burton and his posse had done.
Rather, each witness confirms that the shot that killed Bowman was aimed at Morris, and passed through the sleeve of his clothing, inadvertently striking Bowman.
Burton did admit to shooting Morris twice; just because he was a bad aim and shot an unarmed woman because of it, doesn't help his cause, in my opinion.
Furthermore, multiple independent eyewitnesses testify that Burton explicitly ordered that the two cannon shots on the first day were to be fired over the fort in demonstration. But the gunners’ unfamiliarity with the second artillery piece resulted in an undershot that hit outside the fort in a plowed field, then bounded into the fort, inadvertently killing two women.
Sorry, but this just doesn't excuse what happened, in my opinion. If Burton's gunners were that bad (or their cannon that unreliable), then what the hell was Burton doing when he ordered cannon shot over a fort filled with women and children? He was in charge, and gave the order, so he is responsible for this catastrophic screw-up.
There is much more, but I will reserve it for the detailed essay I am writing …
I'm looking forward to it. But please don't just paraphrase what you read -- give actual quotes and sources where we can read the evidence for ourselves. Thanks in advance.