Arnold in American Satire
Arnold was still associated with his treason and a lack of virtue. However, these
discussions of Arnold consist of news related to Arnold’s current whereabouts, reflections on his invasion of New London, Connecticut and satire. A satirical story about Arnold being executed in the future over horse stealing ran in the Newport Mercury. The article is titled as “Articles of Intelligence to be published in the Pennsylvania Gazette in the year 1800” and it pretended to break the news that “by a late Amsterdam paper it appears that the noted Benedict Arnold, formerly a deserter from the American army, and afterwards a Gen. Officer in the army of late King George the III, was lately executed at Tyburn for horse-stealing.”153 Also, the Norwich Packet published a letter detailing Arnold’s chilly reception in the British House of Commons.
The letter states:
On the 22d of March last a determination was taken in the British House of Commons to turn all strangers out, among which was General Arnold, who met with a mortification which he might have avoided if his prudence was equal to his intrepidity. He was not ignorant that he was the person aimed at for he had a hint given him to retire, pervious to the determination. Upon his promising that he would not again attempt to enter the British senate, the member who designed to make the motion declined it, and Benedict remained spectator of a scene which afforded but little amusement to him, and it is probable from henceforth, obscurity will be his lot.154
Here the writer took evident satisfaction in that fact that Arnold was not even welcomed in the British House of Commons.
By 1783, the interpretation of Arnold’s name continued to shift toward malignity. The Boston Evening Post reprints an article from a London publication discussing Arnold’s life. The column explicates:
When a man is steeped to the lips in guilt and publicly branded, it may be
considered an insult to the amiable part of mankind, to bestow a thought on him but leave him on the gibbet of infamy as an example to after ages, of perfidy and ingratitude. Yet, though we have viewed, and still view the despicable hero of our memoirs, in a light the most offensive to the human sight, still we hold it highly laudable to preserve the features of so singular a traitor; and anecdotes of his life, in which we behold the steps that raised him from poverty to those honors that now give a faint splendor to his situation.155
The narrator attempted to give a neutral account of Arnold’s life. He insisted that although Arnold was publicly branded as a traitor, it did not mean that Arnold’s life was not owed a fair examination. For instance, the narrator discussed Arnold’s actions at Lake Champlain where he was “spirited and brave.”156 The narrator also reflected on Arnold’s performance at Saratoga where he “determined vigorous measures and carried on [attacks] with such spirit that a battalion of Brunswickers gave way.”157 The author concluded Arnold’s life story, by describing his
current residence in England:
General Arnold has been in England some time, a situation of all others surely the most disagreeable to a feeling man; for however giddy and inattentive the people of this kingdom may be they have their hours of reflection, and those hours are winged with contempt and detestation for any character, however exalted by Majesty and his Ministers, who could basely desert that cause that was by no means dishonorable, and beneath the dignity of a man to support.158
The authors closing words demonstrate how even though Arnold was in another country his infamous legacy followed him. And, due to his legacy, others in his vicinity, even the English, to a certain extent, thought of him with contempt and detestation because Arnold abandoned a worthy cause. In consequence, Arnold’s legacy also doubled as a cautionary tale for Americans who wished to be good and virtuous citizens.