hrough the American lines by putting sprigs of white paper in their
caps, as some of the whig militia did--for the militia had no uniforms,
and were dressed alike on both sides. A certain number of men who
escaped must thus be added.] The forces were very nearly equal in
number. What difference there was, was probably in favor of the British
and tories. There was not a bayonet in the American army, whereas
Ferguson trusted much to this weapon. All his volunteers and regulars
were expert in its use, and with his usual ingenuity he had trained
several of his loyalist companies in a similar manner, improvising
bayonets out of their hunting-knives. The loyalists whom he had had with
him for some time were well drilled. The North Carolina regiment was
weaker on this point, as it was composed of recruits who had joined him
but recently. [Footnote: There were undoubtedly very many horse-thieves,
murderers, and rogues of every kind with Ferguson, but equally
undoubtedly the bulk of his troops were loyalists from principle, and
men of good standing, especially those from the seaboard. Many of the
worst tory bandits did not rally to him, preferring to plunder on their
own account. The American army itself was by no means free from
scoundrels. Most American writers belittle the character of Ferguson's
force, and sneer at the courage of the tories, although entirely unable
to adduce any proof of their statements, the evidence being the other
way. Apparently they are unconscious of the fact that they thus wofully
diminish the credit to be given to the victors. It may be questioned if
there ever was a braver or finer body of riflemen than the nine hundred
who surrounded and killed or captured a superior body of well posted,
well led, and courageous men, in part also well drilled, on King's
Mountain. The whole world now recognizes how completely the patriots
were in the right; but it is especially incumbent on American historians
to fairly portray the acts and character of the tories, doing justice to
them as well as to the whigs, and condemning them only when they deserve
it. In studying the Revolutionary war in the Southern States, I have
been struck by the way in which the American historians alter the facts
by relying purely on partisan accounts, suppressing the innumerable whig
excesses and outrages, or else palliating them. They thus really destroy
the force of the many grave accusations which may be truthfully brought
against the