He displayed a fine courtesy to those about him, both to his soldiers and compatriot generals. I quote the following paragraph from A. Tififany Norton, who I believe to be the one who has written the best account of the Indian campaign, and it is a wonder to me that one who sho^vs so broad a grasp of history and its essential principles and the elements that make for historical research, has never written more than he has. Norton, in his general description of Sullivan, says : " His eyes were keen and dark, his hair curly black, his form erect, his movements full of energy and grace." His height was five feet nine inches, and a slight corpulency when in his prime gave but an added grace. General Sullivan was a man of undoubted courage, warmth of temperament and independent spirit equalled only by his patriotic devotion to his country's cause and his zeal in all public affairs." Doubtless he was too impatient and outspoken and may have been deserving of some measure of blame, stil'l his faults should not have detracted from that meed of praise to which he was justly entitled. Neither should the jealousies of his brothers in arms, which prompted them to ridicule his achievements, question his reports and detract from his hard-earned laurels, have weight with the historian. Yet sucli has been, in great degree, the case, and the name of Sullivan occupies a lesser space in the history of the Revolutionary struggle, than those of many others whose achievements fell far s'hort of his in magnitude and importance. Sullivan has been made the victim of the intrigues and petty jealousies of his times, and while for this his own indiscretions may justly be blamed, the duty is none the less incumbent on the present generation to render due homage to one who is a brave soldier and a del8 NEW YORK STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.