The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Loyalists of America and Their Times,
Vol. 2 of 2, by Edgerton Ryerson
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: The Loyalists of America and Their Times, Vol. 2 of 2
From 1620-1816
Author: Edgerton Ryerson
Release Date: February 20, 2008 [EBook #24658]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA ***
Produced by Jason Isbell, Graeme Mackreth and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
THE
LOYALISTS OF AMERICA
AND
THEIR TIMES:
FROM 1620 TO 1816.
BY EGERTON RYERSON, D.D., LL.D.,
_Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada from 1844 to 1876._
IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. II.
TORONTO:
WILLIAM BRIGGS, 80 KING STREET EAST;
JAMES CAMPBELL & SON, AND WILLING & WILLIAMSON.
MONTREAL: DAWSON BROTHERS.
1880.
ENTERED, according to the Act of the Parliament of Canada, in the year
One thousand eight hundred and eighty, by the REV. EGERTON RYERSON,
D.D., LL.D, in the Office of the Minister of Agriculture.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XXVII.
ALLIANCE BETWEEN CONGRESS AND FRANCE NOT PRODUCTIVE OF THE
EFFECT ANTICIPATED; EFFORTS OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT FOR
RECONCILIATION WITH THE COLONIES 1-16
Alliance deferred twelve months by France after it was
applied for by Congress, until the King of France was assured
that no reconciliation would take place between England and
the Colonies 1
Lord Admiral Howe and his brother, General Howe, Commissioners
to confer with Congress with a view to reconciliation; their
power limited; Congress refuses all conference with them,
but the vast majority of the Colonists in favour of reconciliation 2
Reasons of the failure of the two Commissioners 4
New penal laws against the Loyalists 5
Three Acts of Parliament passed to remove all grounds
of complaint on the part of the Colonists, and the appointment
of five Commissioners; Lord North's conciliatory speech;
excitement and opposition in the Commons, but the bills were
passed and received the royal assent 6
Lord North's proposed resignation, and preparations for it 8
Opinions of Lords Macaulay and Mahon as to the success
of a commission; proposed terms of reconciliation if
appointed and proposed by the Earl of Chatham 8
The large powers and most liberal propositions of the
five Royal Commissioners for reconciliation between the
Colonies and the Mother Country 11
The refusal of all negotiation on the part of Congress;
bound by treaty to the King of France to make no peace with
England without the consent of the French Court 12
The three Acts of Parliament, and proposals of the five
Commissioners of all that the Colonists had desired before
the Declaration of Independence; but Congress had transferred
allegiance from England to France, without even consulting
their constituents 12
Appeal of the representative of France to the Canadians
to detach Canada from England (in a note) 12
Sycophancy of the leaders of Congress to France against England 13
The feeling of the people in both England and America
different from that of the leaders of Congress 14
The war more acrimonious after the alliance between
Congress and the Kingof France and the failure of the
British Commissioners to promote reconciliation between
Great Britain and the Colonies 16
CHAPTER XXVIII.
COMPLETE FAILURE OF THE FRENCH FLEET AND ARMY,
UNDER COUNT D'ESTAING, TO ASSIST THE CONGRESS 17-32
Count D'Estaing arrives in America with a powerful
fleet and several thousand soldiers 17
Anchors off Sandy Hook for eleven days; goes to Long Island
by Washington's advice, and sails up Newport River, whither
he is pursued by the Lord Admiral Howe with a less powerful
fleet; the ships, with 4,000 French soldiers and 10,000 Americans,
to land and attack the British on Long Island, who were
only 5,000 strong 17
The two fleets separated by a storm; only fighting between
individual ships 18
Count D'Estaing, against the remonstrances and protests of
American officers, determines to sail for Boston Harbour for
the repair of his ships 18
Bitter feeling and riot between the American sailors and
citizens and French seamen and soldiers in the streets of Boston 19
Raids in New England by British expeditions (in a note) 19
Differences between Count D'Estaing and the American
officers as to the mode of attacking the British on Long Island 19
Early in November Count D'Estaing with his fleet quitted
the port of Boston and sailed for the West Indies, thus
disappointing the hopes of the Americans from the French alliance 20
Count D'Estaing, though strengthened by the fleet of
Count De Grasse, could not be induced to come to close
fight with Admiral Byron 21
The French take St. Vincent 21
Count D'Estaing complained of by the Americans to the
French Court, which orders him to return to the American
coasts and assist the Colonists 22
D'Estaing arrives suddenly on the American coasts with
twenty-two sail-of-the-line and eleven frigates and six
thousand soldiers; his magnificent plans and expectations 22
D'Estaing arranges with General Lincoln to attack
Savannah and rescue the province of Georgia, and afterwards
other Southern provinces, from the British 23
Account of the Siege of Savannah, and the defeat
of the French and their American allies; result of the contest 24
Mutual recriminations and jealousies between the French
and American officers; Count D'Estaing sails with his
fleet for France 25
Why this minute account of Count D'Estaing's abortive
expeditions to America; the barren results of the first
two years' alliance between Congress and the King of France,
by Dr. Ramsay 27
Spain joins France against England in 1779 28
Low state of the American army and finances; discouragement
and despondency of the Americans in 1780 28
The degeneracy of Congress in 1778, as stated by General Washington 29
Depreciation of public credit; sale of the confiscated property
of "Tories" 30
CHAPTER XXIX.
1780--A YEAR OF WEAKNESS AND DISASTER TO THE AMERICAN CAUSE,
AND OF SUCCESS TO THE BRITISH 32-41
Depression of American finances 32
Weakness of Washington's army 32
La Fayette returns from France with a loan of money and
reinforcements of naval and land forces 33
The British receive naval reinforcement of war ships, and
become superior to the French 33
Failure of the French reinforcements 33
Sir Henry Clinton goes South; besieges and takes Charleston 34
Conditions of the surrender and treatment of the inhabitants,
as stated by Dr. Ramsay and misrepresented by Mr. Bancroft 35
Sir Henry Clinton's bad administration and bad proclamation
in South Carolina; his exaggerated statements of his success;
re-embarks at Charleston for New York 36
Expeditions to secure the universal submission of the people;
but they weakened the cause of the British in the hearts of
the people 36
The military power of Congress reduced and crushed in the
Southern States 37
Lord Cornwallis's antecedents, and those of Lord Rawdon
(afterwards Marquis of Hastings); but their severe policy
unjustifiable and injurious to the British cause 38
Military proceedings in the North also unfavourable to the
Congress; its confessed weakness and gloomy prospects 40
Appeal of Congress to France for men and money as their only hope 40
Washington's despondency without French aid (in a note) 41
Mr. Hildreth, the historian, on the gloomy state of American
affairs at the close of the year 1780, though the English
victories and rule did not attract the hearts of the people
to the British cause 41
CHAPTER XXX.
THE FRENCH AND CONGRESS ALLIES RECOVER VIRGINIA; SURRENDER OF
LORD CORNWALLIS; RESULTS 42-52
General Washington and the French Commander plan an
expedition to the South 42
Sir Henry Clinton deceived as to their design 43
Count De Grasse sails for the Chesapeake with a fleet of
28 ships and 7,000 French troops 43
Remarkable march of the allied army, five hundred miles
from New York to Virginia, without committing any depredations
whatever upon the inhabitants, even in the season of fruits 43
Plan of the siege of York Town 44
Earl Cornwallis's measures of defence 44
Position and strength of the allied forces, and their
process of operations 45
Lord Cornwallis's courageous and protracted defence; is
disappointed of promised reinforcements from New York 45
Lord Cornwallis capitulates to superior forces 45
Conditions of capitulation 46
Circumstances of the Loyalists 46
Groundless boastings of American orators and writers
over the surrender of Lord Cornwallis, commanding but a small
part of the British forces 47
The unrivalled skill and courage of Washington undoubted,
as well as the bravery and endurance of his soldiers; but
the success of the siege of York Town chiefly owing to the
French, but for whose ships, artillery and land forces, Lord
Cornwallis would have been the conqueror, rather than conquered,
in this famous siege and battle 47
The resources of England; the peace party opposed to the
continuance of the American War irrespective of the Battle
of York Town 48
The war party and corrupt administration at length defeated
in the House of Commons, after repeated and protracted debates
and various intrigues 50
Change of Government, and end of Lord North's twelve years'
administration 51
Seven years' war and bloodshed, and an unnatural alliance
would have been prevented, liberty secured, and the united
life of the Anglo-Saxon race saved, had Congress, in 1776,
adhered to its previous professions (in a note) 52
CHAPTER XXXI.
CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION IN ENGLAND; CHANGE OF POLICY
FOR BOTH ENGLAND AND THE COLONIES; PEACE NEGOTIATIONS AT
PARIS; CAUSE OF THE UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS; CHANGE OF MINISTRY;
THE KING COMPELLED TO YIELD 53-65
Names of the new Ministers; death of the Marquis of
Rockingham, the Premier, succeeded by the Earl of Shelburne,
in consequence of which several Ministers resign, and are
succeeded by others, among whom was Pitt, as Chancellor of
the Exchequer (in a note) 53
Correspondence between Dr. Franklin, at Paris, and the Earl
of Shelburne, which led to negotiations for peace 54
Parliament does not pass an Act to authorize peace with
America until three months after the accession of the new Ministry 54
Dr. Franklin proposes to include _Canada_ in
the United States 54
English and American Commissioners meet at Paris and hold
protracted negotiations, with many delays, in regard to terms
of peace 56
Two most difficult questions of the treaty--The fishing
grounds of Newfoundland and the Loyalists 56
It was agreed that the Americans should have the right
to take fish on the Banks of Newfoundland, but not to
dry or cure them on any of the King's settled dominions 56
Preamble and articles of the treaty (in a note) 56
The most important question of the Loyalists 57
They constituted the majority of the population of the
Colonies at the beginning of the contest 57
It was at length agreed that the Congress should recommend
to the several States to compensate the Loyalists; but Dr.
Franklin anticipated no success from it, as of course he
did not desire it 58
Dr. Franklin's counter-scheme to defeat the proposition of
the English Commissioners, who gave way 58
Dr. Ramsay on the Loyalists being "sacrificed" to their sufferings 59
Mr. Hildreth on the same subject 61
What was demanded for the Loyalists had been sanctioned by
all modern civilized nations in like circumstances 61
How honourable to the United States to have imitated such examples 62
The fallacy of the plea or pretext that Congress had no
power to grant an amnesty and compensation to the Loyalists 62
Severe censure of the royal historian, Dr. Andrews, upon
the English Commissioners for having agreed to sacrifice the
Loyalists (in a note) 62
"All parties in the Commons unanimously demand amnesty
and indemnity for the Loyalists." (Bancroft, in a note) 62
Dr. Franklin and his colleagues outwitted the English
Commissioners not only in regard to the Loyalists but also in
regard to immense territories 63
Deplorable condition of the Loyalists during the war;
utter abandonment by the English Commissioners 64
CHAPTER XXXII.
ORIGIN OF REPUBLICANISM AND HATRED OF MONARCHY IN AMERICA;
THOS. PAINE, SKETCH OF HIS LIFE, CHARACTER, AND WRITINGS, AND
THEIR EFFECTS 66-71
CHAPTER XXXIII.
THE HIRING OF FOREIGN SOLDIERS AND EMPLOYMENT OF INDIANS
IN THE CIVIL WAR 72-84
The policy of the British Ministry in employing foreign
soldiers and Indians in the war with the Colonies deprecated by
all classes in England and America and throughout Europe 72
Violent opposition in Parliament to the hiring of foreign
troops; exasperation in the Colonies (in a note) 73
Unreliable and bad character of the Hessian mercenaries 74
Remarks upon the bad policy of employing them, and their
bad conduct, by the royal historian (in a note) 74
The employment of Indians still more condemned and denounced
than the hiring of foreign troops 74
Employment of Indians by both the French and English during
the war of 1755-63, between France and England 75
At the close of the war the French authorities recommended
the Indians to cultivate the friendship of England 75
Both Congress and the English sought the alliance and
co-operation of the Indians; misstatements of the Declaration
of Independence on this subject (in a note); the advantages
of the latter over the former in conciliating the Indians 75
The employment of the Indians in every respect disadvantageous
to England 76
English Generals in America individually opposed to the
employment of the Indians in the military campaigns 76
Failure, if not defeat, of General Burgoyne's army by the
bad conduct, and desertion, of his Indian allies 76
But Washington and Congress, as well as the English
Government, sanctioned the employment of the Indians in the
war, and the first idea of thus employing them originated with
the first promoters of revolution in Massachusetts 77
Omissions of American writers to state that the aggressions
and retaliations of the Congress soldiers and their coadjutors
far exceeded in severity and destruction the aggressions and
retaliations of the Indians on the white inhabitants 77
Many letters and biographies of actors in the Revolution show
that very much of what was written or reported during the
Revolution against the English Loyalists and Indians was
fictitious or exaggerated 78
Proceedings of the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts
(before the affairs of Concord and Lexington) to enlist and
employ the Indians against the British 79
General Washington, under date of July 27th, 1776, recommends
the employment of Indians in the revolutionary cause 80
The Americans have no ground of boasting over the English
in regard to the employment of Indians and their acts during
the war 81
Efforts of General Burgoyne to restrain the Indians, who were
an incumbrance to his army, and whose conduct alienated great
numbers of Loyalists from the British cause 82
The conduct and dread of the Indians roused great numbers
to become recruits in General Gates' army, and thus rendered
it far more numerous than the army of General Burgoyne (in a note) 83
American invasion and depredations in the Indian country the
latter part of 1776, as stated by Dr. Ramsay 84
The invasion unprovoked, but professedly as a "precaution"
to "prevent all future co-operation between the Indians and
British in that quarter" bordering in Virginia, North and South
Carolina, and Georgia 84
Complete destruction of Indian settlements; their country a
desolation 84
CHAPTER XXXIV.
THE MASSACRE OF WYOMING; FOUR VERSIONS OF IT BY ACCREDITED
AMERICAN HISTORIANS, ALL DIFFERING FROM EACH OTHER; THE FACTS
INVESTIGATED AND FALSE STATEMENTS CORRECTED 85-98
The original inflated and imaginary accounts of the
"Massacre of Wyoming" 85
Four versions of it by accredited historians 85
The account given by Dr. Ramsay 87
Remarks upon Dr. Ramsay's account 88
Description of Wyoming 88
Mr. Bancroft's account of the "Massacre" 88
Mr. Tucker's brief account of the "Massacre" 90
Mr. Hildreth's more intelligible and consistent account
of the "Massacre" 90
Remarks on the discrepancies in four essential particulars
of these four accounts 94
Supplementary remarks, founded on Colonel Stone's refutation
of the original fabulous statements of the "Massacre," in
his "_Life of Joseph Brant, including the Border Wars of
the American Revolution_" 98
CHAPTER XXXV.
AMERICAN RETALIATION FOR THE ALLEGED "MASSACRE OF WYOMING,"
AS NARRATED BY AMERICAN HISTORIANS 99-122
Destruction of Indian villages and settlements for several
miles on both sides of the Susquehanna by the Americans 99
Attack in retaliation "by Indians and Tories" on Cherry
Valley, but more than revenged by Colonel G. Van Shaick
on the settlements 99
The destruction of Indian villages and other settlements to
the extent of "several miles on both sides of the Susquehanna,"
more than an equivalent revenge for the destruction of Wyoming
(in a note) 100
This only the beginning of vengeance upon the Indian
settlements on the part of the "Continentals;" cruelties compared 100
General Sullivan's expedition, and destruction of the
towns, settlements, crops, and orchards of the Six Nations
of Indians, as stated by Dr. Andrews 100
The same expedition, as stated by Mr. Bancroft, Mr. Hildreth,
Mr. Holmes, and Dr. Ramsay 102
Further examples of "retaliation," so-called, inflicted upon
the Indians and their settlements (in a note) 106
The "Tories," driven among the Indians as their only refuge,
treated as traitors; their conduct and duty 108
Colonel Stone's account in detail of General Sullivan's expedition
of extermination against the Six Nations of Indians 108
Dr. Franklin's fictions on the massacre and scalping of the
whites by Indians, in order to inflame the American mind against
England; his fictions recorded as history 115
Injustice done to the Indians in American accounts of them;
their conduct compared with that of their white enemies 119
CHAPTER XXXVI.
SITUATION AND TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS DURING THE WAR 123-138
Summary of the condition and treatment of the Loyalists 123
The relation of both parties before the Declaration of Independence 123
How the Declaration of Independence changed the relations of
parties both in England and America 123
At the Declaration of Independence the adherents to England
the largest part of the population of the Colonies 124
Elements of their affectionate attachment to England 125
Their claims to have their rights and liberties respected 125
Their position and character stated by Mr. Hildreth; abused
by mobs and oppressed by new Acts and authorities 125
John Adams the prompter and adviser for hanging "Tories;"
his letter to the Governor of Massachusetts on the subject 127
First scene of severity against Loyalists at Boston; new
American maxim of morals for not forgiving "Tories" 127
Treatment of Loyalists in New York, Philadelphia, Virginia,
and other places 128
Kindness of the French officers and soldiers after the
defeat of Lord Cornwallis 129
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER XXXVI.
State Legislative and Executive acts against the Loyalists 130
Rhode Island; Connecticut 130
Massachusetts 131
New Hampshire; Virginia; New York 131
New Jersey; Pennsylvania; Delaware 132
Maryland; North Carolina; Georgia 132
South Carolina 134
Remarks on the Confiscation Acts and policy of the several
States mentioned 136
CHAPTER XXXVII.
TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS ON THEIR APPLICATIONS FOR
REDRESS AFTER THE REVOLUTION 139-144
Impolicy of such persecuting proceedings on the part of
the States, by an American writer 141
APPENDIX "A" TO CHAPTER XXXVII.
Review of the principal characteristics of the American
Revolution, and remarks on the feelings which should now
be cultivated by both of the former contending parties,
by Mr. J.M. Ludlow 145
APPENDIX "B" TO CHAPTER XXXVII.
Reflections of Lord Mahon on the American contest; apology
for George III.; unhappiness of Americans since the Revolution;
unity of the Anglo-Saxon Race 154
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
AND PARLIAMENT AFTER THE REVOLUTION 159-182
PART FIRST.
Proceedings in Parliament; refusal of the States to compensate
the Loyalists, as proposed in the Treaty of Peace, and contrary
to the example and practice of civilized nations 159
In the House of Commons, Mr. Wilberforce, Lord North, Lord
Mulgrave, Secretary Townsend, Mr. Burke, Mr. Sheridan, Mr.
Norton, Sir Peter Burrell, Sir William Bootle, and other
members of Parliament, spoke on the subject 160
In the House of Lords, Lords Walsingham, Townsend, Stormont,
Sackville, Loughborough and Shelburne, also advocated the
claims of the Loyalists 163
Grounds of the responsibility of Parliament to the Loyalists
for compensation 164
Unpopular and unprecedented omissions in the terms of Peace 164
Fallacy of the argument of advocates of the Treaty 165
PART SECOND.
Agents in England of the Loyalists; proceedings of the
Parliamentary Commission; results 166-182
CHAPTER XXXIX.
THE LOYALISTS DRIVEN FROM THE UNITED STATES TO THE
BRITISH PROVINCES 183-190
CHAPTER XL.
BRIEF SKETCHES OF SOME INDIVIDUAL LOYALISTS IN THE
BRITISH PROVINCES; FIRST SETTLERS IN CANADA, AND HOW
THEY TRAVELLED HITHER 190-208
1. Samuel Anderson; 2. Rev. John Bethune; 3. Doanes--five
brothers; 4. Stephen Jarvis; 5. Wm. Jarvis; 6. David Jones;
7. Jonathan Jones; 8. Captain Richard Lippincott; 9. The
McDonalds;10. John McGill; 11. Donald McGillis; 12. Thomas
Merritt; 13. Beverley Robinson; 14. Beverley Robinson, jun.;
15. Christopher Robinson; 16. Sir John Beverley Robinson;
17. Sir Charles Frederick Phillipse Robinson; 18. Morris
Robinson; 19. John Robinson; 20. Roger Morris; 21. Allen McNab;
22. Luke Carscallen; 23. John Diamond; 24. Ephraim Tisdale;
25. Lemuel Wilmot
Dr. Canniff's account of the migration of the first Loyalists
from Lower Canada, and settlement on the North Shore of the
St. Lawrence, and in the country round and west of Kingston 204
CHAPTER XLI.
FIRST SETTLEMENT OF LOYALISTS IN THE BRITISH
PROVINCES--ESPECIALLY OF UPPER CANADA,--THEIR ADVENTURES AND
HARDSHIPS, AS WRITTEN BY THEMSELVES OR THEIR DESCENDANTS 208-270
First settlement of the first company of Loyalists at the
close of the Revolutionary War, in and near Kingston, Upper
Canada, by the late Bishop Richardson, D.D. 208
First settlement of Loyalists in Nova Scotia, by a gentleman
of that Province 211
Colonel Joseph Robinson, his adventures and settlement,
by the late Hon. R. Hodgson, Chief Justine of Prince
Edward Island 213
Robert Clark, his sufferings in the Revolutionary War, and
settlement in the Midland District, U.C.; by his son, late
Colonel John C. Clark 216
Captain William B. Hutchinson, his sufferings and settlement
in Walsingham, County of Norfolk, U.C.; by his grandson,
J.B. Hutchinson, Esq. 218
Patriotic feeling and early settlement of Prince Edward County
and neighbouring Townships; by Canniff Haight, Esq. 219
Colonel Samuel Ryerse, his adventures, settlement, and
character, in the County of Norfolk; in letters by his son,
the late Rev. George J. Ryerse; and in a memorandum, including
a history of the early settlement of the County of Norfolk,
and recollections of the war of 1812-1815; by Mrs. Amelia
Harris, of Eldon House, London, U.C. 226
Colonel Joseph Ryerson, his adventures, sufferings, and
settlement in the County of Norfolk, U.C.; by an intimate
friend of the family 257
NOTE.--Colonel Samuel Ryerse and Colonel Joseph
Ryerson were brothers, and both officers in the British army
during the Revolutionary War; but in the commission of the
former, his name was spelled Ryerse; and it being difficult
at that time to correct such an error, he and his descendants
have always spelt their name Ryerse, though the original name
of the family, in the records of New Jersey, in Holland, and
previously in the history of Denmark, is Ryerson.
Interesting piece of local history; by the Rev. Dr. Scadding 259
Loyalty and sufferings of the Hon. John Monroe; by his son 261
Sufferings of the U.E. Loyalists during the Revolutionary War;
vindication of their character--including that of Butler's
Rangers--their privations and settlement in Canada; by the
late Mrs. Elizabeth Bowman Spohn, of Ancaster, in the County of
Wentworth, U.C., together with an introductory letter by the
writer of this history 264
CHAPTER XLII.
ORIGIN AND CHARACTER OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF BRITISH NORTH
AMERICA.--NOVA SCOTIA 271-276
CHAPTER XLIII.
NEW BRUNSWICK 277-280
CHAPTER XLIV.
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND 280
CHAPTER XLV.
GOVERNMENT OF LOWER CANADA 281-306
The famous Quebec Act, 14th Geo. III.; its provisions;
why and by whom opposed; opposed in the Lords and Commons,
and in the Colonies; supposed to have promoted the American
Declaration of Independence 281
Constitutional Act of 1791--Act 31st George III., chapter 31 285
Mr. Pitt explains the principal provisions of the Bill;
provided against the imposition of taxes in the colonies by
the Imperial Parliament; opposed by some members in the Commons;
rupture between Burke and Fox (in a note); Pitt's defence
of the Bill 285
The Bill becomes an Act; separates Upper from Lower Canada;
constitutes a legislature for each province; how the two branches
of the legislature were constituted; the _representative_ form
of government obtained by the United Empire Loyalists 286
The Administration of the Government and Legislation in Lower
Canada under the new constitution 288
Lord Dorchester Governor-General; first session of the
Legislature; Speakers of the two Houses; a Speaker elected
in the House of Assembly who could speak both the French and
English language 289
The Governor's first speech to the Legislature 290
The cordial and loyal response of the House of Assembly 290
Useful and harmonious legislation; a noble example and
illustration of loyalty by the House of Assembly before the
close of the session 292
The Governor's speech at the close of the session 294
Unjust statements against the French corrected (in a note) 294
Second session of the Legislature called by Lord Dorchester
on his arrival from England; his cordial reception; beneficial
legislation; Canadians recoil from the horrors of the French
Revolution 295
French Republican agents endeavour to incite Canadians to
revolt, and to excite hostilities against England in the
United States 297
Mutual cordiality between the Governor-General and the House
of Assembly 297
Visit of the Duke of Kent to Lower Canada as Commander of the
Forces; his wise and patriotic counsels; beneficial influence
of his visit and residence 297
Lord Dorchester lays the public accounts before the Assembly;
their contents; this proceeding highly satisfactory to the
Assembly; bills passed and assented to 298
Interval of quiet between the second and third Sessions of
the Legislature; Lord Dorchester's practical and noble speech
at the opening of the third Session; Mr. Christie's remarks upon
it; cordial answer of the House of Assembly, to whom the public
accounts were transmitted, even more comprehensive and complete
than those sent down the previous Session 299
Commissioners first appointed to adjust the revenues between
Upper and Lower Canada; their courteous and fair proceedings
on both sides 301
Gratifying close of the third Session 302
Auspicious opening, useful legislation, and happy conclusion
of the fourth and last Session of the first Parliament of
Lower Canada 302
Termination of Lord Dorchester's thirty-six years connection
with Canada; review of his conduct and character by the historian
Bancroft; cordial addresses to him, and his affectionate answers 303
Meritorious conduct of the French Canadians 305
CHAPTER XLVI.
GOVERNMENT OF UPPER CANADA 307-315
How governed and divided by Lord Dorchester before the
Constitutional Act of 1791 307
The Constitutional Act of 1791, 31 George III., chapter 31, and
construction of governments under it 307
General John Graves Simcoe the first Governor; character of
his government; arrives at Kingston 8th July, 1792, where the
members of the Executive Legislative Councils were sworn into
office, and writs issued for the election of members of the
House of Assembly 308
The seat of government first established at Newark, now Niagara,
where a small frame house was built for the Governor, and in
which also the first Session of the Legislature was held 308
Number of members of the Legislative Council and House of
Assembly present at the opening of the Session; their character 309
Number and character of the population of the country,
including the Mohawk Indians, headed by Joseph Brant 309
First Session of the first Parliament and its work 309
Remarkable speech of Governor Simcoe at the close of the
Session, explanatory of our constitution of government 310
Change of the seat of government and reasons for it 311
Governor Simcoe's work and policy; removal to the West Indies,
and abandonment of his wise policy 311
Parliament meets at Niagara until 1797; its legislation;
Governor Simcoe's successor, the Hon. Peter Russell and
General Hunter; population of Upper Canada in 1800 312
Legislation, progress, trade, custom-houses 313
Provision for one Grammar School Master in each of the
eight districts 314
Emigration; legislation; experience of the country during
sixteen years under the new constitution 314
State of the country in 1809 314
Anticipated hostilities between Great Britain and the United
States; concluding remarks on this period of Canadian history 315
CHAPTER XLVII.
WAR OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN, FROM
1812 TO 1815 316-317
Introductory and general remarks; illustrations of true
loyalty; war struggles of England for human liberty when the
United States joined the tyrant of Europe in war and invaded
Canada; comparative population of Canada and the United States;
Canada, almost unaided, successfully resists the eleven invasions
of the United States against her; phases of the war against her 316
CHAPTER XLVIII.
DECLARATION OF WAR BY THE UNITED STATES AGAINST BRITAIN,
AND PREPARATIONS FOR THE INVASION OF CANADA 318-330
The alleged and real causes of the war; the Democratic
party in the United States always hostile to England and her
colonies, and sympathisers with every raid against Canada 318
Two alleged causes for the war by the United States; Berlin
decrees, and answers to them by British Orders in Council--results 319
Collusion between Napoleon and the President of the United
States against England; seduction and desertion of British sailors
(nearly 10,000) besides soldiers; the justice and acknowledged right
of the British claims, and injustice and unreasonableness of the
Madison Government's proceedings 319
The event between the warships _Leopard_ and _Chesapeake_;
American misrepresentations of it; dishonest conduct of President
Madison in respect to it; noble and generous proposal of the
British Government, disclaiming the conduct of the captain of the
_Leopard_, and offering to compensate all parties for injuries
done them by the _Leopard_ 323
The "Henry Plot" affair; conduct of President Madison in
respect to it; declaration of war by the United States 327
CHAPTER XLIX.
DECLARATION OF WAR BY THE UNITED STATES 331-336
Declaration of war, June 18, 1812; votes in the House of
Representatives for and against it 331
Character of the war party and its Generals 333
Opposition to the war, and reasons against it, by a State
Convention of New York 333
Address of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts
against the war 334
The Orders in Council, as administered, beneficial to
American merchants 335
CHAPTER L.
PREPARATIONS MADE BY THE CANADIANS FOR THEIR DEFENCE 337-351
War against the Canadas being contemplated in the United States 337
Preparations by Lower Canada; Sir George Prevost succeeds
Sir James Craig as Governor-General; his character and first
speech to the Legislature 338
The loyal answer of the Assembly, and liberal provisions for
the defence of the Province 338
Organization of militia 339
American residents allowed twenty days to leave the Province 340
Second Session of the War Legislature, 16th July, 1812;
the Governor's speech, relying upon the Province, and noble
reply, and further various and liberal supplies and measures of
the Legislative Assembly to meet the emergency 340
Preparations in Upper Canada for self-defence 341
General Brock calls a meeting of the Legislature, July 27,
1812; his stirring speech at the opening of the session;
hearty response and liberal supplies of the House of Assembly 342
Patriotic address of the Assembly to the people of Upper Canada,
and remarks upon it 342
CHAPTER LI.
FIRST INVASION OF UPPER CANADA, IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT,
BY GENERAL HULL, AND HIS PROCLAMATION TO THE INHABITANTS OF UPPER
CANADA, GIVEN ENTIRE IN A NOTE 346-351
General Brock's manly and overwhelming reply to General
Hull's proclamation, in an address to the people of Canada 349
CHAPTER LII.
GENERAL BROCK TAKES DETROIT, GENERAL HULL'S ARMY, THE
TERRITORY OF MICHIGAN, AND IMMENSE MILITARY STORES 352-364
INCIDENTS OF THIS GREAT ACHIEVEMENT.
1. Smallness of General Brock's army, and the manner in which
he collected it 353
Preparations at Windsor for the attack upon Detroit before
General Brock's arrival there 353
Crossing the river, and the surrender of Fort Detroit, &c. 354
2. General Brock's council with the Indians at Sandwich
before crossing the river at Detroit; his conversation with
the great chief Tecumseh; and after the taking of Detroit,
takes off his sash and places it around Tecumseh, who next day
placed it around the Wyandot chief, Round Head; reasons for
it given to General Brock 355
General Brock's estimate of Tecumseh, and the latter's
watching and opinion on the conduct of the former 356
Particulars of Tecumseh's personal history and death (in a note) 357
Surprise and taking of Michillimackinack, and other defeats,
discouraging to General Hull, before his surrender of Detroit 358
Particulars of the surrender 361
General Brock's proclamation to the people of Michigan 362
Remarks on the difference in sentiment and style between
this proclamation to the inhabitants of Michigan and that of
General Hull to the inhabitants of Canada 363
General Brock's return to York; having in 19 days settled
public legislative business, raised a little army, taken a
territory nearly as large as Upper Canada, and an army three
times as numerous as his own 364
CHAPTER LIII.
SECOND INVASION OF UPPER CANADA AT QUEENSTON 365-371
Crossing of the river from Lewiston to Queenston of 1,500
regular troops, who, by a private path, gain Queenston Heights;
death of General Brock; the invaders dislodged from the Heights
and driven down the banks of the river; American militia refuse
to cross the river; American soldiers surrender to General Sheaffe
to the number of 900 men, besides officers, including General
Wadsworth and Colonel Winfield Scott 365
Armistice 368
Incidents on the Niagara frontier after the death of General
Brock, by Lieutenant Driscoll, of the 100th Regiment 368
CHAPTER LIV.
THIRD AMERICAN INVASION OF CANADA 372-379
A large American army assembled; confidence of its success 372
No reinforcements from England; but the sacrifice and zeal
of the Canadians for the defence of their country against this
third and most formidable invasion of the year 373
The Commander-in-Chief's (General Smyth) address to his army,
given entire in a note 373
Its effect to bring 2,000 volunteers from the State of Pennsylvania 374
The troops embark; General Smyth does not appear; failure of
the attempted invasion; General Smyth's flight from his own
soldiers, who shoot off their guns in disgust and indignation 375
Three armies, altogether of 10,000 men, defeated by less than
1,000 Canadian volunteers and soldiers 378
CHAPTER LV.
AN INVADING ARMY OF 10,000 MEN, UNDER GENERAL DEARBORN,
DEFEATED BY COLONEL DE SALABERRY, WITH 300 CANADIANS, AT
CHATEAUGUAY; DESCRIPTION OF THE BATTLE 380-382
The Canadian militia put in readiness to repel a second
apprehended invasion, but General Dearborn does not venture it,
and retires with his hosts into winter quarters 381
The Canadian militia allowed to retire for the winter 382
The armistice between Generals Sheaffe and Smyth injurious to
Upper Canada (in a note) 382
CHAPTER LVI.
CAMPAIGNS OF 1813 383-425
Americans determined to conquer Canada this year 383
Disadvantage of the Governor-General of Canada from the
fewness of his troops, regulars and militia, compared with
those of the invading armies 383
Three American invading armies--one consisting of 18,000 men,
the second of 7,000 men, and the third of 8,000 men 384
General Proctor's slender force at Detroit 384
Battle of Frenchtown; victory of Colonel Proctor; American
misrepresentations respecting it corrected 385
Colonel Proctor promoted to be General 388
Several American plundering raids on Brockville and
neighbourhood; retaliatory raid of the British on Ogdensburg;
town ordnance, arms, &c., taken, and vessels destroyed 388
Canadian preparations in the winter of 1813 for the season's
campaign; U.E. Loyalist regiment comes from Fredericton, New
Brunswick, to Quebec, on snow shoes 390
The American plan of campaign to invade and take Canada in 1813 390
The American fleet on Lake Ontario superior to the British
fleet; attack upon York with 1,700 men, commanded by Generals
Dearborn and Pike; battle, explosion of a magazine; many of
both armies killed; Canadians defeated and York taken 391
Americans evacuate York and return to Sackett's Harbour,
after having destroyed public buildings, and taken much booty 393
Americans attack Fort George, Newark (Niagara), by land
and water, and after a hard fight take the town and fort,
the British retiring to Queenston 393
General Vincent, having destroyed the fortifications on the
frontier, retreats to Burlington Heights, pursued by Generals
Chandler and Winder, with an army of 3,500 infantry and 300 cavalry 394
Colonel Harvey, with 700 men, surprises the whole American
army at Stony Creek, captures their two generals and 150 men, &c. 395
American army retreats in great disorder towards Fort George 396
The affair at the Beaver Dams; the capture of 700 American
soldiers, with their officers, by a small party of soldiers
and Indians--the captured prisoners being five to one of
their captors 397
The American army confined to Fort George and its neighbourhood 397
A small party of the British retaliate the marauding game
of the Americans by crossing the river at Chippewa, attacking
and dismantling Fort Schlosser and bringing off military stores;
and seven days afterwards, 11th July, crossing from Fort Erie
to Black Rock, and burning the enemy's block-houses, stores,
barracks, dockyards, &c. 397
The two armies almost within gunshot of each other at Fort
George; but the Americans could not be drawn out to a battle,
though their numbers were two to one to the British 398
General Harrison prepares to prosecute the war for recovering
the Territories of Michigan; General Proctor raises the siege
of Lower Sandusky and retires to Amherstburg 399
Unsuccessful expedition of Governor-General Prevost and Sir
James L. Yeo against Sackett's Harbour; Sir George Prevost
orders the withdrawment of the troops, at the very crisis of
victory, to the great disappointment and dissatisfaction
of his officers and men 399
OCCURRENCES ON LAKE ONTARIO.
Second unsuccessful attempt of Commodore Sir James Yeo on
Sackett's Harbour 401
Commodore Chauncey's expedition to the head of the lake to
take Burlington Heights is deferred by the preparations of
Colonels Harvey and Battersby to receive him 402
Commodore Chauncey makes a second raid upon York (Toronto),
plunders, burns, and departs; singular coincidence 402
The British fleet, sailing from Kingston the last day of July,
with supplies for the army at the head of the lake, encounters
the American fleet at Niagara, and after two days' manoeuvring,
a partial engagement ensues, in which the British capture two small
vessels--the _Julia_ and _Growler_ 402
A graphic account of the naval manoeuvring and battle by
the American historian of the war, Brackenridge (in a note) 402
Encounters and tactics of the British and American fleets on
Lake Ontario for the rest of the season 404
OCCURRENCES ON LAKE ERIE AND IN THE WEST.
Fleet fitting out by Commodore Perry at Presqu' Isle (Erie)
blockaded by Commodore Barclay, who, neglecting his duty and
absenting himself from Presqu' Isle, allowed the American
fleet to get over the bar at the mouth of the harbour, and getting
into the lake with their cannon reshipped and completely equipped 405
Commodore Barclay, the enemy too well manned and too powerful
for him, sails for Amherstburg; is pursued by Commodore Perry
and compelled to fight, in which he lost his fleet, though he
fought bravely 406
In consequence of the loss of the fleet on Lake Erie, the
British army in possession of the territory of Michigan, left
without resources, evacuate the territory and Fort Detroit,
before an American army of 7,000 men and 1,000 dragoons,
under General Harrison 407
General Proctor retreats up the Thames; is pursued by
General Harrison, with a force of 3,000 men, including 1,000
Kentucky dragoons, and overtaken near Moravian Town, where a
battle ensues, in which General Proctor is defeated with
heavy loss--the Indians remaining loyal, fighting longest,
suffering most, with the loss of their chief, Tecumseh 408
Shameful burning of Moravian Town by the Americans 410
Americans accept Indian alliance; Americans intoxicated by
these successes, but driven from every inch of Canadian
territory before the end of the year 410
AMERICAN INVASION OF LOWER CANADA.
Defeat of an American advance invading division, and capture
of two vessels, the _Growler_ and _Eagle_, of eleven guns each,
at the Isle-aux-Noix, by 108 men, under the command of Lieut.-Col.
George Taylor 411
Attacks upon and capture and destruction of the American war
materials, hospitals, barracks, &c., at Plattsburg, under
Colonel Murray (General Moore retreating with 1,500 men),
at Burlington (where was encamped General Hampton with 4,000 men),
capturing and destroying four vessels, and afterwards at
the towns of Champlain and Swanton, destroying the block-houses
and barracks 412
These successes but preliminary to the Canadian victories
of Chateauguay, and Chrystler's Farm 413
BATTLE OF CHATEAUGUAY.
General Hampton, with 5,000 men, defeated by the skill and
courage of Colonel De Salaberry with 300 Canadians; the
battle described, and the close of it witnessed, by the
Governor-General Prevost and Major-General De Watteville 413
General Hampton with his demoralized army retires into
winter quarters at Plattsburg 417
Next expedition against Montreal by the St. Lawrence, under
command of General Wilkinson, with a force of 10,000 men;
the American soldiers promised grand winter quarters at Montreal 417
American army descends the St. Lawrence from near Kingston
in 300 boats; is followed by a detachment of the British
from Kingston, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Morrison,
who overtakes and skirmishes with divisions of the American army
on the way; at the American post, at the town of Hamilton,
takes a considerable quantity of provisions and stores,
and two pieces of ordnance 418
BATTLE OF CHRYSTLER'S FARM.
American force engaged between 3,000 and 4,000 men; the
British forces were about 800 rank and file; preliminaries
and description of the battle, said to be the most squarely
and scientifically fought battle of the war 419
Losses; General Wilkinson's testimony as to the loyalty and
courage of the Canadians 420
General Wilkinson proceeds down the St. Lawrence with his
flotilla; disappointment and mortification at General Hampton's
disobedience and failure to meet him at St. Regis; crosses the
St. Lawrence and retires into winter quarters at Salmon River 420
The campaign of the season terminated in Lower Canada; the
Canadian militia dismissed to their homes with thanks and applause 421
BRITISH VICTORIES IN UPPER CANADA.
In December, 1813, Lieutenant-General Drummond supersedes
Major-General De Rottenburgh in command of Upper Canada, and
proceeds to York and the head of the Lake at Burlington Heights;
despatches Colonel Murray to arrest the predatory incursions of
General McClure in the neighbourhood of Fort George, of which
he was then in possession 422
McClure's plundering the inhabitants; his barbarous act in
burning the town of Newark (Niagara), and flight to the
American side of the river 423
The British, under command of Colonel Murray, take Fort Niagara,
the whole garrison, and much warlike supplies 423
Lewiston, Manchester, Black Rock and Buffalo destroyed in
retaliation for the burning of Newark (Niagara), and exposure
of 400 women and children, by McClure 424
Proclamation issued by General Drummond, deprecating this
savage mode of warfare, and declaring his purpose not to pursue
it, unless compelled by the measures of the American Government 425
CHAPTER LVII.
MOVEMENTS AND CAMPAIGNS IN 1814--THE THIRD AND LAST
YEAR OF THE WAR 426-434
Two years' expensive failures of American invasions against
Canada; preparations on both sides for the third year's campaigns 426
Volunteers, soldiers and sailors, march through the woods
from New Brunswick to Canada 426
Expression of Royal satisfaction and admiration of the loyalty
and courage of the Canadians during the war, making special
mention of the affair of Chateauguay and Colonel De Salaberry 427
First American invasion of Lower Canada in 1814; the
American soldiers, crossing Lake Champlain on the ice, attack
Le Colle Mill (Block-house), and are driven back by a small
but heroic force of Canadians 427
General Wilkinson returns with his army to Plattsburg; and,
disappointed and mortified at his failures, retires from the army 428
Prairie du Chién, on the Mississippi, taken by the British, and
Fort Michillimackinack triumphantly defended against a large
American force; and Sir John C. Sherbrook, Lieutenant-Governor
of Nova Scotia, reduces an extensive portion of American territory
adjoining New Brunswick, and adds it to that Province 428
Peace in Europe; reinforcements of 16,000 veteran soldiers
from England to Canada 430
Sir George Prevost's abortive expedition against Plattsburg
censured; recalled to England to be tried by court-martial;
dies a week before the day of trial 330
The estimate of Mr. Christie, the Canadian historian, of
the character and policy of Sir George Prevost 431
Opening of the campaign in Upper Canada; expedition from
Kingston against Oswego, which is dismantled, its fortifications
destroyed, military stores, &c., seized 432
British fleet, supreme on Lake Ontario, blockades Sackett's
Harbour; intercepts supplies being sent from Oswego to Sackett's
Harbour, but is unsuccessful in pursuing American supply boats up
the Sandy Creek; the pursuers taken prisoners and well treated
by the Americans 433
CHAPTER LVIII.
LAST INVASIONS AND LAST BATTLES OF THE WAR 435-460
Americans, in two divisions, under command of Brigadier-Generals
Scott and Ripley, cross the river and land on the Canadian
side above and below Fort Erie, which is commanded by Major
Buck, and surrendered without firing a shot, to the great loss
of the British, and to the great advantage of the Americans 435
General Brown, with a force of over 4,000 troops, advances
down the river from Fort Erie, with a view of taking Chippewa;
is encountered by General Riall, who is compelled to retire
to the rear of his works at Chippewa; heroism of the Lincoln
Militia 436
General Riall retires to Fort George, pursued by General
Brown; pillage of the American soldiers and officers in the
neighbourhood of Fort George 437
Both armies reinforced; General Brown in difficulties;
retreats towards Chippewa; is pursued by General Riall; burns
the village of St. David's; makes a stand at Lundy's Lane--called
Bridgewater by the Americans 437
Battle of Lundy's Lane; preliminaries to it 438
The battle itself; protracted and bloody struggle; Americans
retreat to beyond Chippewa 439
Forces engaged; losses on both sides; victory absurdly claimed
on the American side 441
American army retreats to Fort Erie, pursued by General Drummond,
who invests the fort 443
Storming the fort; terrible conflict; on the point of victory
a magazine blown up, destroying all the British soldiers who
had entered the fort--including Colonels Drummond and Scott--compelling
the retirement of the assailants; British losses severe 444
The enemy shut up for a month in the fort by the British investment 445
At the expiration of a month the enemy makes a sortie,
with his whole force; surprises and destroys the batteries;
a bloody conflict; the enemy compelled to return to the fort
with a loss of 600 men 445
Incessant rains prevent General Drummond repairing his batteries;
he raises the siege and tries in vain to bring General Brown
to a general engagement, but he evades it and evacuates Fort Erie 446
Thus terminates the last American invasion of Canada, without
acquiring possession of an inch of Canadian territory 446
Summary review of Canadian loyalty, and the causes,
characteristics, and the results of the war, in an address
delivered at Queenston Heights, near Brock's Monument, by
the author, at the anniversary of the Battle of Lundy's
Lane, July, 1875 447
CHAPTER LIX.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS EXTRACTED FROM
UNITED EMPIRE LOYALIST MANUSCRIPTS IN THE DOMINION
LIBRARY AT OTTAWA 461-464
Character of the Canadian Militia 461
American invasions of Canada and their military forces 462
Notice of Colonel John Clarke and his manuscript contributions 462
The treatment of Canadians by the American invaders 463
The Royal Patriotic Society of Upper Canada and its doings
in raising and distributing upwards of £20,000 to relieve
Canadian sufferers by the war 466
CHAPTER LX.
STATE OF CANADA AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE WAR; CONCLUSION 469
THE
LOYALISTS OF AMERICA
AND
THEIR TIMES,
FROM 1620 TO 1816.
CHAPTER XXVII.
THE WAR OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION AFTER THE DECLARATION OF
INDEPENDENCE--THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE CONGRESS AND KING OF FRANCE--THE
ALLIANCE NOT PRODUCTIVE OF THE EFFECTS ANTICIPATED--EFFORTS OF THE
BRITISH GOVERNMENT FOR RECONCILIATION WITH THE COLONIES NOT SUCCESSFUL.
It was supposed, both in America and France, that when the alliance
between the King of France and Congress, referred to in the last chapter
of the previous volume, became known in England, though it was not
publicly avowed until February, 1778, England would be weakened and
discouraged from further warlike effort, and immediately offer terms of
peace, upon the ground of American independence; but the reverse was the
case.
The alliance between Congress and the King of France was kept in
abeyance by the latter during more than a twelvemonth after it was
applied for by the agents of Congress, until after the defeat and
capture of General Burgoyne and the refusal of Congress to confer with
Lord and General Howe, as British Commissioners, without the previous
acknowledgment by the Commissioners of the independence of the United
States.[1]
Lord Admiral Howe, having spent some months with his fleet at Halifax,
did not arrive at Sandy Hook until the 12th of July, eight days after
the Declaration of Independence. "Besides the troops, Lord Howe had
brought with him a document which it was hoped might render them
unnecessary--the Royal warrant appointing himself and General Howe
Commissioners under the Act of Parliament for the pacification of
America. No doubt the selection of such men was most wisely made. The
memory of their elder brother, who had fallen gloriously in the wars
against the French in Canada, was endeared to the colonists, who had
fought by his side. Both Lord Howe and the General, but Lord Howe
especially, had ever since cultivated a friendly intercourse with
Americans, and now entertained a most earnest wish to conclude the
strife against them. But judicious as was the choice of the
Commissioners, the restricted terms of the Commission were certainly in
the highest degree impolitic. Lord Howe had laboured, but vainly, to
obtain its enlargement; it amounted, in fact, to little more than the
power, first, of receiving submissions, and then, but not till then, of
granting pardons and inquiring into grievances.[2] Yet, still, since
these terms had not been divulged, and were much magnified by common
rumour, the name of the Commission was not ill adapted for popular
effect. Had Lord Howe arrived with it a few weeks before, as he might
and should have done, we are assured by American writers that an
impression might have been produced by it, in some at least of the
thirteen colonies, to an extent which they 'cannot calculate,' or
rather, perhaps, which they do not like to own. But these few months had
been decisive in another direction. During these months both the feeling
and the position of the insurgents had most materially changed."[3]
"The two Royal Commissioners," says Dr. Ramsay, "Admiral and General
Howe, thought proper, before they commenced their military operations,
to try what might be done in their civil capacity towards effecting a
reunion between Great Britain and the colonies. It was one of the first
acts of Lord Howe to send on shore a circular letter to several of the
Royal Governors in America, informing them of the late Act of Parliament
'for restoring peace to the colonies, and granting pardon to such as
should deserve mercy,' and desiring them to publish a declaration which
accompanied the same. In this, he informed the colonists of the power
with which his brother and he were entrusted 'of granting general or
particular pardons to all those who, though they had deviated from their
allegiance, were willing to return to their duty:' and of declaring 'any
colony, province, county or town, port, district or place, to be in the
peace of his Majesty.' Congress, impressed with the belief that the
proposals of the Commissioners, instead of disuniting the people, would
have a contrary effect, ordered them to be speedily published in the
several American newspapers. Had a _redress of grievances_ been at this
late hour offered, though the honour of the States was involved in
supporting their late Declaration of Independence, yet the love of
peace, and the bias of great numbers to their parent State, would, in
all probability, have made a powerful party for rescinding the Act of
Separation, and for re-uniting with Great Britain; but when it appeared
that the power of the Royal Commissioners was little more than to grant
pardons, Congress appealed to the good sense of the people for the
necessity of adhering to the Act of Independence."[4]
It was a diplomatic blunder and an unwise policy for the English
Commissioners to make known to the public the restricted authority of
their commission, instead of simply stating in general terms their
commission under the authority of the Act of Parliament "for restoring
peace to the colonies." On such grounds and for such an object the
Congress could have offered no justifiable excuse for refusing a
conference with the Royal Commissioners; and when, in the course of the
discussion, it should have been found that the Commissioners could not
agree with, and did not feel themselves authorized to accede to, all
the demands of the agents of Congress, the Royal Commissioners (both of
whom were known to be friends of the colonies, and opposed to the
high-handed measures of the Parliament) could have noted the points of
difference, and agreed to recommend the demands made upon them to the
most favourable consideration of the King's Government: at all events,
friendly intercourse and negotiations would have been opened which would
have been probably followed by a suspension of hostilities, if not
complete reconciliation. But this was what Congress, led by John Adams
and Dr. Franklin--bitter enemies to reconciliation--dreaded; and they
very shrewdly saw and improved the imprudent exposure of the Royal
Commissioners, by directing the publication of their circular letter and
declaration in all the provincial newspapers, "that the good people of
the United States may be informed of what nature are the Commissioners,
and what the terms, with expectation of which the insidious Court of
Great Britain had endeavoured to amuse and disarm them; and that the few
who still remain suspended by a hope, founded either on the justice or
moderation of their late King, might now at length be convinced that the
valour alone of their country is to save its liberties."
Thus all conference with the Royal Commissioners was refused on the part
of the leaders in Congress; war and bloodshed followed, and a year of
disastrous defeats to the Revolutionists; but the position of the
Loyalists may be inferred from the resolution of the New York
Revolutionary Convention, adopted a few days after the Declaration of
Independence, and before the actual commencement of hostilities, and
which was as follows: "That all persons residing within the State of New
York, and claiming protection from its laws, owed it allegiance; and
that any person owing it allegiance, and levying war against the State,
_or being an adherent to the King of Great Britain, should be deemed
guilty of treason and suffer death_." The Convention also resolved:
"That as the inhabitants of King's County had determined not to oppose
the enemy, a Committee should be appointed to inquire into the
authenticity of these reports, and to _disarm and secure the
disaffected, to remove or destroy the stock of grain, and, if necessary,
to lay the whole county waste_." Such treatment of adherents to the
unity of the empire, and of even neutrals, at the very commencement of
the war, goes far to account for the warfare of extermination in many
places between the two parties in subsequent years. This mode of warfare
was first instituted against the Loyalists, who acted on the defensive,
and who have been loudly complained of by American historians for having
afterwards, and on some occasions cruelly retaliated upon those who had
driven them to desperation.
A little more than eighteen months after the Declaration of
Independence, 17th of February, 1778, three Bills were introduced into
and passed by the British Parliament, which entirely removed all the
grounds of complaint made by the colonists in previous years, and
provided for the appointment of Commissioners to settle all differences
between the colonies and the mother country. The first of these Bills
was entitled, "For removing Doubts and Apprehensions concerning Taxation
by the Parliament of Great Britain in any of the Colonies." It expressly
repealed by name the tea duty in America, and declared: "That from and
after the passing of this Act the King and Parliament of Great Britain
will not impose any duty, tax, or assessment whatever in any of his
Majesty's (American) colonies, except only such duties as it may be
expedient to impose for the regulation of commerce; the net produce of
such duties to be always paid and applied to and for the use of the
colony in which the same shall be levied." "Thus," says Lord Mahon, "was
the claim of parliamentary taxation fully, at last, renounced."
The second Bill was "To enable his Majesty to appoint Commissioners with
sufficient power to treat, consult, and agree upon the means of quieting
the disorders now subsisting in certain of the colonies, plantations,
and provinces of North America." The Commissioners were to be five in
number, and were invested with extensive powers; they were to raise no
difficulties as to the rank or title of the leaders on either side, but
were left at liberty to treat, consult, and agree with any body or
bodies politic, or any person or persons whatsoever; they might proclaim
a cessation of hostilities on the part of the King's forces by sea or
land, for any time, or under any conditions or restrictions; they might
suspend any Act of Parliament relating to America passed since the 10th
of February, 1763. In short, it was intimated that the Commissioners
might accept almost any terms of reconciliation short of independence,
and subject to be confirmed by a vote of Parliament.
Lord North introduced his Bills in an able and eloquent speech of two
hours, in which he reviewed his own career and the several questions of
dispute with the colonies.[5]
But though taunted from all sides, his Bills passed speedily through
both Houses of Parliament. Lord Mahon remarks: "In spite of such taunts
and far from friendly feelings on all sides, the Conciliatory Bills, as
they have been termed, were not in reality opposed from any quarter.
There was only one division on a clause moved by Mr. Powys, to repeal
expressly by name the Massachusetts Charter Act. Lord North induced a
large majority to vote against that clause, but agreed that the object
in view should be attained by a separate measure. A Bill for that
purpose was therefore introduced by Mr. Powys, and passed through
Parliament concurrently with the other two. In the House of Lords the
same arguments were, with little change, renewed. Lord Shelburne took
occasion to declare his full concurrence in the sentiments of Lord
Chatham, expressing 'the strongest disapprobation of every idea tending
to admit the independence of America,' although acknowledging that
future circumstances might create a necessity for such a submission.
Lord Chatham himself was ill with gout at Hayes, and did not appear.
There was no division; and on the 11th of March (1778), the King, seated
on his throne, gave to all three measures the royal assent."[6]
Lord North and other members of his Administration were convinced that
the American problem could not be solved by their own party; that such a
work could be accomplished by the Earl of Chatham alone, as he had a few
years before, by his skill and energy, when the affairs of America were
in a desperate state after five years' unsuccessful war with France,
dispossessed France, in the short space of two years, of every inch of
American territory. The Duke of Richmond advocated immediate surrender
of independence to the Americans, and peace with them, in order to avoid
a war with France; he doubted the possibility of even Lord Chatham being
able to effect a reconciliation between the American colonies and Great
Britain. Three-fourths of a century afterwards, Lord Macaulay expressed
the same opinion; but Lord Mahon, in his History, has expressed a
contrary opinion, and given his reasons in the following words, well
worthy of being carefully read and pondered:
"In the first place, let it be remembered with what great and what
singular advantages Lord Chatham would have set his hand to the work. He
had from the outset most ably and most warmly supported the claims of
the colonists. Some of his eloquent sentences had become watchwords in
their mouths. His statue had been erected in their streets; his
portrait was hanging in their Council Chambers. For his great name they
felt a love and reverence higher as yet than for any one of their own
chiefs and leaders, not even at that early period excepting Washington
himself. Thus, if even it could be said that overtures of reconciliation
had failed in every other British hand, it would afford no proof that in
Chatham's they might not have thriven and borne fruit.
"But what at the same period was the position of Congress? Had that
assembly shown of late an enlightened zeal for the public interests, and
did it then stand high in the confidence and affection of its
countrymen? Far otherwise. The factions and divisions prevailing at
their town of York (in Virginia, where they removed from Baltimore), the
vindictive rigour to political opponents, the neglect of Washington's
army, and the cabals against Washington's powers, combined to create
disgust, with other less avoidable causes, as the growing depreciation
of the paper-money, the ruinous loss of trade, and the augmented burdens
of the war. Is the truth of this picture denied? Hear then, as
witnesses, the members of Congress themselves. We find in this very
month of March (1778), one of them write to another on the necessity of
joint exertions to "revive the expiring reputation of Congress." (Letter
from William Duer, of New York, to Robert Morris, dated March 6th, 1778,
and printed in the Life of Reed, Vol. I., p. 365.) We find another
lamenting that 'even good Whigs begin to think peace, at some expense,
desirable.' (General Reed to President Wharton, February 1, 1778.)
"When such was the feeling in America, both as regarded Lord Chatham and
as regarded the Congress, it would not certainly follow that any
overture from the former would be rejected on account of the
disapprobation of the latter. The provinces might, perhaps, have not
been inclined to the deliberations, or even cast off the sway of the
central body, and make terms of peace for themselves. At any rate, all
such hope was not precluded; at least some such trial might be made.
"Nor does it appear to me, as to Mr. Macaulay, that there was any, even
the slightest, inconsistency in Lord Chatham having first pronounced
against the conquest of America, and yet refusing to allow her
independence. After the declaration in her behalf of France, Lord
Chatham had said, no doubt, that America could not be conquered. Had he
ever said she could not be reconciled? It was on conciliation, and not
on conquest, that he built his later hopes. He thought the declaration
of France no obstacle to his views, but rather an instrument for their
support. He conceived that the treaty of alliance concluded by the
envoys of the Congress with the Court of Versailles might tend beyond
any other cause to rekindle British feelings in the hearts of the
Americans. Were the glories of Wolfe and Amherst, in which they had
partaken, altogether blotted from their minds? Would the soldier-yeomen
of the colonies be willing to fight side by side with those French whom,
till within fifteen years, they had found in Canada their bitter
hereditary foes? That consequences like to these--that some such
revulsion of popular feeling in America might, perhaps, ensue from an
open French alliance, is an apprehension which, during the first years
of the contest, we find several times expressed in the secret letters of
the Revolution chiefs; it was a possibility which we see called forth
their fears; why then might it not be allowed to animate the hopes of
Chatham?"[7]
But Lord Chatham was not destined even to try the experiment of giving
America a second time to England; in a few days he fell in the House of
Lords, to rise no more, with the protest on his lips against the
separation of the American colonies from England. The Americans had no
confidence in the professions of a Parliament and Ministry which had
oppressed and sought to deceive them for twelve years. As low as the
Congress had fallen in the estimation of a large part of the colonists,
the English Ministry was regarded with universal distrust and aversion.
The Congress refused even to confer with the Royal Commissioners, and
had sufficient influence to prevent any province from entering into
negotiations with them. All the former grounds of complaint had been
removed by the three Acts of Parliament above referred to, and all the
concessions demanded had been granted. The Royal Commissioners requested
General Washington, on the 9th of June (1778), to furnish a passport for
their Secretary, Dr. Ferguson with a letter from them to Congress; but
this was refused, and the refusal was approved by Congress. They then
forwarded, in the usual channel of communication, a letter addressed "To
his Excellency Henry Laurens, the President, and other Members of
Congress," in which they enclosed a copy of their commission and the
Acts of Parliament on which it was founded; and they offered to concur
in every satisfactory and just arrangement towards the following among
other purposes:
"To consent to a cessation of hostilities both by sea and land;
"To restore free intercourse, to revive mutual affection, and renew the
common benefits of naturalization through the several parts of this
empire;
"To extend every freedom to trade that our respective interests can
require;
"To agree that no military forces shall be kept up in the different
States of North America without the consent of the General Congress, or
particular Assemblies;
"To concur in measures calculated to discharge the debts of America, and
to raise the credit and value of the paper circulation;
"To perpetuate our union by a reciprocal deputation of an agent or
agents from the different States, who shall have the privilege of a seat
and voice in the Parliament of Great Britain; or if sent from Great
Britain, in that case to have a seat or voice in the Assemblies of the
different States to which they may be deputed respectively, in order to
attend to the several interests of those by whom they are deputed;
"In short, to establish the power of the respective Legislatures in each
particular State; to settle its revenue, its civil and military
establishment, and to exercise a perfect freedom of legislation and
internal government; so that the British States throughout North
America, acting with us in peace and war under one common sovereign, may
have the irrevocable enjoyment of every privilege that is short of total
separation of interests, or consistent with that union of force on which
the safety of our common religion and liberty depends."[8]
The three Acts of Parliament and the proposals of the five English
Commissioners were far in advance of any wishes which the colonists had
expressed before the Declaration of Independence, and placed the
colonists on the footing of Englishmen--all that the Earl of Chatham and
Mr. Burke had ever advocated--all that the free, loyal, and happy
Dominion of Canada enjoys at this day--all and nothing more than was
required for the unity of the empire and of the Anglo-Saxon race; but
the leaders of Congress had determined upon the dismemberment of the
empire--had determined to sever all connection with the elder European
branch of the Anglo-Saxon family--had determined, and that without even
consulting the constituents whom they professed to represent, to
transfer their allegiance from England to France, to bind themselves
hand and foot to France--that they would make no peace with England,
upon any terms, without the consent of the French Court.
It may be easily conceived what an effect would be produced upon the
truly national mind of both England and America by such a transition on
the part of the leaders of Congress and their representatives abroad--a
transition which might be called a revolution, involving new issues and
new relations of parties; for the question was no longer one of mere
separation from England, much less the question of Stamp Acts, or
taxation without representation, or suspension of charters--all acts and
pretensions of this kind having been repealed and renounced; but the
question was now one of union with the hereditary foe of England and her
colonies; and the unnatural alliance contemplated the invasion of
England by the French, the destruction of British commerce, the wresting
from England of the West Indies as well as Canada,[9] and the
possession by France of whatever islands or territory her navy and army
should conquer.
All this was a different thing from mere independence of the mother
country. The United Empire Loyalists and advocates of colonial rights
were now subject to a new allegiance, and punished as rebels and their
property confiscated if they would not unite with the French against
their English forefathers and brethren. So enamoured were the leaders of
Congress with their new allies, that they interrupted the reading of the
official letter from the British Commissioners on account of a passage
which reflected upon France, and debated three days whether they should
allow the remaining part of the letter to be read.[10]
But the feelings of all classes in England, and of a large part, if not
the great majority, of the colonists, were different from those of the
leaders of Congress, now depleted of many distinguished men who attended
its previous year's sittings.[11]
By this alliance with France the allied colonies became, as it were, a
part of France, bound up in oneness with it--refusing all overtures or
negotiations with the representatives of England without the approval of
the French Court. The coasts, cities, towns, etc., of the American
allies of France therefore became liable to the same treatment on the
part of the British army and navy as the coasts, cities, and towns of
France. Of this the British Commissioners informed the Congress, after
the latter had declared its identity with France, and refused any
further intercourse with them.[12]
The war for a short time after this period became more acrimonious and
destructive on both sides than before, as between the French and
English. But this policy of devastation and retaliation was disapproved
of by the British Government--was confined mostly to some certain coast
towns in New England, while in the South the conduct of Col. Campbell,
on the subjugation of Georgia, was marked by lenity and generosity.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: "While the American Commissioners were urging the Ministers
of the King of France to accept the treaty proposed by Congress, they
received assurances of the good wishes of the Court of France; but were
from time to time informed that the important transactions required
further consideration, and were enjoined to observe the most profound
secrecy. Matters remained in this fluctuating state from December, 1776,
till December, 1777. Private encouragement and public discountenance
were alternated; but both varied according to the complexion of news
from America. The defeat on Long Island, the reduction of New York, and
the train of disastrous events in 1776, which have already been
mentioned, sunk the credit of the Americans very low, and abated much of
the national ardour for their support. Their subsequent successes at
Trenton and Princeton effaced these impressions, and rekindled active
zeal in their behalf. The capture of Burgoyne (October, 1777) fixed
these wavering polities. The successes of the American campaign of 1777
placed them on high ground. Their enmity proved itself formidable to
Britain, and their friendship became desirable to France. It was
therefore determined to take them by the hand and publicly espouse their
cause. The Commissioners of Congress, on the 16th of December, 1777,
were informed by M. Gerard, one of the Secretaries of the King's Council
of State, 'that it was decided to acknowledge the independence of the
United States, and to make a treaty with them; that in the treaty no
advantage would be taken of their situation to obtain terms which
otherwise it would not be convenient for them to agree to; that his Most
Christian Majesty desired the treaty, once made, should be durable, and
their amity to subsist for ever, which could not be expected if each
nation did not find an interest in its continuance as well as in its
commencement.'" (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,
Chap, xv., pp. 246, 247.)]
[Footnote 2: "MS. Instructions, May, 6th, 1776, State Paper Office.--It
is therein required as a preliminary condition, before any province
shall be declared in the King's peace, that its Convention, or
Committee, or Association 'which have usurped powers,' shall be
dissolved."]
[Footnote 3: Lord Mahon's History of England, Vol. VI., Chap. liii., pp.
137, 138.
Lord Mahon adds: "At the beginning of the troubles, as I have already
shown, and for a long time afterwards, the vast majority of the
Americans had no wish nor thought of separation from the mother country.
Their object was substantially, and with some new safeguards for their
rights, to revert to the same state in which they had been before the
Administration of George Grenville. But the further the conflict
proceeded, the less and less easy of attainment did that object seem.
How hard, after what had passed, to restore harmonious action between
the powers now at strife, for the people to trust the Governors
appointed by the King, and for the King to trust the Assembly elected by
the people. Even where the actual wrong might have departed, it would
still leave its fatal legacy, rancour and suspicion, behind. Under the
influence of these feelings a great number of persons in all the
colonies were gradually turning their minds to the idea of final
separation from the parent State. Still, in all these colonies, except
only in New England, there were many lingering regrets, many deep-rooted
doubts and misgivings. John Adams writes as follows: 'My dear friend
Gates, all our misfortunes arise from a single source--the reluctance of
the Southern colonies to republican government' (March, 1776, American
Archives, Vol. V., p. 472). Here are the words of another popular
leader: 'Notwithstanding the Act of Parliament for seizing our property,
there is a strange reluctance in the minds of many to cut the knot which
ties us to Great Britain'" (Letter of Reed to Washington, March 3rd,
1776).--_Ib._, pp. 139, 140.]
[Footnote 4: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xi., pp. 121, 122.]
[Footnote 5: "The impression on the House that night, while Lord North
was speaking, and after he sat down, is well described by the pen of a
contemporary--no other, in all probability, than Burke: 'A dull,
melancholy silence for some time succeeded to this speech. It had been
heard with profound attention, but without a single mark of approbation
to any part, from any description of men, or any particular man in the
House. Astonishment, dejection, and fear overclouded the whole assembly.
Although the Minister had declared that the sentiments he expressed that
day had been those which he always entertained, it is certain that few
or none had understood him in that manner; and he had been represented
to the nation at large as the person in it the most tenacious of those
parliamentary rights which he now proposed to resign, and the most
remote from the submissions which he now proposed to make.'
"It may be said, indeed, that there was not a single class or section
within the walls of Parliament to which the plan of Lord North gave
pleasure. The Ministerial party were confounded and abashed at finding
themselves thus requested to acknowledge their past errors and retrace
their former steps. Some among them called out that they had been
deceived and betrayed. In general, however, the majority acquiesced in
sullen silence. On the other part, the Opposition were by no means
gratified to see the wind, according to the common phrase, taken from
their sails. They could not, indeed, offer any resistance to proposals
so consonant to their own expressed opinions, but they took care to make
their support as disagreeable and damaging as possible." (Lord Mahon's
History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. lvii., pp. 327-329.)]
[Footnote 6: History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. lvii, pp. 329,
330.
Lord Mahon adds: "Only two days previously, Lord North, who had opened
his Budget on the 6th, had carried through his financial resolutions in
the House of Commons, involving a new loan of £6,000,000, which was
contracted on advantageous terms. Thus were funds provided to pursue the
war, should that be requisite. Thus was an opening made for negotiations
should they be practicable. In either case the path was cleared for a
new Administration. Here then was the moment which Lord North had for
some time past desired--the moment when, with most honour to himself and
with most advantage to his country, he could fulfil his intentions of
resigning." (Lord Mahon's History of England, Vol. VI., Chap. lvii, pp.
330, 331.)]
[Footnote 7: Lord Mahon's History of England, Vol. VI., Chap. lvii., pp.
344-347.]
[Footnote 8: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xv., pp. 254, 255.]
[Footnote 9: While Count D'Estaing was at Boston repairing his shattered
fleet, he was not unmindful of an essential part of his commission--to
detach Canada from England. "In pursuance of this design, a Declaration
was published (dated the 28th of October, 1778), addressed in the name
of the King of France to the French inhabitants of Canada, and of every
other part of America formerly subject to that Crown. This Declaration
contained the highest praises of the valour of the Americans; it laid
before the inhabitants of Canada the mortification they must endure in
bearing arms against the allies of their parent State; it represented to
them, in the strongest terms, the ties formed by origin, language,
manners, government, and religion, between the Canadians and the French,
and lamented the misfortune which had occasioned a disjunction of that
colony from France; it recalled to their remembrance the brave
resistance they had made during the many wars they had been engaged in
against England, especially the last; it reminded them of their
favourite warriors and generals, particularly the valiant Montcalm, who
fell at their head, in defence of their country; it earnestly entreated
them to reflect seriously on their disagreeable subjection to strangers
living in another hemisphere, differing from them in every possible
respect, who could consider them no otherwise than as a conquered
people, and would always, of course, treat them accordingly. It
concluded by formally notifying, that the Count D'Estaing was authorized
and commanded by the King of France to declare, in his name, that all
his former subjects in North America who should renounce their
allegiance to Great Britain might depend on his protection and support."
(Dr. Andrews' History of the American War, Vol. III., Chap. xxxviii., p.
171.)]
[Footnote 10: The conciliatory acts of the British Parliament and the
letter of the Commissioners were referred by the Congress to a Committee
of three--all known to be opposed to any reconciliation with England.
This Committee made, the next day after its appointment, a report which
was adopted by Congress, that the British acts were merely intended to
operate upon the hopes and fears of the American people, and to produce
divisions among them; "that those who made any partial convention or
agreement with the Commissioners of Great Britain would be regarded as
enemies; and that the United States could hold no conference with such
Commissioners until the British Government _first withdrew its fleets
and armies, or acknowledged the independence of the United States_."
"This _rejection_ of terms which they not long before would have
cordially welcomed, _was, no doubt, caused by the confident expectation
they then had of the support and alliance of France_; and accordingly
the news of that alliance soon after reached them, and diffused a
general joy throughout the land." (Tucker's History of the United
States, Vol. I., Chap. iii., pp. 221, 222.)]
[Footnote 11: "The Declaration of Independence effected an alteration of
sentiments in England. It was esteemed by many of the most judicious
persons in this country, a measure wholly unnecessary, and without
recurring to which America might have compassed every point proposed by
continuing its resistance to Britain on the same footing it had begun.
This measure occasioned an alienation from its interests in the minds of
many of its former adherents. It was looked upon as a wanton abuse of
the success with which it had opposed the efforts of the British
Ministry to bring them to submission, and as an ungrateful return for
the warmth with which their cause had been espoused in Parliament, and
by such multitudes as in the idea of many amounted to a plurality."
"The Declaration of France completed the revolution that had been
gradually taking place in the opinions of men on their being repeatedly
apprised of the determination of Congress to break asunder all the bonds
of former amity, and to unite themselves in the closest manner with that
kingdom." (Dr. Andrews' History of the American War, Vol. III., Chap.
xxxiv., pp. 82-84.)
The Declaration of France in favour of the independence of the American
colonies, and of alliance with them, was officially communicated to the
British Government the 13th of March, 1778, a few days after which the
French fleet under the command of Count D'Estaing sailed from Toulon,
and arrived off the coast of America in July--after a long voyage of
eighty-seven days. On learning the departure of the French fleet for
America, the British Government sent out, in the same ships with the
Peace Commissioners, orders to Sir Henry Clinton to concentrate his
forces on Long Island and at New York. "The successor of Howe, Sir Henry
Clinton, was," says Lord Mahon, "in character, as upright and amiable;
in skill and enterprise, much superior. Had the earlier stages of the
war been under his direction, his ability might not have been without
influence upon them. But it was his misfortune to be appointed only at a
time when other foes had leagued against us, when the path was beset
with thorns and briars, when scarce any laurels rose in view. In
consequence of the impending war with France, and in conformity with the
advice of Lord Amherst to the King, instructions had been addressed to
Sir Henry, on the 23rd of March, to retire from the hard-won city of
Philadelphia, and concentrate his forces at New York. This order reached
him at Philadelphia, in the month of May, only a few days after he had
assumed the chief command; only a few days before, there came on shore
the British Commissioners of Peace. These Commissioners might well
complain with some warmth, in a secret letter to Lord George Germaine,
that an order so important, so directly bearing on the success of their
mission, should have been studiously concealed from them until they
landed in America, and beheld it in progress of execution. Thus to a
private friend wrote Lord Carlisle (one of the Commissioners): 'We
arrived at this place, after a voyage of six weeks, on Saturday last,
and found everything here in great confusion--- the army upon the point
of leaving the town, and about three thousand of the miserable
inhabitants embarked on board of our ships, to convey them from a place
where _they think they would receive no mercy from those who will take
possession after us_.'"
"Thus from the first," says Lord Mahon, "the Commissioners had against
them the news of a retreat from Philadelphia, and the news of the treaty
of Paris; further, they had against them, as the Opposition in England
had long foreseen and foretold, the fact of their connection with Lord
North. Even at the outset, before their affairs could be known (June 14,
1778), one of the leaders in America, General Joseph Reed, answered a
private note from one of them as follows: 'I shall only say that after
the unparalleled injuries and insults this country has received from the
men who now direct the affairs of Great Britain, a negotiation under
their auspices has much to Struggle with.'" "How different," remarks
Lord Mahon, "might have been his feelings, had they brought their
Commission from Lord Chatham." (History of England, Vol. VI., Chap.
lviii., pp. 372-374.)
Lord Mahon adds: "Not any, even the smallest opening, was afforded to
these messengers of peace. They desired to despatch to the seat of
Congress their Secretary, Dr. Adam Ferguson, the well-known Professor of
Edinburgh, and they applied to Washington for a passport, but Washington
refused it until the pleasure of Congress should be known. The Congress,
on their part, had put forth a resolution declining even to hold any
conference with the Commissioners unless, as a preliminary, they should
either withdraw the fleets and armies, or else, in express terms,
acknowledge the independence of the United States. In vain did the
Commissioners address the President of the Congress, and entreat some
consideration of their terms. (For the terms, see page 11.) To none of
these terms, so tempting heretofore, would the Congress hearken; and
after their first letter, they decided in a summary manner that no
further reply should be returned."--_Ib._, pp. 374, 375.]
[Footnote 12: "Finding it impossible to proceed with their negotiations,
the Commissioners prepared to re-embark for England. First, however,
they issued a manifesto, or proclamation, to the American people,
appealing to them against the decisions of the Congress, and offering to
the colonies at large, or singly, a general or separate peace. This
proclamation was in most parts both ably and temperately argued. But
there was one passage liable to just exceptions. The Commissioners
observed, that hitherto the hopes of a reunion had checked the extremes
of war. Henceforth the contest would be changed. If the British colonies
were to become an accession to France, the law of self-preservation must
direct Great Britain to render the accession of as little avail as
possible to her enemy. Mr. Fox and others in the House of Commons
inveighed with great plausibility against this passage, us threatening a
war of savage desolation. Others again, as friends of Lord Carlisle and
Mr. Eden (afterwards Lord Auckland), asserted that no such meaning was
implied. The error, whatever it might be, lay with the Commissioners,
and in no degree with the Government at home; for Lord North denied, in
the most express terms, that his Ministers had intended to give the
least encouragement to the introduction of any new kind of war in North
America." (Debate in the House of Commons, Dec. 4, 1778.)
Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. lviii., pp. 376,
377.]
CHAPTER XXVIII.
COMPLETE FAILURE OF THE FRENCH FLEET AND ARMY, UNDER COUNT D'ESTAING, TO
ASSIST THE CONGRESS.
The leaders of Congress were disappointed in the high expectations which
they had entertained from their unnatural alliance with France. Count
D'Estaing left France with a much more powerful fleet than Lord Howe
commanded in America, besides bringing an army of several thousand
soldiers. He had expected to surprise and capture the British ships in
the River Delaware; but Lord Howe had sailed for New York several days
before his arrival. Count D'Estaing pursued, and lay eleven days at
anchor off Sandy Hook, not being able to get his large ships over the
bar into New York harbour. He at length directed his course, by
Washington's advice, to Long Island, and sailed up the Newport river,
whither he was followed by Lord Howe. "An attack against the British in
that quarter had been projected between the new allies. The French
promised to land from their ships four thousand troops, and the
Americans actually sent a detachment of ten thousand under General
Sullivan. The British troops, only five thousand strong, retired within
their lines at Newport.
"At these tidings, Lord Howe, whose intended successor, Admiral Byron,
had not yet arrived, issued forth from the Hudson and sailed in pursuit
of D'Estaing. The two fleets were on the point of engaging when
separated by a violent storm; there were conflicts between individual
ships only, in which the honour of the British flag was worthily
maintained. D'Estaing now declared his fleet so far damaged by the
storm as to compel him to put into Boston harbour and refit. In this
resolution he persisted, though Sullivan, Greene, and other American
officers altogether denied the necessity, and even transmitted to him a
written protest against it, couched in the most acrimonious terms."[13]
Certain it is, that the course which D'Estaing pursued on this occasion
not only forced the Americans to relinquish their enterprise upon Long
Island, but roused up among them a bitter feeling against the French. To
such an extent was this animosity carried that riots ensued in the
streets of Boston[14] between the American seamen and their new
allies.[15]
Even in regard to the mode of attacking the British on Long Island,
differences arose between Count D'Estaing and his new American friends
on questions of etiquette. Mr. Tucker says: "D'Estaing's fastidiousness
on points of etiquette, and his refusal to aid in what would have given
so serious a blow to the British power in America, is calculated to
raise a doubt whether he was really anxious to bring the war to an
immediate conclusion."[16] Early in November, Count D'Estaing, with the
French squadron, quitted the port of Boston and sailed for the West
Indies, there to pursue exclusively French objects. "Deep was the
disappointment and loud the animadversion of the Americans in the
Northern provinces. They had formed the most sanguine hopes from the
French alliance. They had found that alliance as yet little better than
a name."[17]
The results of Count D'Estaing's expedition, and of the French alliance
thus far, are well summed up by Dr. Ramsay in the following words: "With
the abortive expedition to Rhode Island there was an end to the plans
which were in this first campaign projected by the allies of Congress
for co-operation. The Americans had been intoxicated with hopes of the
most decisive advantages; but in every instance they were disappointed.
Lord Howe, with an inferiority of force, not only preserved his own
fleet, but counteracted and defeated all the views and attempts of Count
D'Estaing. The French fleet gained no direct advantages for the
Americans; yet their arrival was of great service to their cause.
Besides deranging the plans of the British, it carried conviction to
their minds that his Most Christian Majesty was seriously disposed to
support them. The good-will of their new allies was manifested to the
Americans; and though it had failed in producing the effects expected
from it, the failure was charged to winds, weather, and unavoidable
incidents. Some censured Count D'Estaing; but while they attempted to
console themselves by throwing blame on him, they felt and acknowledged
their obligation to the French nation, and were encouraged to persevere
in the war, from the hope that better fortune would attend their future
co-operation."[18] Count D'Estaing proceeded with his fleet to the West
Indies, where he did nothing worthy of the large fleet, reinforced by
that of Count de Grasse with several thousand troops, against the
English fleet under the command of Admiral Byron--much inferior in both
men and metal; but the French admiral declined and evaded any general
engagement, though repeatedly provoked to it. "The British fleet
endeavoured in vain to compel the enemy to come to close fight; they
avoided it with the utmost circumspection and dexterity."[19]
It became indispensably necessary for Admiral Byron to provide a
powerful convoy to the merchant shipping now on the eve of their
departure for England, and whose cargoes were of immense value. Under
all the circumstances, Admiral Byron determined to convoy the homeward
trade with his whole fleet, till it was out of danger of being followed
by Count D'Estaing or of falling in with M. de la Motte, who was on his
way from France to the French islands with a strong squadron. During
Admiral Byron's absence, Count D'Estaing directed an attack to be made
on the island of St. Vincent, the garrison of which was very
inconsiderable, and soon surrendered to the superior strength of the
French, assisted by a great multitude of the Caribbee Indians, and who
seized this opportunity of revenging themselves for injuries inflicted
upon them by the English during the last French war.
In the meantime Count D'Estaing was still further reinforced by the
arrival of the squadron commanded by M. de la Motte. His fleet now
consisted of twenty-six ships of the line and twelve frigates, and his
land force amounted to ten thousand men. With this powerful armament he
sailed for the island of Grenada, the strength of which consisted of
about one hundred and fifty regulars and three or four hundred armed
inhabitants. The garrison was compelled to yield to the prodigious
superiority of force against them, after a most heroic defence, in
which no less than three hundred of the French were killed and
wounded.[20]
The complaints of the Americans of the failure of Count D'Estaing's
expedition to America, of his abandoning the expedition against Long
Island, of his leaving the coasts of the Southern colonies unprotected
and exposed, and proceeding to the West Indies, reached the French
Court, which sent instructions to Count D'Estaing enjoining him to
return with all speed to the assistance of the colonies. For this
purpose he left the West Indies on the 1st of September. Mr. Tucker
remarks: "General Lincoln (commander of the colonial forces in Carolina)
having informed Count D'Estaing that the British ships had gone into
port to repair the damages sustained in the late engagement with his
fleet in the West Indies, and that a fair opportunity was presented of
destroying the British army in Georgia, with the co-operation of the
French fleet, the Count immediately left the West Indies, with
twenty-two sail of the line and eleven frigates. He had on board six
thousand land forces, and arrived so unexpectedly on the coast that a
British fifty-gun ship and three frigates fell into his hands. He then,
in conjunction with General Lincoln, planned an attack on the town of
Savannah."[21]
The arrangements for the attack having been made, the whole French fleet
came to anchor at the mouth of the Savannah river on the 1st day of
September. He was occupied ten days in landing his troops and
artillery; on the 15th of September a junction was formed between the
French and General Lincoln,[22] and with the utmost confidence of
success.[23]
They determined to take the town by siege rather than by storm in the
first instance.[24]
On the 16th of September they demanded, in a very confident and haughty
tone, the surrender of the town to the arms of the King of France; but
General Prevost declined surrendering on a general summons, and
requested a specific statement of the terms of it. The Count replied
that it was for the besieged to propose the terms. General Prevost
requested and obtained twenty-four hours' suspension of hostilities to
prepare his answer. Before the twenty-four hours had elapsed,
Lieutenant-Colonel Maitland, with several hundred men who had been
stationed at Beaufort, made their way through inland channels and
swamps, and joined the royal standard at Savannah; and General Prevost
gave his answer of no surrender. The French and Americans, who formed a
junction the evening after, resolved to besiege the town, and consumed
several days in preparing for it, while the works of the garrison were
hourly strengthened by great labour and skill. From the 24th of
September to the 4th of October a heavy cannonade on both sides was kept
up; but the allied army, finding that they could make little or no
impression on the works of the besieged, resolved on a bombardment, with
a stronger cannonading than ever. On the 4th of October the besiegers
opened on the town three batteries, with nine mortars, thirty-seven
pieces of cannon from the land side, and fifteen from the water. The
firing from these batteries lasted, with little intermission, during
five days; but the damage they did was confined mostly to the town,
where some houses were destroyed and some women and children killed.
Soon after the commencement of the cannonade, General Prevost requested
permission to remove the women and children out of the town to a place
of safety; but this request was refused in offensive terms on the part
of Count D'Estaing, by the advice of General Lincoln, on the pretext
that a desire of secreting the plunder lately taken from the South
Carolinas was covered under the veil of humanity, but the real reason
was that the surrender of the town would be expedited by keeping the
women and children in it.[25]
Count D'Estaing, finding that his five days' cannonading made no
impression on the defensive works of the city, and his officers
remonstrating against his continuing to risk so valuable a fleet on a
dangerous coast, in the hurricane season, and at so great a distance
from shore that it might be surprised by a British fleet, now completely
repaired in the West Indies and fully manned, he decided to assault the
town. The attack was commenced in three columns on the 9th, an hour
before sunrise.
"Though the besieged were prepared for the assault, and their fire was
very destructive, the assailants pressed on and planted (for a few
minutes) the standard of both nations on the walls; but the contest
being still obstinately continued, the assailants were brought to a
pause by the fall of Count Pulaski (commanding an American corps), who
received a mortal wound; and Major Glaziers, who commanded the garrison,
rushing at the head of a body of grenadiers and marines, drove back the
allied troops, who were ordered to retreat. The French lost seven
hundred men; the Americans, two hundred and thirty-four. The British
garrison lost only fifty-five in killed and wounded. On the 16th of
October the siege was raised by the Count, who thus for the third time
failed in his co-operation with the Americans, after the fairest
prospects of success."[26]
Mr. Bancroft states the final struggle of this eventful contest, and the
results and effects of it on the Southern colonies, in the following
words:--"After an obstinate struggle of fifty-five minutes to carry the
redoubt, the assailants retreated before a charge of grenadiers and
marines, led gallantly by Maitland. The injury sustained by the British
was trifling; the loss of the Americans was about two hundred; of the
French, thrice as many. The French withdrew their ships, and sailed for
France; the patriots of Georgia who had joined them fled to the
backwoods or across the river.
"Lincoln repaired to Charleston, and was followed by what remained of
his army; the militia of South Carolina returned to their homes; its
continental regiments were melting away; and its paper money became so
nearly worthless, that a bounty of twenty-five hundred dollars for
twenty-one months' service had no attraction. The dwellers near the sea
between Charleston and Savannah were shaken in their allegiance, not
knowing where to find protection. Throughout the State the people were
disheartened, and foreboded desolation."[27]
I have given a more minute account of Count D'Estaing and his abortive
expeditions to America, and of his final attack upon Savannah and its
results; how completely disappointed were the American revolutionists
thus far in their unnatural alliance with France against England; how
little mutual respect or good-will, and what quarrels occurred, whenever
they came or attempted to act together, whether at Boston, or Long
Island, or Charleston, or Savannah; and how much feebler the army and
more gloomy the prospects of the Congress party were at the end of 1779
than they were two years before, when the alliance with France was
formed. Dr. Ramsay well sums up these events as follows:
"The campaign of 1779 is remarkable for the feeble exertions of the
Americans. Accidental causes, which had previously excited their
activity, had in a great measure ceased to have influence. An enthusiasm
for liberty made them comparatively disregard property and brave all
dangers in the first years of the war. The successes of their arms near
the beginning of 1777, and the hope of capturing Burgoyne's army in the
close of it, together with the brisk circulation of a large quantity of
paper-money, in good credit, made that year both active and decisive.
The flattering prospects inspired by the alliance with France in 1778
banished all fears of the success of the revolution, but the failure of
every scheme of co-operation produced a despondency of mind unfavourable
to great exertions. Instead of driving the British out of the country,
as the Americans vainly presumed, the campaigns of 1778 and 1779
terminated without any direct advantage from the French fleet sent to
their aid. Expecting too much from their allies, and then failing in
these expectations, they were less prepared to prosecute the war with
their own resources than they would have been if D'Estaing had not
touched on their coast. Their army was reduced in its numbers and badly
clothed.
"In the first years of the war, the mercantile character was lost in the
military spirit of the times; but in the progress of it the inhabitants,
cooling in their enthusiasm, gradually returned to their former habits
of lucrative business. This made distinctions between the army and
citizens, and was unfriendly to military exertions. While several
foreign events tended to the embarrassment of Great Britain,[28] and
indirectly to the establishment of independence, a variety of internal
causes relaxed the exertions of the Americans, and for a time made it
doubtful whether they would ultimately be independent citizens or
conquered subjects."[29]
Even a year later--"The military force," says Mr. Tucker, "embarked in
the beginning of 1781, to maintain the cause of independence, is thus
stated in (Chief Justice) Marshall's Life of Washington: The Southern
troops, from Pennsylvania to Georgia, did not exceed three thousand men.
Of the Northern troops, twelve hundred had been detached to Virginia,
under La Fayette; with these they amounted only to three thousand
effective men in April. The cavalry and artillery was less than one
thousand. With some small additions, the whole reached four thousand men
in May. They were ill supplied with clothing, and were seriously
threatened with a want of provisions. The quartermaster's department was
without means of transport," (Marshall, Vol. IV., p. 446).[30]
Such was the character and such the fruits of the alliance with France
during the first two years of its existence; and such was the state of
the revolutionary army in 1780, and which seems to have been largely
owing to the incapacity and ill conduct of the Congress itself, which
had become degenerate and corrupt--equal to that of any British
Parliament, or of any Provincial Legislature, under any Royal
Governor.[31]
Abundant evidence can be adduced in proof and illustration of this
statement from the warmest partizans of Congress; but the testimony of
Washington himself is ample and indisputable. In the winter of 1778-9 he
had to concert his measures with Congress at Philadelphia, and he writes
from thence as follows to his friend Benjamin Harrison:
"If I were to be called upon to draw a picture of the times and of men
from what I have seen, heard, and in part known, I should in one word
say that idleness, dissipation, and extravagance seem to have laid fast
hold of them; that speculation, peculation, and an insatiable thirst for
riches seem to have got the better of every other consideration and of
every order of men; that party disputes and personal quarrels are the
great business of the day; whilst the momentous concerns of an empire, a
great and accumulating debt, ruined finances, depreciated money, and
want of credit, which in its consequence is the want of everything, are
but secondary considerations, and postponed from day to day, and from
week to week, as if our affairs wore the most promising aspect. * * Our
money is now sinking fifty per cent. a day in this city, and I shall not
be surprised if in the course of a few months a total stop is put to the
currency of it; and yet an assembly, a concert, a dinner, a supper, that
will cost three or four hundred pounds, will not only take men from
acting in this business, but from thinking of it; while a great part of
the officers of our army, from absolute necessity, are quitting the
service. * * I have no resentments, nor do I mean to point at particular
characters. This I can declare upon my honour, for I have every
attention paid me by Congress that I could possibly expect. * * But
such is the picture which from my inmost soul I believe to be true; and
I confess to you that I feel more real distress on account of the
present appearances of things, than I have done at any time since the
commencement of the dispute."[32]
Such is General Washington's own account of the character and occupation
of the Congress of the United States in the third year of the
revolutionary war, and in the second year of their alliance with
France--idleness, dissipation, extravagance, speculation, peculation,
avarice, party and personal quarrels, dancing, feasting; while the
credit was reduced almost to nothing, and the army neglected and
suffering.[33]
Such was the progress of the war; such the failure of the expeditions of
the French alliance; such the state of the revolutionary army, and of
the public credit; and such the degenerate character and proceedings of
Congress and its surroundings in the beginning of 1780--the fifth year
of the civil war.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 13: "They urged D'Estaing to return with his fleet into the
harbour; but his principal officers were opposed to the measure, and
protested against it. He had been instructed to go into Boston if his
fleet met with any misfortune. His officers insisted on his ceasing to
prosecute the expedition against Rhode Island, that he might conform to
the orders of their common superiors. A protest was drawn up and sent to
him, which was signed by John Sullivan, Nathaniel Greene, John Hancock,
I. Glover, Ezekiel Cornel, William Whipple, John Tyler, Solomon Lovell,
John Fitconnel. They protested against the Count's taking the fleet to
Boston, as derogatory to the honour of France, contrary to the intention
of his Christian Majesty and the interests of his nation, destructive in
the highest degree to the welfare of the United States, and highly
injurious to the alliance formed between the two nations. Had D'Estaing
prosecuted his original plan within the harbour, either before or
immediately after the pursuit of Lord Howe, the reduction of the British
post on Rhode Island (which had been in the possession of the British
since 1776) would have been probable; but his departure in the first
instance to engage the English fleet, and in the second from Rhode
Island to Boston, frustrated the whole." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the
United States, Vol. II., Chap. xvi., p. 272.)
"Whatever were the reasons which induced Count D'Estaing to adopt that
measure (of sailing with his fleet direct for Boston), the Americans
were greatly dissatisfied. They complained that they had incurred great
expense and danger, under the prospect of the most effective
co-operation; that depending thereon, they had risked their lives on an
island, where, without naval protection, they were exposed to particular
dangers; that in this situation they were first deserted, and afterwards
totally abandoned, at a time when, by persevering in the original plan,
they had well-grounded hopes of speedy success. Under these
apprehensions the discontented militia went home in such crowds that the
regular army, which remained was in danger of being cut off from a
retreat. In these embarrassing circumstances, General Sullivan
extricated himself with judgment and ability. He began to send off his
heavy artillery and baggage on the 26th, and retreated from the lines on
the night of the 28th." (Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol.
VI., Chap. lviii., p. 173.)]
[Footnote 14: "The inveteracy to the French, traditionally inherent in
the lower classes of the New England people, could not be restrained
from breaking out in Boston, in manner that might have been attended
with the most serious consequences to the interests of both France and
America, had not the prudence of the magistracy interposed on the one
hand, and the sagacity of Count D'Estaing co-operated on the other. A
desperate fray happened in that city between the populace and the French
sailors, in which these were roughly handled, and had much the worse. A
number of them were hurt and wounded, and some, it was reported, were
killed."
"Precisely at the same time, a disturbance of a like nature happened at
Charleston, in South Carolina, between the French and American seamen,
but it was carried to much greater extremities; they engaged on both
sides with small arms, and even with cannon. A number of people were
killed and wounded" (Dr. Andrews' History of the American War, Vol.
III., Chap. xxxviii., pp. 172, 173)]
[Footnote 15: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap.
lviii, pp. 380, 381.
"During this time Sir Henry Clinton sent out several expeditions in
various quarters. Near Tappan, a body of American horsemen under Colonel
Baylor were surprised and routed, or put to the sword. In Egg-Harbour,
great part of Count Pulaski's foreign legion was cut to pieces. At
Buzzard's Bay, and on the island called Martha's Vineyard, many American
ships were taken or destroyed, store-houses burned, and contributions of
sheep and oxen levied. In these expeditions the principal commander was
General Charles Grey, an officer of great zeal and ardour, whom the
Americans sometimes surnamed the 'No-flint General,' from his common
practice of ordering the men to take the flints out of their muskets,
and trust to their bayonets alone. After some twenty years of further
service, the veteran was raised, by the favour of his Sovereign, to the
peerage as Lord Grey of Howick, and afterwards Earl Grey. His son became
Prime Minister (father of the present Earl Grey), and the greatest
orator who, since the death of Chatham, had appeared in the House of
Lords."--_Ib._, pp. 382, 383.]
[Footnote 16: Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap.
iii., p. 231.]
[Footnote 17: Lord Mahon's History of England, Vol. VI., Chap. lviii.,
p. 384.
Mr. Tucker remarks on this subject: "On the 3rd of November D'Estaing
sailed for the West Indies, and thus ended the costly and fruitless
expedition which bade fair to be decisive of the contest; and which
failed first by disasters from the elements, and then from
misunderstandings in which the interests of the common cause seem to
have been sacrificed to paltry personal feelings on both sides."
(History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, iii., p. 234.)]
[Footnote 18: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap,
xvi., p. 275.]
[Footnote 19: "Early in January, 1779, reinforcements under Admiral
Byron transferred maritime superiority to the British; and D'Estaing for
six months sheltered his fleet in the bay of Port Royal. At the end of
June, Byron having left St. Lucia to convoy a company of British
merchant ships through the passage, D'Estaing detached a force against
St. Vincent, which, with the aid of the oppressed and enslaved Caribs,
was easily taken. At the same time the French admiral made an attack on
the island of Grenada, whose garrison surrendered on the 4th of July, at
discretion." (Bancroft, Vol. X., Chap, xiii., p. 295.)]
[Footnote 20: "Two days after the taking of Grenada," says Mr. Bancroft,
"the fleet of Byron arrived within sight of the French, and, though
reduced in number, sought a general close action, which his adversary
knew how to avoid." (History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap, xiii.,
p. 295.)]
[Footnote 21: History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, iii., p. 249.
"Count D'Estaing's intentions and his hopes were, as before, directed to
objects of the first magnitude. The first measure of the plan and
contemplation was to expel the British forces out of Georgia, and to
place that province and the contiguous province of South Carolina, and
in short all the Southern colonies, on a footing of perfect security
from any future invasions by the British troops. After the
accomplishment of this object, he next proposed no less than a total
deliverance of America from the terror of the British arms. This was to
be effected by the destruction of the British fleet at New York. The
latter part of the plan he doubted not to accomplish through the
co-operation of the American army under Washington." (Dr. Andrews'
History of the Late War, Vol. III., Chap. xlv., pp. 308, 309.)]
[Footnote 22: "A junction being formed by the French and American
forces, they amounted together to between nine and ten thousand men.
Count D'Estaing had five thousand regulars, and near one thousand stout
mulattos and free negroes, well armed. The body of Americans that joined
him under the command of General Lincoln consisted of about two thousand
at first, but were soon augmented to twice that number.
"To oppose this formidable strength, General Prevost (the commander of
Savannah) had no more, altogether, than three thousand men; but they
were such as continual experience had shown he could place the utmost
dependence on. Numbers were refugees (loyalists), _whom resentment for
the usage they had received_ exasperated to a degree that rendered them
desperate."--_Ib._, p. 312.]
[Footnote 23: "As soon as the arrival of Count D'Estaing on the coast
was known, General Lincoln, with the army under his command, marched for
the vicinity of Savannah; and orders were given for the militia of
Georgia and South Carolina to rendezvous near the same place. The
British were equally diligent in preparing for their defence. The
American militia, flushed with the hope of speedily expelling the
British from their southern possessions, turned out with an alacrity
which far surpassed their exertions in the previous campaign." (Dr.
Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xvii., p. 302.)]
[Footnote 24: "The French and the Americans encamped separately. Count
D'Estaing thought it most prudent to keep them apart. He knew by
experience how apt they were to disagree; and he hoped that, by acting
asunder from each other, a reciprocal emulation would be excited. It was
agreed, accordingly, that each of them should carry on their respective
approaches without interference from the other side. This method was
particularly agreeable to the French, who, looking upon themselves as
incomparably superior to the Americans, did not choose to divide any
honour with these, to which they imagined that they alone were
entitled." (Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol. III., Chap, xlv.,
pp. 312, 313.)]
[Footnote 25: Count D'Estaing was afterwards so ashamed of this inhuman
refusal, that after the repulse of his assault upon the garrison he
apologized for it, and offered the permission requested, but which was
no longer needed, and therefore refused.
General Stedman, referring to this circumstance, says: "On the morning
of the 4th of October, the batteries of the besiegers having opened with
a discharge from fifty-three pieces of heavy cannon and fourteen
mortars, a request was made by General Prevost that the women and
children might be permitted to leave the town and embark on board
vessels in the river, which should be placed under the protection of
Count D'Estaing, and wait the issue of the siege. But this proposal,
dictated by humanity, was rejected with insult. Fortunately, however,
for the inhabitants as well as the garrison, although an incessant
cannonade from so many pieces of artillery was continued from the 4th to
the 9th of October, less injury was done to the houses in the town than
might have been expected; few lives were lost, and the defences were in
no respect materially damaged." (Stedman's History of the American War,
Vol. II., Chap, xxx., p. 127.)]
[Footnote 26: Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap,
iii., p. 250.
This disastrous attack upon Savannah was followed by mutual
recriminations between the French and American officers and soldiers.
"No good agreement, it has been said, subsisted between the French and
Americans from the commencement of the siege, and their mutual dislike
was now increased by disappointment. After the assault, the French could
no longer conceal their contempt for their new allies; they styled them
'insurgents' in common conversation and even in written memorials."
(General Stedman's History of the American War, Vol. II., Chap, xxx., p.
132.)
"While the British troops were enjoying the satisfaction resulting from
the success that was due to their conduct and valour, the enemy was in a
condition of discontent and sullenness which had like to have terminated
fatally. The Americans could not conceal their disapprobation of the
whole proceedings of Count D'Estaing, nor he the contemptuous light in
which he held them. Reciprocal taunts and reproaches came to such a
height between both the officers and soldiers of either party, that it
was once thought they would have proceeded to actual violence.
"A motive which strongly influenced the Americans was the jealousy they
had conceived against the French commander, on account of his having
summoned General Prevost to _surrender to the arms of France_, without
including those of the United States of America. They inferred from
thence, that either he considered them as unworthy of the honour of
being mentioned conjointly with the King of France, or that he meant to
retain the province of Georgia for that Crown in case of reduction.
Whichever of the two was the meaning of the French commander, it exposed
him equally to the indignation of the Americans.
"To this it may be added, that the inhuman refusal of the request of
General Prevost for a permission to the women and children to depart
from the town of Savannah during the siege, was now by the French
attributed to the Americans, whom they accused of brutality, and whose
general, a French officer of rank, was loaded with the coarsest and most
injurious appellations, in common with his other countrymen.
"From the day of their repulse, both the French and Americans abandoned
all further prosecution of the siege.
"In this manner was the province of Georgia cleared a third time of the
enemy, after the most sanguine expectations had been entertained by all
America that the reduction of this province would have been a
preparatory step to the expulsion of the British fleets and armies from
every part of the continent." (Dr. Andrews' History of the War, etc.,
Vol. III., Chap. xlv., pp. 316-318.)]
[Footnote 27: Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap.
xiii., pp. 297, 298.]
[Footnote 28: "In the latter part of this year (1779), Spain decided on
joining France in the war, anxious as she was to take the chance of
recovering Gibraltar, Jamaica, and the Floridas." (Tucker's History of
the United States, Vol. I., Chap. iii., p. 251.)
Thus England had arrayed against her two of the most powerful
Governments, with the two most powerful fleets in Europe, besides the
war in America.]
[Footnote 29: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xvii., pp. 305, 306.]
[Footnote 30: Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap.
iii., p. 282.]
[Footnote 31: "There were never more than forty members present--often
no more than twenty. These small numbers, however, by no means insured
harmony, nor precluded violent and unseemly quarrels, rumours of which
were not slow in passing the Atlantic. 'For God's sake,' thus writes La
Fayette from France, 'For God's sake prevent the Congress from disputing
loudly together. Nothing so much hurts the interest and reputation of
America.' (Letter of La Fayette to Washington, June 12th, 1779.) Thus
the object of concealment, unless, perhaps, for private purposes, was
most imperfectly attained, although, in name at least, the deliberations
of Congress at this time were secret. Historically, even the Journal
which they kept gives little light as to their true proceedings. An
American gentleman, who has studied that document with care, laments
that it is painfully meagre, the object being apparently to record as
little as possible." (Life of President Reed, by Mr. William Reed, Vol.
II., p. 18.)
Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. lviii., pp. 420,
421.]
[Footnote 32: Letter to Benjamin Harrison, December 30th, 1778.
Washington's Writings, Vol. VI., p. 151, quoted in Lord Mahon's History,
Vol. VI., Chap. lviii., pp. 419, 420.]
[Footnote 33: Dr. Ramsay, referring to this depreciation of the
currency, says: "The confiscation and sale of the property of Tories,
for the most part, brought but very little into the public treasury. The
sales were generally made on credit, and by the progressive
depreciation, what was dear at the time of the purchase, was very cheap
at the time of payment. When this measure was first adopted, little or
no injustice resulted from it, for at that time the paper bills were
equal, or nearly equal, to gold or silver of the same nominal sum. In
the progress of the war, when depreciation took place, the case was
materially altered.
"The aged, who had retired from the scenes of active business to enjoy
the fruits of their industry, found their substance melting away to a
mere pittance, insufficient for their support. The widow who lived
comfortably on the bequests of a deceased husband, experienced a
frustration of all his well-meant tenderness. The laws of the country
interposed and compelled her to receive a shilling, where a pound was
her due. The hapless orphan, instead of receiving from the hands of an
executor a competency to set out in business, was obliged to give a
final discharge on the payment of sixpence in the pound." (Dr. Ramsay's
History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xviii., pp. 315, 316.)
"The paper-money," says Lord Mahon, "had gradually fallen to
one-twentieth, to one-thirtieth, nay, in some cases to not less than
one-hundredth of its nominal value! But perhaps one practical instance
may make this case clearer. In December of this year (1779), and in the
State of Maryland, an English officer received an innkeeper's bill,
which in his Travels he has printed at full length, amounting in
paper-money to £732 and some shillings; and this bill he paid in gold
with four guineas and a half." (Aubury's Travels, Vol. II., p. 492.)
(Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. lviii., p. 416.)
General Washington thus describes this state of things in regard to
every man in the public service: "What officers can bear the weight of
prices that every necessary article is now got to? A rat, in the shape
of a horse, is not to be bought at this time for less than two hundred
pounds, nor a saddle under thirty or forty pounds; boots twenty, and
shoes and other articles in like proportion. How is it possible,
therefore, for officers to stand this without an increase of pay? And
how is it possible to advance their pay when flour is selling at
different places from five to fifteen pounds per hundredweight, hay from
ten to thirty pounds, and beef and other essentials in like proportion?"
The depreciation still proceeding, Washington a few months afterwards
says that "a waggon load of money will now scarcely purchase a waggon
load of provisions." (Letters to Governor Morris, October 4th, 1778; and
to the President of the Congress, April 23rd, 1779.)]
CHAPTER XXIX.
1780--A YEAR OF WEAKNESS AND DISASTER TO THE AMERICAN CAUSE, AND OF
SUCCESS TO THE BRITISH ARMS.
The year 1780 was inauspicious for the revolutionary cause, but
auspicious for the English. The financial embarrassments arising from
the depreciation of the paper-money engaged the anxious deliberations of
Congress,[34] and Washington's army was by no means able to cope with
the northern division of the English army.[35]
But La Fayette, now returned from a recent visit to France, during which
he had obtained from the French Court a loan of money and reinforcements
of naval and land forces, Washington contemplated the recovery of New
York, which had long been a favourite object with him. The French
squadron of seven sail of the line, and five frigates and transports,
under the command of Chevalier de Ternay, arrived at Newport harbour,
Long Island, on the 10th July, having on board six thousand troops,
under the command of Count de Rochambeau, who, in order to prevent the
repetition of previous disputes, was directed to put himself under
Washington's orders; and on all points of precedence and etiquette--this
was the first division of the promised reinforcements from France--the
French officers were to give place to the Americans. Washington and
Count de Rochambeau agreed upon an attack on New York. The British had
in New York only four ships of the line and a few frigates; but three
days after the arrival of the French squadron, Admiral Graves reached
New York with six ships of the line. Having now the naval superiority,
the British, instead of waiting to be attacked, proposed to attack the
French at Newport, and for which purpose Sir Henry Clinton embarked with
six thousand men; but as Sir Henry Clinton and Admiral Arbuthnot could
not agree on a plan of operations, the British troops were disembarked.
The fleet proceeded to blockade the French ships, and the revolutionary
army was obliged to remain at Newport for their protection. "News
presently arrived that the French second division was detained at Brest,
blockaded there by another British squadron. Instead of being an
assistance, the French auxiliaries threatened to be a burden; three
thousand troops and five hundred militia were kept under arms at Newport
to assist in guarding the French ships. Thus a third time--as it seemed,
almost a sort of fatality--the attempt at French co-operation proved a
failure."[36]
Sir Henry Clinton, on leaving the Count D'Estaing after his defeat at
Savannah, had left the coast of Georgia with his fleet for France,
determined to extend his military operations south, with a view of
completing the submission of the Southern States. Leaving the garrison
of New York under the command of General Knyphausen, he proceeded in
person on an expedition against South Carolina, and besieged Charleston,
the capital. Information had been obtained at Charleston of Sir Henry
Clinton's intention two months before the arrival of his fleet and
troops, and the city was fortified on all sides, and on its redoubts,
lines, and batteries were mounted eighty pieces of cannon and mortars.
The commander, General Lincoln, had a force of 7,000 men of all
denominations under arms, and was expecting large reinforcements. The
army of Sir Henry Clinton was increased by a reinforcement of 3,000
men--making in the whole about 9,000 men under his command.
At the commencement of the siege, the Governor of the State, by the
extraordinary powers conferred upon him by the Legislature, issued a
proclamation requiring such of the militia as were regularly drafted,
and all the inhabitants and _owners of property in the town, to repair
to the American standard and join the garrison immediately, under pain
of confiscation_.
The siege commenced the 3rd of April, and was protracted to the 11th of
May. The terms of capitulation proposed by each party in the earlier
part of the siege were mutually declined. Cannonading continued on each
side until the British opened batteries on the third parallel, played
upon the American garrison with cannon and mortars at a distance of less
than a hundred yards, advanced within twenty-five yards of the American
works, and were ready for making a general assault by land and water
when, on the 11th of May, "a great number of citizens addressed General
Lincoln in a petition, expressing their acquiescence in the terms which
Sir Henry Clinton had offered, and requested his acceptance of them. On
the reception of this petition, General Lincoln wrote to Sir Henry, and
offered to accept the terms before proposed. The royal commanders,
wishing to avoid the extremity of storming the city, and unwilling to
press to unconditional submission an enemy whose friendship they wished
to conciliate, returned a favourable answer. A capitulation was signed
on the 12th of May, and Major General Leslie took possession of the town
the next day. Upwards of 400 pieces of artillery were surrendered.[37]
By the articles of capitulation, the garrison was to march out of town
and deposit their arms in front of the works, but the drums were not to
beat a British march, nor the colours to be uncased. The continental
troops and seamen were to keep their baggage and remain prisoners of war
till exchanged. The militia were to be permitted to return to their
respective homes, as prisoners on parole; and while they adhered to
their parole, were not to be molested by the British troops in person or
property. The inhabitants, of all conditions, were to be considered as
prisoners on parole, and to hold their property on the same terms with
the militia. The officers of the army and navy were to retain their
servants, swords, pistols, and baggage unsearched. They were permitted
to sell their horses, but not to remove them. A vessel was allowed to
proceed to Philadelphia with General Lincoln's despatches unopened."[38]
Shortly after the capture of Charleston, Sir Henry Clinton embarked for
New York with the principal part of his army;[39] but before his
departure he performed several important acts both as Royal Commissioner
and as Commander-in-Chief of the army.
After the surrender of the capital, it was proposed to awe the
disaffected and secure the universal submission of the people by sending
out three expeditions.
"One expedition was sent by Clinton up the Savannah, to encourage the
loyal and reduce the disaffected in the neighbourhood of Augusta:
another proceeded for like purpose to the district of Ninety-Six, where
Williamson surrendered his post and accepted British protection. A third
and larger party, under Cornwallis, moved across the Santee towards
Camden."[40]
These expeditions rather weakened than strengthened the influence of the
British cause, as compulsion rather than conciliation was employed to
re-establish British supremacy; and the proclamations and orders issued
by Sir Henry Clinton before his departure for New York, defeated rather
than promoted the objects intended by them.[41]
After issuing his proclamation (for the purport of which see previous
note), Sir Henry Clinton took his departure, with the major part of his
army, for New York, leaving Lord Cornwallis in command with four
thousand troops.[42]
"Lord Cornwallis, considering South Carolina as entirely reannexed to
Great Britain, would admit of no neutrality among the inhabitants; but
insisted on their taking the oath of allegiance, which, however, was
generally taken with reluctance by the people of the lower country. This
part of the State was still further alienated by the licentious and
plundering habits of the British soldiers over a conquered country, and
by the seduction of many of the slaves from their masters."[43]
There can be no justification of Lord Cornwallis's policy; but there
were some mitigating circumstances that palliate the severities which he
inflicted. Among those who had been taken prisoners at the capture of
Charleston, and professed loyalty, was, as Lord Mahon says, "One Lisle,
who had not only taken the oath of allegiance, but accepted military
rank as a King's officer; waited just long enough to supply his
battalion with clothes, arms, and ammunition from the royal stores, and
then quietly led them back to his old friends. Highly incensed at such
signal acts of treachery as Lisle's, Lord Cornwallis had recourse to
some severe orders in return. The penalty of death was denounced against
all militiamen who, after serving with the English, went off to the
insurgents. Several of the prisoners in the battle of Camden, men taken
with arms in their hands and British protections in their pockets, were
hanged. Other such examples were made at Augusta and elsewhere. Some who
had been living on their parole at Charleston, and who, in spite of that
parole, carried on a secret correspondence with their insurgent
countrymen, were shipped off to St. Augustine. A proclamation was
issued, sequestering the estates of those who had been the most forward
to oppose the establishment of the royal authority within the province.
Perhaps these measures exceeded the bounds of justice; certainly they
did the bounds of policy. This was shown by the fatal event, when, on
the overthrow of the royalist cause in South Carolina, the measures of
Lord Cornwallis became the plea for other executions and for every act
of oppression that resentment could devise."
"Within the more limited sphere of his own command, Lord Rawdon had
recourse to, or at the very least announced, some measures still more
severe, and far less to be justified. In a letter to one of his
officers, which was intercepted, we find, for example, what follows: 'I
will give the inhabitants ten guineas for the head of every deserter
belonging to the volunteers of Ireland; and five guineas only if they
bring him in alive.' No amount of provocation or of precedent in his
enemies, no degree of youthful ardour in himself, are at all adequate to
excuse these most blamable words. When, however, he was called upon to
vindicate them, Lord Rawdon declared that many of his threats were meant
only 'to act on the fears and prejudices of the vulgar,' and by no means
to be carried into practical effect."[44]
During the latter part of the year there were various skirmishes and
battles between volunteer parties of Independents, under such leaders as
Sumpter and Clarke, and detachments of the British army, with various
success, but nothing which affected the supremacy of the royal cause,
though the moral influence of it was widely weakened by the arbitrary
policy of the British commanders and the conduct of the British troops.
The prospects of the revolution were very gloomy,[45] and its leaders
were much disheartened. In these circumstances of depression and
despondency, an earnest appeal was made to France for men and money,[46]
and the transactions following show that the appeal was not made in
vain, and that French ships and troops were the main instruments in
deciding the battle which was followed by the acknowledgment of American
Independence.[47]
Mr. Hildreth, referring to the close of this year, says: "So far,
indeed, as related to America, Great Britain had good reason to be
satisfied with the late campaign. Georgia was entirely subdued, and the
royal government re-established. The possession of Charleston, Augusta,
Ninety-Six, and Camden, supported by an army in the field, secured
entire control over all the wealthy parts of South Carolina. North
Carolina was full of Tories, anxiously awaiting the approach of
Cornwallis. The three Southern States were incapable of helping
themselves, and those further north, exhausted and penniless, were
little able to send assistance. It seemed as if the promises so often
made by Lord George Germaine's American correspondents were now about to
be fulfilled, and the rebel colonies to sink beneath the accumulated
pressure of this long-protracted struggle."[48]
Thus, at the close of 1780, the military conflicts were almost
invariably successful on the side of the British; the resources of the
revolutionists in both money and men were exhausted, and their hopes of
success utterly extinguished without foreign aid. But though the British
were successful on the fields of battle, they everywhere lost in the
confidence, esteem, and affections of the people, even of the Loyalists.
Yet the prospects of the war party of independence were gloomy indeed.
General Washington felt that some great achievement was necessary to
revive the hopes of his fellow-countrymen, and save from dissolution his
daily decreasing army. His only hope was in aid from France. His words
were:
"Without an immediate, ample, and efficacious succour in money, we may
make a feeble and expiring effort in our next campaign, _in all
probability the period of our opposition_. Next to a loan in money, _a
constant naval superiority on these coasts_ is the object the most
interesting."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 34: "The commissaries, greatly in debt, had neither money nor
credit, and starvation began to stare the soldiers in the face. To
support his army, Washington was again obliged to resort to the harsh
expedient of levying contributions on the surrounding country. Each
county was called upon for a certain quantity of flour and meat; but as
the civil authorities took the matter of supply in hand, for which
certificates were given by the commissaries on the appraisement of two
magistrates, the use of force did not become necessary." (Hildreth's
History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap. xi., p. 301.)]
[Footnote 35: "Washington's entire force scarcely exceeded ten thousand
men, a number not equal to the (British) garrison of New York; and even
of these a considerable number were militia drafts, whose terms of
service were fast expiring."--_Ib._, p. 303.
But though New York was in possession of the British, and strongly
garrisoned, apprehensions were entertained of attacks upon the several
English garrison posts in the State from invasions of marauding parties
of the revolutionary army, from facilities of approach on account of the
freezing over of all the rivers from the extreme severity of this
winter. It is singular that while Benjamin Franklin was leader of the
Revolutionists, and now United States Minister to France, his son was
one of the leaders of the Loyalists. "It was now," says Mr. Hildreth,
"that the 'Board of Associated Loyalists' was formed, of which Franklin,
late Royal Governor of New Jersey, released by exchange from his tedious
confinement in Connecticut, was made president. Washington, however, was
in no condition to undertake an attack, and the winter passed off with
few skirmishes." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III.,
Chap. xi., p. 303.)]
[Footnote 36: _Ib._, pp. 311, 312.]
[Footnote 37: "In the siege, the British lost seventy-six killed and one
hundred and eighty-nine wounded; the Americans about an equal number.
The prisoners, exclusive of sailors, amounted to five thousand six
hundred and eighteen, counting all the adult males of the town."
(Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap. lii., p. 253.)]
[Footnote 38: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xx., pp. 337, 338.
Yet in the face of the facts above stated by Dr. Ramsay, who was an
officer on General Washington's staff, and afterwards member of
Congress, where he had access to the official documents and letters from
which he compiled his history, Mr. Bancroft makes the following
statements and remarks: "The value of the spoil, which was distributed
by English and Hessian commissaries of captures, amounted to about
£300,000 sterling, so that the dividend of a major-general exceeded
4,000 guineas. There was no restraint on private rapine; the silver
plate of the planters was carried off; all negroes that had belonged to
the rebels were seized, even though they had themselves sought an asylum
within the British lines; and at one embarkation 2,000 were shipped to a
market in the West Indies. British officers thought more of amassing
fortunes than of re-uniting the empire. The patriots were not allowed to
appoint attorneys to manage or sell their estates, a sentence of
confiscation hung over the whole land, and British protection was
granted only in return for the unconditional promise of loyalty."
(Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap. xiv., pp. 305,
306.)]
[Footnote 39: "Sir Henry Clinton, having left about 4,000 men for
Southern service, embarked early in June with the main army for New
York. On his departure the command devolved on Lieutenant-General
Cornwallis." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xx., p. 341.)
"They saw South Carolina apparently won back to the royal cause, and
with some probability that North Carolina would follow the example. But
at this crisis intelligence reached Sir Henry Clinton that the Americans
upon the Hudson (under the command of General Washington) were on the
point of receiving considerable succours; that a French fleet sent to
their aid, with several French regiments on board, might soon be
expected off the New England coasts. Sir Henry deemed it his duty to
provide in person for the safety of his principal charge. In the first
days of June he accordingly re-embarked for New York, with a portion of
his army; leaving, however, about 4,000 men under Lord Cornwallis's
command. The instructions given to Lord Cornwallis were to consider the
maintenance of Charleston, and in general of South Carolina, as his main
and indispensable objects; but consistently with these, he was left at
liberty to make 'a solid move,' as it was termed, into North Carolina,
if he judged it proper or found it possible." (Lord Mahon's History,
etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxii., p. 70.)
On the eve of leaving Charleston for New York, Sir Henry reported to the
British Colonial Minister, Lord Germaine: "The inhabitants from every
quarter declare their allegiance to the King, and offer their services
in arms. There are few men in South Carolina who are not either our
prisoners or in arms with us."]
[Footnote 40: Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap.
xiv., p. 306.
"The universal panic consequent on the capture of Charleston had
suspended all resistance to the British army. The men of Beaufort, of
Ninety-Six, and of Camden, had capitulated under the promise of
security. They believed that they were to be treated as neutrals or as
prisoners on parole. There remained to them no possibility of flight
with their families; and if they were inclined to take up arms, there
was no American army around which they could rally." (Bancroft's History
of the United States, Vol. X., Chap. xiv., p. 307.)
"No organized American force was now left in either of the Carolinas.
The three most Southern States had not a battalion in the field, nor
were the next three much better provided. The Virginia line had been
mostly captured at Charleston, or dispersed in subsequent engagements.
The same was the case with the North Carolina regiments. The recent
battle of Camden had reduced the Maryland line to a single regiment--the
Delaware line to a single company." (Hildreth's History of the United
States, Vol. III., Chap. xi., p. 316.)]
[Footnote 41: "On the 22nd of May, confiscation of property and other
punishments were denounced against all who should thereafter oppose the
King in arms, or hinder any one from joining his forces. On the 1st of
June, a proclamation by the Commissioners Clinton and Arbuthnot, offered
pardon to the penitent on their immediate return to allegiance; to the
loyal, the promise of their former political immunities, including
freedom from taxation, except by their own Legislature. This policy of
moderation might have familiarized the Carolinians once more to the
British Government; but the proclamation was not communicated to
Cornwallis--so that when, three weeks later, two leading men, one of
whom had been in a high station, and both principally concerned in the
rebellion, went to that officer to surrender themselves under its
provisions, he could only answer that he had no knowledge of its
existence.
"On the 3rd of June (the day of his departure from Charleston), Clinton,
by a proclamation which he alone signed, cut up British authority in
Carolina by the roots. He required all the inhabitants of the province,
even those outside of Charleston, 'who were now prisoners on parole,' to
take an active part in securing the royal government. 'Should they
neglect to return to their allegiance,' so ran the proclamation, 'they
will be treated as rebels to the government of the King.' He never
reflected that many who accepted protection from fear or convenience,
did so in the expectation of living in a state of neutrality, and that
they might say, 'If we _must fight_, let us fight on the side of our
friends, of our countrymen of America.'" (Bancroft's History of the
United States, Vol. X., Chap. xiv., pp. 307, 308.)]
[Footnote 42: "Earl (afterwards Marquis) Cornwallis was born in 1738.
Early in life he had embraced the military profession, which he pursued
with undeviating honour, though variable success. In him the want of any
shining talents was in a great measure supplied by probity, by
punctuality, by steady courage, by vigilant attention to his duties. In
1776, on the Declaratory Bill, he had shown his conciliatory temper to
the colonies; denying, with Lord Camden and only three Peers besides,
any right we had to tax them while they remained unrepresented in the
House of Commons. When, however, the war broke forth, he acted solely as
became a soldier. Under Lord Cornwallis was now serving a young officer
of no common spirit and daring, destined, like himself, to attain, at
another period, the highest office that an Englishman out of England can
fill--the office of Governor-General of India. This was Francis Lord
Rawdon, subsequently better known, first as Earl of Moira, and then as
Marquis of Hastings. In the ensuing battle of Camden, where he held a
second rank, he played a distinguished part; he was not yet twenty-six
years of age, and he had already gained renown five years before, in the
battle of Bunker's Hill." (Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap.
lxii., p. 71.)]
[Footnote 43: Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap.
iii., p. 254.
"There was no longer any armed American force in South Carolina; and
Lord Cornwallis resorted to energetic means of preventing disaffection.
All those who were found in arms after they had submitted to British
protection were considered as having forfeited their lives, and several
of them were hung on the spot. But these severities, instead of their
intended effect, produced a strong reaction."--_Ib._, p. 256.]
[Footnote 44: Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxii., pp.
75, 76.]
[Footnote 45: "While the war raged in South Carolina, the campaign of
1780, in the Northern States, was barren of important events. The
campaign of 1780 passed away in the Northern States, as has been
related, in successive disappointments and reiterated distresses. The
country was exhausted; the continental currency expiring. The army, for
want of subsistence, was kept inactive and brooding over its calamities.
While these disasters were openly menacing the ruin of the American
cause, treachery was silently undermining it. A distinguished officer
(General Arnold) engaged, for a stipulated sum of money, to betray into
the hands of the British an important post committed to his care," etc.
(Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xxiv., pp.
364-377.)]
[Footnote 46: "Congress could do nothing, and confessed that it could do
nothing. 'We have required,' thus they wrote to the States on the 15th
of January, 1781, 'aids of men, provisions and money; the States alone
have authority to execute.' Since Congress itself made a public
confession of its powerlessness, nothing remained but _to appeal to
France_ for rescue, not from a foreign enemy, but from the evils
consequent on its own want of government. 'If France lends not a speedy
aid,' wrote General Greene from the South to her Minister in
Philadelphia, 'I fear the country will be for ever lost.' It was
therefore resolved for the moment to despatch to Versailles, as a
special minister, one who had lived in the midst of the ever-increasing
distresses of the army, to set them before the Government of France in
the most striking light. The choice fell on the younger Laurens, of
South Carolina. To this agent Washington confided a statement of the
condition of the country; and with dignity and candour avowed that it
had reached a crisis out of which it could not rise by its own
unassisted strength. To Franklin he wrote in the same strain; and La
Fayette addressed a like memorial of ripe wisdom to Vergennes" (the
French Minister for Foreign Affairs). (Bancroft's History of the United
States, Vol. X., Chap., xix., pp. 417, 418.)
"Scarce any one of the States had as yet sent an eighth part of its
quota into the field; and there was no prospect of a glorious offensive
campaign, unless their generous allies should help them with money, and
with a fleet strong enough to secure the superiority at sea."--_Ib._, p.
425.]
[Footnote 47: It was in the latter part of this year, 1780, that the
treachery of General Arnold and the melancholy tragedy of Major André's
execution took place.]
[Footnote 48: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap.
xli., p. 331.
"Though British conquests had rapidly succeeded each other, yet no
advantages accrued to the victors. The minds of the people were
unsubdued, or rather were alienated from every idea of returning to
their former allegiance. Such was their temper, that the expense of
retaining them in subjection would have exceeded all the profits of the
conquest. British garrisons kept down open resistance, in the vicinity
of the places where they were established; but as soon as they were
withdrawn and the people left to themselves, a spirit of revolt hostile
to Great Britain always displayed itself; and the standard of
independence, whenever it was prudently raised, never wanted followers
among the active and spirited part of the community." (Dr. Ramsay's
History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xx., p. 363.)]
CHAPTER XXX.
THE FRENCH AND CONGRESS ALLIES IN 1781 RECOVER VIRGINIA--SURRENDER OF
LORD CORNWALLIS--RESULTS.
Under the adverse circumstances and gloom which attended and closed the
year 1780, as stated in the preceding chapter, Washington felt the
necessity of doing something bold and great to revive the confidence of
his countrymen and arrest the decline of his army.
Under these circumstances, a campaign of operations was devised and
agreed upon by Washington and the commander of the French troops. The
centres of British power in America were the army of about ten thousand
men in New York, under the immediate command of Sir Henry Clinton, who
was, indeed, Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America;
and secondly, the army of Virginia, about seven thousand men, under the
command of Earl Cornwallis; and thirdly, the garrison of Charleston,
South Carolina, under the command of Lord Rawdon; Savannah, the capital
of Georgia, was also occupied by a British garrison. Washington's plan
was to pretend an attack upon New York, but to make a real attack upon
the army of Virginia, with the view of extinguishing British power in
the Southern States. So well was the appearance of an intended attack
upon New York kept up, that Sir Henry Clinton made all needful
preparations for its defence, and actually ordered Lord Cornwallis to
send a detachment of his men to New York to strengthen its defence; but
after their embarkation for that purpose the order was countermanded,
and Lord Cornwallis was allowed to retain them. Nothing could be more
complete than the deception practised upon Sir Henry Clinton; nor did
he suspect the real intention of the allied armies until they had
crossed the Hudson and were on their way, through the Jerseys,
Pennsylvania, and Maryland, to Virginia.[49]
"In the latter end of August," says Dr. Ramsay, "the American army began
their march to Virginia from the neighbourhood of New York. Washington
had advanced as far as Chester before he received information of the
arrival of De Grasse. The French troops marched at the same time, for
the same place. In the course of this summer they passed through all the
extensive settlements which lie between Newport and Yorktown. It seldom
if ever happened before, that an army led through a foreign country at
so great a distance from their own, among a people of different
principles, customs, language, and religion, behaved with so much
regularity. In their march to Yorktown they had to pass through five
hundred miles of a country abounding in fruit, and at a time when the
most delicious productions of nature, growing on and near the public
highways, presented both opportunity and temptation to gratify their
appetites, yet so complete was their discipline, that in this long march
scarce an instance could be produced of a peach or an apple being taken
without the consent of the inhabitants."[50]
On the 14th of September, Washington and De Rochambeau, in advance of
their armies and with their respective staffs of officers, arrived at
Williamsburg; and with Generals Chastellux, Du Portail, and Knox,
visited Count de Grasse on board his famous ship, the _Ville de Paris_,
and agreed on the plan of operations against Earl Cornwallis at
Yorktown, on York river, to which the allied armies at once proceeded,
for the purpose of besieging it. On the 1st day of October, General
Washington was able to report to the President of Congress that the
investment of the place was completed. "Gloucester (on the opposite side
of the river, not a mile wide there), which was held by Colonel Dundas,
was beleaguered by some Virginian troops, and by the French legion of
the Duke de Lauzun. Yorktown, where Cornwallis in person, and with his
main force, commanded, saw to his left the division of La Fayette, and
to his right the division of St. Simon. Other bodies of troops filled
the space between them, while Washington and Rochambeau fixed their
posts near together, towards the centre. They brought up fifty pieces of
cannon, for the most part heavy, by aid from the French ships, as also
sixteen mortars, and they lost no time in commencing their first
parallel against the town.[51] By the 9th the first parallel was
completed, when the town and its defences were cannonaded and shelled.
Within another week a second parallel was completed within three
hundred yards of the defences, two redoubts stormed and taken--one by
the French and the other by the Americans--and the further defence of
the town rendered impossible."
"Down to this time, the 15th of October, Lord Cornwallis had expected
reinforcements of ships and troops from New York;[52] but he now
despaired of aid from that quarter, and attempted to escape with his
army in the night across the river, which was prevented by a storm, when
the only alternative left him was to surrender on the best terms he
could obtain. On the morning of the 17th he sent a flag of truce to
Washington, proposing a cessation of arms, and a treaty for the
capitulation of his post. Hostilities ceased; the terms of surrender
were discussed and agreed upon on the 18th by four commissioners, two
field officers being named on each side. The army, and all that belonged
to it, was surrendered to Washington; and the ships and seamen to Count
de Grasse" (Tucker).
"All the artillery and public stores in the two forts, together with the
shipping and boats in the two harbours, were to be surrendered by the
English. On the other hand, private property of every kind was to be
respected by the Americans and French. The garrisons of York and
Gloucester were to march out with the same honours of war as had been
granted by Sir Henry Clinton at Charleston; the land forces to remain
prisoners of the United States, and the naval forces prisoners of
France. The soldiers were to be kept in Virginia, Maryland, or
Pennsylvania, and as much by regiments as possible. The general staff
and other officers not left with the troops to be permitted to go to New
York, or to Europe, on parole."[53]
The battle of Yorktown, and the surrender of Lord Cornwallis to the arms
of the French and the Americans, may be regarded as the last battle of
importance of the civil war in America. American writers and orators are
fond of saying that here was brought face to face on the battle-field
the strength of Old England and Young America, and the latter prevailed.
No statement can be more unfounded, and no boast more groundless than
this. England, without an ally, was at war with three kingdoms--France,
Spain, and Holland--the most potent naval and military powers of Europe;
while were also arrayed against her, by an "armed neutrality," Russia,
Prussia, Denmark, and Sweden. England was armed to the teeth for the
defence of her own shores against threatened invasion, while her navies
were maintaining in sundry battles the honour of the British flag on
three seas.
A small part only of the British land and naval forces was on the coast
of America; yet there were garrisons at Savannah and Charleston, and a
much larger military force at New York, under the command of Sir Henry
Clinton, than that of Yorktown, under Lord Cornwallis. In the following
campaign the English fleet was victorious over the French fleet in the
West Indies, capturing the great ship _Ville de Paris_, and taking Count
de Grasse himself prisoner. In the siege of Yorktown there were about
18,000 of the allied army of French and Americans, besides ships of the
line and sailors, while the effective men under command of Lord
Cornwallis amounted to less than 4,000. It was a marvel of skill and
courage that with an army so small, and in a town so exposed and so
incapable of being strongly fortified, and against an allied force so
overwhelming, Lord Cornwallis was able to sustain a siege for a
fortnight, until he despaired of reinforcements from New York.
Be it also observed, that the greater part of the forces besieging
Yorktown were not Americans, but French, who supplied the shipping and
artillery; in short, all the attacking forces by water, and a duplicate
land enemy--the one part under the command of Count de Rochambeau, and
the other part under the command of the Marquis de La Fayette. Had it
not been for the French fleet and the French land forces, Washington
would not have attempted an attack upon Yorktown. The success of the
siege was, therefore, more French than American, though Washington had
the nominal command of the allied army.
No one can doubt the undaunted courage and matchless skill of
Washington, and his great superiority over any English general ever sent
against him; nor can the bravery and endurance of his army be justly
questioned; nor the dash and boldness and gallantry of the French army.
But it is idle to speak of the siege of Yorktown as a trial of strength
between Young America and Old England. And it is equally incorrect to
say that the resources of England, in men or money, in ships or land
forces, were exhausted, or that England was compelled to make peace in
consequence of the disaster of Lord Cornwallis. There had been a peace
party, both in and out of Parliament, opposed to the American war from
the beginning. That party included some of the ablest statesmen in
England, and increased in strength and influence from year to year, by
exposing the incompetence, extravagance, and corruption of the
Administration, the failure of all their plans, and the non-fulfilment
of any of their promises in regard to America; that although they could
defeat the Americans in the field of battle, they had not conquered and
they could not conquer the hearts of the people, who became more and
more alienated from England by the very example and depredations of the
British officers and soldiers. The surrender of Lord Cornwallis, the
importance of which was greatly magnified, increased the intensity of
English feeling against the continuance of the American war, until the
peace party actually gained a majority in the House of Commons,
compelled the retirement of the old and corrupt Ministry, which had been
the cause of all the oppressions in the American colonies and all the
miseries of the war. Session after session, the leaders of the
Opposition in both the Lords and Commons moved resolutions condemning
the American war and the manner of conducting it; the Duke of Richmond,
the Marquis of Rockingham, the Earl of Shelburne in the Lords; and
General Conway, Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, Lord John Cavendish, Mr. Hartley,
Mr. Dunning (afterwards Lord Ashburton), and Sir James Lowther in the
Commons. Several resolutions were introduced into the Commons
condemnatory of the war in America, with a view of reducing the colonies
to submission, and were defeated by small majorities--in one a majority
of ten, and in another a majority of only _one_. At length they were
censured and rejected by the Commons without a division.
On the 22nd of February, General Conway moved "That an address should be
presented to his Majesty, to implore his Majesty to listen to the advice
of his Commons, that the war in America might no longer be pursued for
the impracticable purpose of reducing the inhabitants of that country to
obedience by force, and to express their hopes that his Majesty's desire
to restore the public tranquillity might be forwarded and made effectual
by a happy reconciliation with the revolted colonies."
After a lengthened debate, this resolution was negatived--one hundred
and ninety-three for the resolution, against it one hundred and
ninety-four--a majority of one for the continuance of the war.
The motion having been objected to as vague in its terms, General
Conway, on the 27th of February, introduced another motion, the same in
substance with the previous one, but varied in phraseology, so as to
meet the rules of the House, and more explicit in its terms. This
resolution was strongly opposed by the Ministry; and after a long debate
the Attorney-General moved the adjournment of the House: For the
adjournment voted two hundred and fifteen; against it, two hundred and
thirty-four--majority of nineteen against the Ministry--so that the
original question, and an address to the King, framed upon the
resolution, were then earned without a division.[54] The King returned a
gracious but vague answer.
General Conway, after moving a vote of thanks to the King for his
gracious answer, followed by moving a resolution: "That this House would
consider as enemies to his Majesty and the country all those who should
advise or by any means attempt the further prosecution of offensive war,
on the continent of North America, for the purpose of reducing the
revolted colonies to obedience by force." This motion, after a feeble
opposition from the Ministry, was allowed to pass without a division.
It might be supposed, under these circumstances, that the Ministry would
forthwith resign; but they continued to hold on to office, which they
had held for twelve years, to the great injury of England and her
colonies.
To bring the matter to an issue, the following resolution was moved on
the 8th of March by Lord John Cavendish, seconded by Mr. Powys:
"That it appears to this House, that since the year 1775 upwards of one
hundred millions of money have been expended on the army and navy in a
fruitless war.
"That it appears to this House, that during the above period we have
lost the thirteen colonies of America, which anciently belonged to the
Crown of Great Britain (except the ports of New York, Charleston, and
Savannah), the newly acquired colony of Florida, many of our valuable
West India and other islands, and those that remain are in the utmost
danger.
"That it appears to this House, that Great Britain is at present engaged
in an expensive war with America, France, Spain, and Holland, without a
single ally.
"That it appears to this House, that the chief cause of all these
misfortunes has been the want of foresight and ability in his Majesty's
Ministers.[55]"
The facts stated in the first three of these resolutions were admitted
on all sides; the discussion, therefore, turned upon the conclusion
drawn in the last resolution, the justice of which was patent to all
from the uniform failure and disgrace of the policy and all the separate
measures of Ministers during the whole of their administration. It was
attempted to be argued, in defence of Ministers, that misfortune did not
always prove misconduct; that the failure of execution of measures might
depend, not on those who planned them, but on the fault of those who
were to execute them. But "this ground," says the Parliamentary
Register, "appeared so weak, even to the friends of the Administration,
that it was almost entirely deserted, except by the Ministers
themselves; and the question was taken up with great art and ingenuity
on other topics, as to who would succeed the Administration they were
endeavouring to remove, and the diversity of opinions among them. But
the efforts on the part of Ministers and their friends to create
jealousies and discords among the members of the Opposition proved
fruitless; and when the final vote was proposed, the Secretary of War
evaded it by moving the order of the day, which was carried by a
majority of ten."
In the interval between the 8th and 14th, every intrigue was employed to
create discord among the members of the Opposition, and to bring about a
coalition under the presidency of Lord North, and a resolution was moved
to that effect, which was lost by a majority of only nine.
The Earl of Surrey gave notice that on the morning of the 20th inst. he
would move, in substance, Lord John Cavendish's resolution directly
condemnatory of the Ministry. On that morning Lord North and the Earl of
Surrey rose at the same moment, and neither would give way to the other.
The general cry was "Lord Surrey, and no adjournment." As soon as the
House could be reduced to order, it was moved "That the Earl of Surrey
be now heard," when Lord North, having obtained the right to speak,
said, "I rise to speak to the motion before the House." He observed that
had he been suffered to proceed before, he believed much unnecessary
heat and disorder would have been prevented. He meant no disrespect to
the noble earl; but as notice had been given that the object of the
intended motion was the removal of his Majesty's Ministers, he meant to
have acquainted the House that such a motion had become unnecessary. He
could assure the House with authority that _the present Administration
was no more_, and that his Majesty had come to a full determination of
changing his Ministers; and that it was for the purpose of giving
necessary time for new arrangements that he meant to have moved an
adjournment.
The noble lord then took leave of the House as a Minister of the Crown,
and with many kind and courteous words thanked them for the honourable
support they had given him during so long a course of years.[56]
By such blows following each other in the Commons, in rapid succession
and with accelerated force, was driven from power an Administration
which had inflicted greater evils upon the Crown, the constitution, the
people of England and of the colonies, than any Administration since the
Revolution of 1688.[57]
[Footnote 49: It appears, however, that in the first consultation, which
"took place at Weathersfield, between Generals Washington, Knox, and Du
Portail on the part of the Americans, and Count de Rochambeau and the
Chevalier Chastellux on the part of the French, it was agreed to lay
siege to New York in concert with the French fleet, which was to arrive
on the coast in the month of August. Washington addressed letters to the
executive officers of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New
Jersey, requiring them to fill up their battalions, and to have their
quotas of six thousand two hundred militia in readiness within a week
after the time they might be called for. But all these States not adding
five hundred men to Washington's army, Sir Henry Clinton having received
a reinforcement of three thousand Germans, and intelligence having been
received that Count de Grasse, with a French fleet of twenty-eight ships
and seven thousand troops (besides seamen), had sailed for the
Chesapeake, Washington and Count de Rochambeau changed their plan of
operations and determined to proceed to Virginia, and, in combination
with the French fleet and soldiers, to capture the army under the
command of Earl Cornwallis in Virginia. The appearance of an intention
to attack New York was nevertheless kept up. While this deception was
played off, the allied army crossed the North River on August 24th, and
passed on by the way of Philadelphia through the intermediate country to
Yorktown, Virginia. An attempt to reduce the British force in Virginia
promised success with more expedition, and to secure an object of nearly
equal importance to the reduction of New York." (Ramsay's History of the
United States, Vol. II., Chap. xxv., pp. 448-451.)]
[Footnote 50: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xxv., pp. 450, 451.]
[Footnote 51: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap.
lxiv., p. 172.
"On the other hand, Lord Cornwallis is admitted to have shown most
undaunted resolution. The officers under him, and the troops, German and
English, all did their duty well. For some weeks they had laboured hard,
and unremittingly, in raising their defences; and they were now prepared
with equal spirit to maintain their half-completed works. But besides
the enemy without, they had another within--an epidemic sickness, that
stretched many hundreds helpless in their pallet-beds. Nor could they
hinder Washington from completing his first parallel and opening his
fire upon them in the evening of the 9th of October. For two days the
fire was incessant from heavy cannon, and from mortars and howitzers,
throwing shells in showers on the town, until, says Cornwallis, all our
guns on the left were silenced, our works much damaged, and our loss of
men considerable. By these shells, also, the _Charon_, a ship of
forty-four guns, together with three British transports in the river,
were set in flames and consumed."--_Ib._, p. 173.]
[Footnote 52: Before the investment of Yorktown, Lord Cornwallis sent a
despatch to Sir Henry Clinton, informing him of the delicacy and danger
of his situation, and requesting reinforcements. On the evening of the
29th of September, Lord Cornwallis was cheered by the arrival of an
express, bringing despatches from Sir Henry Clinton, dated the 24th,
informing him that by the 5th of October a fleet of twenty-three sail of
the line, three of which were three-deckers, with 5,000 men, rank and
file, would start for his assistance. The auxiliary forces at New York
were ready and eager to depart by the 5th of October; but the ships were
delayed by the slowness and obstinacy of Admiral Arbuthnot. Sir Henry
Clinton writes: "We had the misfortune to see almost every succeeding
day produce some naval obstruction or other to protract our departure;
and I am sorry to add, that it was the afternoon of the 19th before the
fleet was fairly at sea. This was the day of Lord Cornwallis's
capitulation. Five days afterwards the fleet with the 5,000 troops
arrived off the Chesapeake, when they received the news of the surrender
of Lord Cornwallis, and sailed back to New York. Had these auxiliary
forces started from New York at the time promised, the siege of Yorktown
would have been raised, the allied army defeated, and Lord Cornwallis
and his little army would have been victors instead of prisoners."]
[Footnote 53: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap.
lxiv., pp. 177, 178.
"The officers were to retain their side arms and private property of
every kind, but all property obviously belonging to inhabitants of the
United States to be subject to be reclaimed; the soldiers to be supplied
with the same rations as were allowed to soldiers in the service of
Congress. Cornwallis endeavoured to obtain permission for the British
and German troops to return to their respective countries, under no
other restrictions than an engagement not to serve against France or
America. He also tried to obtain an indemnity for those of the
inhabitants who had joined him; but he was obliged to recede from the
former, and also to consent that the loyalists in his camp should be
given up to the unconditional mercy of their countrymen. His lordship,
nevertheless, obtained (from Washington) permission for the _Bonetta_
sloop of war to pass unexamined to New York. This gave an opportunity of
screening such of the loyalists as were most obnoxious to the
Americans." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xxv., pp. 454, 455.)
"The regular troops of France and America, employed in this siege,
consisted of about 7,000 of the former (besides ships and seamen), and
5,500 of the latter; and they were assisted by about 4,000 militia. The
troops of every kind that surrendered prisoners of war were about 7,000;
but so great was the number of the sick and wounded, that there were
only 3,800 capable of bearing arms."--_Ib._, p. 455.]
[Footnote 54: During the discussion on this question, it had been argued
that the Americans are fed, clothed, and paid by France; they are led on
by French officers; the French and the American armies are incorporated
into one; it was merely a locality that should give name to a war.
France had formerly been fought with success in Germany, and there could
be no solid objection to fighting her in America. General Conway argued
that French troops did not cost more than £40 per man a year, while the
expense of the English troops cost £100 per man a year. General Conway
reminded the House that though seventy-three thousand men were voted and
paid for, we had never above half that number in actual service.
Government had, therefore, only to complete the regiments, and they
would have more men in America than ever they had before. (Annual
Register of Parliament for 1782, pp. 158-161.)]
[Footnote 55: Annual Register of Parliament for 1782, Vol. XXIX., p.
173.]
[Footnote 56: Abridged from the Parliamentary Register for 1782, Vol.
XXV., Chap. vii. See also Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol.
VII., Chap. lxv.
Lord Mahon concludes his account of this Administration as follows:
"Thus ended Lord North's Administration of twelve years. It is certainly
strange, on contemplating these twelve years, to find so many harsh and
rigorous measures proceed from the most gentle and good-humoured of
Prime Ministers. Happy, had but greater firmness in maintaining his own
opinions been joined to so much ability in defending opinions even when
not his own.
"Even as to the disasters and miscarriages, however, which could not be
denied in his Administration, the friends of Lord North contended that
in truth he was not answerable for them. The points in his favour were
argued a few days before his fall by Mr. George Onslow in the House of
Commons. 'Why,' said Mr. Onslow, 'have we in this war with America such
ill success? Mainly,' he continued, 'from the support and countenance
given in that House to American rebellion. The army of Washington had
been called by the Opposition "our army;" the cause of the Americans had
been called "the cause of liberty;" and one gentleman (this was Mr.
Burke), while lavishing his praises on Dr. Franklin and Mr. Laurens, had
declared he would prefer a prison with them to freedom in company with
those who were supporting the cause of England.' But this vindication,
though spirited, nay, though true, is faulty; because, though true, it
is not the whole truth; because it overlooks what no statesman
should--the certainty that when free principles are at stake,
dissensions will always arise in a free country."--_Ib._, pp. 209, 210.]
[Footnote 57: I have not a shadow of doubt, that had the leaders in
Congress adhered to their pretensions of contending and fighting for
British constitutional rights, as aforetime, instead of renouncing those
rights and declaring Independence in 1776, the changes which took place
in the Administration in England in 1783 would have taken place in 1777;
for the corrupt Administration showed as strong symptoms of decline, and
was as manifestly "tottering to its fall" in the parliamentary session
which commenced in 1776, as it did in the session which commenced in
1782. In both cases its predictions and assured successes had been
completely falsified; in both cases the indignation of the nation was
aroused against the Administration, and the confidence of Parliament was
on the point of being withdrawn in 1776-77, as it was withdrawn in the
session of 1782-83; but in 1776, the Congress, instead of adhering to
its heretofore professed principles, was induced by its leaders, as
related in Chapter xxvi., to renounce its former principles; to falsify
all its former professions to its advocates in England and
fellow-subjects in America; to renounce the maintenance of the
constitutional rights of British subjects; to adopt a Declaration of
Independence, of eternal separation from England; to extinguish the
national life of the British empire and the unity of the Anglo-Saxon
race, and seek an alliance with their own and Great Britain's hereditary
enemies for a war upon their mother country, which had protected them
for a hundred years against the French and Spaniards, who had also
employed and rewarded the Indians to destroy them.]
CHAPTER XXXI.
CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION IN ENGLAND--CHANGE OF POLICY FOR BOTH ENGLAND
AND THE COLONIES--PEACE NEGOTIATIONS AT PARIS--THE CAUSE OF THE UNITED
EMPIRE LOYALISTS.
During the adjournment of Parliament from the 24th to the 28th of March,
the new Administration was formed, and announced in the Commons on the
28th, when the House adjourned over the Easter holidays, to give time
for the re-election of such members as had accepted office. The King
first sent for the Earl of Shelburne to form a new Administration,
naming some members of it; but the Earl of Shelburne declined, as unable
to form an Administration upon such conditions, and recommended the King
to send for the Marquis of Rockingham. The King refused to see
Rockingham face to face, but requested Shelburne to be the bearer of a
message to him; but Shelburne only consented on the condition of "full
power and full confidence." "Necessity," relates the King, "made me
yield to the advice of Lord Shelburne." Before accepting the offer of
First Lord of the Treasury, the Marquis of Rockingham, without
neglecting some minor matters, stipulated that there should be no veto
to the independence of America.[58] But it was nearly three months
before an Act passed the Commons authorizing peace with America, and
the acknowledgment of American Independence, and it was nearly a year
before the treaty for that purpose was agreed upon.
In the meantime, "Immediately before the fall of Lord North's Ministry,
in anticipation of that event, Dr. Franklin had written from Paris to
Lord Shelburne with general expressions of his pacific views. On
receiving that letter, Lord Shelburne, then Secretary of State, sent to
Paris, as agent, Mr. Richard Oswald, a London merchant well versed in
American affairs. Dr. Franklin readily conferred with Mr. Oswald, and
put into his hands a paper drawn up by himself, suggesting that, in
order to produce a thorough reconciliation, and to prevent any future
quarrel on the North American continent, England should not only
acknowledge the thirteen united States, but concede to them the Province
of Canada. Such a project was not likely to find favour in the eyes of
any British statesman. Mr. Oswald, however, undertook to return to
England and lay it before his chief, Dr. Franklin, at his departure,
expressing an earnest hope that all future communications to himself
might pass through the same hands.
"Under these circumstances, the Cabinet determined that Mr. Oswald
should go back to France and carry on the treaty with Franklin, though
by no means with such concessions as the American philosopher
desired."[59]
After the termination of hostilities between Great Britain and the
colonies, the American Commissioners evinced a desire to treat with
England alone. Mr. Oswald, as early as July, 1782, wrote privately to
Lord Shelburne, "The Commissioners of the colonies have shown a desire
to treat and to end with us on a separate footing from the other
Powers." "The separate negotiation thus arising was delayed," says Lord
Mahon, "first by the severe illness of Dr. Franklin, and next by some
points of form in the commission of Mr. Oswald. When at length the more
solid part of the negotiation was commenced, the hints of Franklin for
the cession of Canada were quietly dropped, with greater case from their
having been transmitted in a confidential form. It is also worthy of
note that Lord Shelburne prevailed, in his desire of acknowledging the
independence of the United States, by an article of the treaty, and not,
as Mr. Fox had wished, by a previous declaration."
The two most difficult questions of the treaty related to the fishing
grounds of Newfoundland, and the Loyalists or "Tories," as they were
called. The English were unwilling to concede the use of the fishing
grounds, but the Americans were firm; the result was, that by the
provisions of the treaty it was agreed that the Americans should have
the right to take fish on the banks of Newfoundland, but not to dry or
cure them on any of the King's settled dominions.[60]
But the question which transcended all others in importance, with which
this work has chiefly to do, was that of the Loyalists--a class which,
by the testimony of American historians themselves, constituted, at the
beginning of the war, a majority of the population of the colonies.
Their numbers had been greatly reduced from various causes during the
war; they had been plundered and scattered by the alternate ascendancy
of opposite parties; they had all of them suffered in their property and
liberty; many of them had suffered imprisonment, and not a few of them
had been executed as criminals for preferring their oath of allegiance
and connection with the mother country to a renunciation of their former
profession of faith, and absolute submission to a newly self-created
authority of rule and a new political creed. At the conclusion of the
war, and in the treaty of peace, "the question of Loyalists or Tories,"
says Lord Mahon, "was, as it ought to be, a main object with the British
Government to obtain, if possible, some restitution to the men who, in
punishment for their continued allegiance to the King, had found their
property confiscated and their persons banished. But from the first Dr.
Franklin held out no hopes of any satisfaction on that point. 'The
Commissioners,' he said, 'had no such power, nor had even Congress.'[61]
They were willing that Congress should, with certain modifications,
recommend those indemnities to the several States; and, as one of the
negotiators from England tells us, they to the last 'continued to assert
that the recommendation of Congress would have the effect we proposed.'
The British diplomatists persevered in their original demand, and at one
time there seemed a probability that the negotiations might break off,
chiefly on this ground. Twice was Mr. Strachey, the Undersecretary of
State, an able and experienced man, dispatched to Paris to aid Mr.
Oswald with his counsel and co-operation. But at last the mind of
Franklin, ever ingenious and fertile of resources, devised a counter
scheme. He said that he would allow the losses which the Loyalists had
suffered, provided another account were opened of the mischief they had
done, as of slaves carried off, or houses burned; new Commissioners to
be appointed to strike a balance between the two computations. At this
formidable proposal, involving an endless train of discussions and
disputes, the negotiators from England finally gave way."[62]
This account of the negotiation in regard to the United Empire
Loyalists, taken from Lord Mahon's impartial history, is corroborated in
all essential particulars by American historians. Mr. Bancroft says that
"Franklin having already explained that nothing could be done for the
Loyalists by the United States, as their estates had been confiscated by
laws of particular States, which Congress had no power to repeal, he
further demonstrates that Great Britain had forfeited every right to
intercede for them by its conduct and example, to which end he read to
Oswald the orders of the British in Carolina for confiscating and
selling the lands and property of all patriots under the direction of
the military; and he declared definitely that, though the separate
governments might show compassion where it was deserved, the American
Commissioners for Peace could not make compensation of refugees a part
of the treaty."
"This last demand (adequate indemnity for the confiscated property of
loyal refugees) touched alike the sympathy and the sense of honour of
England. The previous answer, that the Commissioners had no power to
treat on the business of the Loyalists, was regarded as an allegation
that though they claimed to have full power, they were not
plenipotentiaries; that they were acting under thirteen separate
sovereignties, which had no common head. To meet the exigence, Shelburne
proposed either an extension of Nova Scotia to the Penobscot, or
Kennebec, or the Saco, so that a province might be formed for the
reception of Loyalists; or that a part of the money to be received from
sales of the Ohio lands might be applied to their subsistence."
"On the 29th of November, 1782, Strachey, Oswald, and Fitzherbert, on
the one side, and Jay, Franklin, Adams, and for the first time Laurens,
on the other, came together for their last word at the apartments of
Jay. The American Commissioners agreed that there should be no future
confiscations nor prosecutions of Loyalists, that all pending
prosecutions should be discontinued, and that Congress should recommend
to the several States and their Legislatures, on behalf of refugees,
amnesty and the restitution of their confiscated property." "On the
30th, the Commissioners of both countries signed and sealed fair copies
of the Convention." "The treaty was not a compromise, nor a compact
imposed by force, but a free and perfect solution and perpetual
settlement of all that had been called in question."[63]
Dr. Ramsay observes: "From the necessity of the case, the Loyalists were
sacrificed, nothing further than a simple recommendation for restitution
being stipulated in their favour. * * The case of the Loyalists was
undoubtedly a hard one, but unavoidable from the complex Constitution of
the United States. The American Ministers engaged, as far as they were
authorized, and Congress did all they constitutionally could; but this
was no more than simply to recommend their case to the several States,
for the purpose of making them restitution. To have insisted on more,
under such circumstances, would have been equivalent to saying that
there should be no peace. It is true, much more was expected from the
recommendations of Congress than resulted from them; but this was not
the consequence of deception, but of misunderstanding the principles of
the confederation. In conformity to the letter and spirit of the treaty,
Congress urged, in strong terms, the propriety of making restitution to
the Loyalists, but to procure it was beyond their power. * * There were
doubtless among the Loyalists many worthy characters, friends of peace
and lovers of justice. To such restitution was undoubtedly due, and to
many such it was made; but it is one of the many calamities incident to
war, that the innocent, from the impossibility of discrimination, are
often involved in the same distress with the guilty.
"The return of the Loyalists to their former places of residence was as
much disrelished by the Whig citizens of America as the proposal for
reimbursing their confiscated property. In sundry places Committees were
formed, who, in an arbitrary manner, opposed their peaceable residence.
The sober and dispassionate citizens exerted themselves in checking
these irregular measures; but such was the violence of party spirit, and
so relaxed were the sinews of government, that, in opposition to legal
authority and the private interference of the judicious and moderate,
many indecent outrages were committed on the persons and property of the
returning Loyalists.
"Nor were these all the sufferings of those Americans who had attached
themselves to the royal cause. Being compelled to depart from their
native country, many of them were obliged to take up their abodes in the
inhospitable wilds of Nova Scotia, or on the barren shores of the Bahama
Islands. Parliamentary relief was extended to them; but this was
obtained with difficulty, and distributed with a partial hand. Some, who
invented plausible tales of loyalty and distress, received much more
than they ever possessed; while others, less artful, were not half
reimbursed for their actual losses."[64]
Mr. Hildreth remarks, under date of September, 1783, "that at New York a
general release of prisoners had taken place on both sides; but the
necessity of finding transports for the numerous Loyalists assembled
there protracted the evacuation of New York. In consequence of laws
still in force against them, several thousand American Loyalists found
it necessary to abandon their country. A considerable portion of these
exiles belonged to the wealthier classes; they had been officials,
merchants, large landholders, conspicuous members of the colonial
aristocracy. Those from the North settled principally in Nova Scotia or
Canada, provinces the politics of which their descendants continued to
control until quite recently. Those from the South found refuge in the
Bahamas and other West India islands. Still objects of great popular
odium, the Loyalists had little to expect from the stipulated
recommendations of Congress in their favour. Some of the States, whose
territory had been longest and most recently occupied by the enemy, were
even inclined to enact new confiscations."[65]
In each and all of these historical statements it is clearly admitted
that the claim of the Loyalists to compensation for loss of property was
founded in equity, as well as in national policy. This is sanctioned by
the admission of the American Commissioners and the recommendation of
Congress. The want of power in Congress to do what is admitted to be an
act of justice to the Loyalists is the plea for not restoring them the
property which had gone into the hands of their opponents, who were
proportionally enriched thereby. It was left to local avarice and local
resentment to deal with the property of banished exiles.
What was claimed by and in behalf of the Loyalists accorded with the
practice of even modern nations, as well as with the sentiments of
humanity. When the Dutch provinces asserted their independence of Spain,
and after a long and bloody war obtained the recognition of it, they
cordially agreed to an act of oblivion, and even restored to those who
had adhered to the cause of Spain, their property of every denomination
that had been confiscated, or the full value of it. Even Spain herself
had twice thus acted towards the province of Catalonia--first, on its
revolting from that Crown, and calling in the assistance of France; and
secondly, on its refusing to acknowledge the Bourbon family, at the
beginning of the last century. Though the inhabitants had forfeited life
and property, yet, on their return to obedience, life, possessions, laws
and immunities remained inviolate. England had conducted herself in the
same spirit towards that party in Ireland which had taken up arms in
support of James the Second. No proscriptions took place, and every man,
on submitting to Government, was admitted to the undisturbed enjoyment
of his property. Had this spirit actuated, and these examples, with many
others of like character, influenced the Americans, how much more
honourable to them, and more consistent with sound policy, to efface at
once all remembrance of internal discords, than to pursue, in the
execrable spirit of revenge and avarice, those of their countrymen who
differed from them in opinion in the late contest, and sided with Great
Britain.[66] That the plea that Congress had no power in granting
amnesty and compensation to the Loyalists was a mere pretext, is
manifest from the fact that the Commissioners agreed that there should
be no more confiscations or proscriptions against the Loyalists; for if
the laws under which these prosecutions were instituted and
confiscations made were State laws, with which Congress had no power to
interfere, how could the Congress Commissioners stipulate that there
should be no more confiscations or proscriptions?
Dr. Franklin, the most experienced and ablest of the American
diplomatists, was the most crafty and overbearing against England. At
the beginning of the negotiations for peace, he demurely proposed, and
half converted Mr. Oswald to his proposition, to concede Canada (which
at that time meant all British North America) to the United States,
though his commission related simply to the independency of the thirteen
colonies; and when the British Cabinet vetoed this extra-official and
extravagant proposition, Dr. Franklin and his colleagues overreached the
ignorance and weakness of the British diplomatists by carefully
constructed maps for the purpose of making the boundary lines between
the proposed possessions of Great Britain and the United States on their
northern and north-western frontiers. These lines were so ingeniously
drawn as to take from Great Britain and include in the United States the
immense and valuable territories, back settlements, and the whole
country between the Alleghany Mountains and the Mississippi, and which
have since become the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa,
Wisconsin, Missouri, Michigan, Minnesota, etc.--to not one foot of which
the thirteen American colonies had the slightest claim--territories
ample to compensate Loyalists for their losses and banishment, but whose
interests, together with these most valuable possessions, were lost to
Great Britain by the subserviency of the British Commissioner, Oswald (a
London and American merchant), who looked to his own interests, and was
the subservient tool and echo of Dr. Franklin. The above territories
were a part of the domain of Congress, irrespective of any State, and
therefore at the absolute disposal of Congress. Yet, with these immense
accessions of resources, the American Commissioners professed that the
Congress had no power or means to compensate the United Empire Loyalists
for the confiscation and destruction of their property! One knows not at
which most to marvel--the boldness, skill, and success of the American
Commissioners, or the cowardice, ignorance, and recklessness of the
British diplomatists.
The result of these negotiations was, that the adherents to Great
Britain during the civil war were deprived of the amnesty and
restoration of property upon any ground of right, as had been granted at
the termination of civil strife by all civilized nations--to the
restoration of what had been taken from them during the war--and turned
over as suppliant culprits to the several States by whose laws their
property had been confiscated, and themselves declared guilty of
treason, and condemned to the death of traitors. Dr. Franklin, in the
beginning of his negotiations, had proposed to give all that now
constitutes British North America to the United States, and thus leave
to the British Loyalists not an inch of ground on which to place their
feet; but all that was now left to them, as far as America was
concerned, was to prostrate themselves as suppliants before the
Legislatures of the several States, each of which was for the most part
a seething cauldron of passion and resentment against them.[67]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 58: The new Cabinet was composed as follows: The Marquis of
Rockingham, First Commissioner of the Treasury; the Earl of Shelburne
and Mr. Fox, Secretaries of State; Lord Camden, President of the
Council; Duke of Grafton, Privy Seal; Lord John Cavendish, Chancellor of
the Exchequer; Admiral Keppel, raised to be a Viscount, First
Commissioner of the Admiralty; General Conway, Commander of the Forces;
Duke of Richmond, Master General of the Ordnance. Lord Thurlow was
continued in the office of Lord High Chancellor, and Mr. Dunning raised
to the peerage under the title of Lord Ashburton, as Chancellor of the
Duchy of Lancaster. Mr. Burke was not made a member of the Cabinet, but
was appointed to the lucrative office of Paymaster of the Forces, and
was further gratified by the appointment of his son to a small office.
About six months after the formation of the new Cabinet the Marquis of
Rockingham died, and the Earl of Shelburne was appointed to succeed him,
when the Duke of Richmond, Mr. Fox, and Lord John Cavendish seceded from
the Cabinet, and were succeeded by Mr. Thomas Townsend and Lord Graham
as Secretaries of State, while the place of Lord John Cavendish, as
Chancellor of the Exchequer, was more than filled by Mr. Pitt.]
[Footnote 59: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap
lxvi., pp. 265, 266.
"At Paris, the negotiations had been much impeded by the resignation of
Mr. Fox and the return of Grenville. These events had, in many minds,
cast a shade of doubt over the true intentions of the British
Government. Lord Shelburne, however, renewed the most pacific
assurances, sending to Paris, in place of Mr. Grenville and conjointly
with Mr. Oswald, Mr. Alleyne Fitzherbert, well known in after years as
Lord St. Helens. These gentlemen acted in amity and concert with each
other, although, strictly speaking, negotiation with America was, as
before, the province of Mr. Oswald, and negotiation with the European
Powers the province of Mr. Fitzherbert. Dr. Franklin, on the other hand,
had associated with him three other American Commissioners, arriving in
succession--first, Mr. Jay, from Spain; then Mr. Adams, from Holland;
and finally, Mr. Laurens, from London.
"It became, ere long, apparent to the British agents that the Courts of
France and Spain were by no means earnest and sincere in the wish for an
immediate close of the war. With the hope of soon reducing Gibraltar, or
of otherwise depressing England, they put forward at this time either
inadmissible pretensions, or vague and ambiguous words. It therefore
became an object of great importance to negotiate, if possible, a
separate pacification with America. At first sight there appeared almost
insuperable difficulties in the way of such a scheme. The treaty of
alliance of February, 1778, between France and the United States,
stipulated in the most positive terms that neither party should conclude
a peace or truce with England, unless with the consent of the other
party first obtained. Since that time the French, far from falling short
of their engagement, had gone much beyond it. To say nothing of their
despatch of a fleet and army, and besides their annual loans and
advances to the United States, they had made, in 1781, a free gift of
six millions of livres, and in the spring of 1782 granted another to the
same amount.
"On the other hand, however, there was a strong temptation to treat
without delay. War, if still waged, would be mainly for French and
Spanish purposes. It could be made clear that when the independence of
the Americans was fully established and secured, they had no interest
anymore than England in continuing an unprofitable contest."--_Ib._, pp.
291-293.
"Moreover, there had sprung up in the minds of the American
Commissioners at Paris a strong feeling of distrust and suspicion
against their new allies. That feeling we find most plainly expressed by
Mr. Adams in relating his own conversations with Mr. Oswald. 'You are
afraid,' said Mr. Oswald to-day, 'of being made the tools of the Powers
of Europe?' 'Indeed I am,' said I. 'What Powers?' said he. 'All of
them,' said I.
"But in the minds of the American Commissioners, the distrust against
France was more vehement than against any other State. The best American
writers of the present day acknowledge that all surmises thence arising
were, in truth, ill-founded; that the conduct of France towards the
United States had been marked throughout not only by good faith and
honour, but by generosity." (Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol.
VII., Chap. lxvi., pp. 293, 294.)]
[Footnote 60: In the preamble of the treaty, it was provided that "The
treaty was not to be concluded until terms of peace shall be agreed upon
between Great Britain and France." By this limitation (which was a mere
form, as the provisional articles were to be meanwhile binding and
effective), the Americans were in hopes of avoiding, at least of
softening, their French allies. "The first Article acknowledged in the
fullest terms the independence of the United States. The second fixed
their boundaries, and certainly to their advantage. The third gave their
people the right to take fish on all the banks of Newfoundland, but not
to dry or cure them on any of the King's settled dominions in America.
By the fourth, fifth, and sixth Articles, it was engaged that Congress
should earnestly recommend to the several Legislatures to provide for
the restitution of all estates belonging to real British subjects who
had not borne arms against them. All other persons were to be at liberty
to go to any of the provinces and remain there for twelve months to wind
up their affairs, the Congress also recommending the restitution of
their confiscated property, on their repayment of the sums for which
they had been sold. No impediment was to be put in the way of recovering
_bona fide_ debts; no further prosecutions were to be commenced, no
further confiscations made. It was likewise stipulated in the seventh
and eighth Articles, that the English should at once withdraw their
fleets and armies from every port or place which they still possessed
within the limits of the United States; and that the navigation of the
Mississippi, from its source to the ocean, should be for ever free and
open to both parties." (Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap.
lxvi., pp. 297, 298.)
"It is not to be supposed that the French Government could view with
unconcern the studied secrecy of this negotiation. The appearances of
amity were, indeed, for the sake of mutual interest, kept up on either
side. But thus did the Comte de Vergennes (the French Minister of
Foreign Affairs) unbosom himself in writing to the French Minister at
Philadelphia: 'You will surely be gratified, as well as myself, with the
very extensive advantages which our allies, the Americans, are to
receive from the peace; but you certainly will not be less surprised
than I have been with the conduct of the commissioners. * * They have
cautiously kept themselves at a distance from me. Whenever I have had
occasion to see any one of them, and enquire of them briefly respecting
the progress of the negotiation, they have constantly clothed their
speech in generalities, giving me to understand that it did not go
forward, and that they had no confidence in the sincerity of the British
Ministry. Judge of my surprise when, on the 30th of November, Dr.
Franklin informed me that Articles were signed. The reservation retained
on our account does not save the infraction of the promise which we have
made to each other, not to sign except conjointly. * * This negotiation
has not yet so far advanced in regard to ourselves as that of the United
States; not but what the King, if he had shown as little delicacy in his
proceedings as the American Commissioners, might have signed articles
with England long before them.'"--_Ib._, pp. 298, 299.]
[Footnote 61: It was self-contradictory to say that Congress had power
to confiscate property, and yet had no power to restore it when
confiscated.]
[Footnote 62: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap.
lxvi., pp 295, 296.]
[Footnote 63: History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap, xxix., pp.
555, 583, 589, 590, 591.]
[Footnote 64: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap,
xxvii., pp. 489, 490, 491.]
[Footnote 65: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap,
xlv., p. 439.]
[Footnote 66: The royal historian, Dr. Andrews, remarks strongly on this
subject as follows:
"The demands of restitution to the Loyalists of their property
confiscated during the war, for their attachment to our cause, had been
refused by the American Commissioners, on pretence that neither they,
nor Congress itself, could comply with it, any farther than by
recommendation of it to the different States. The demand was in itself
so just, and founded on so many historical precedents, that Congress
could not possibly plead a want of foresight that it would be made. It
had been usual in all ages, on the cessation of civil war, to grant a
general amnesty. No other motive but that of the basest and most
barbarous revenge could induce men to express an averseness to so humane
and necessary a measure. Next to the cruelty of such a refusal was the
meanness of those who submitted to it.
"Circumstances empowered this nation to have acted with such firmness as
to compel the Americans to relax their obstinacy in this particular.
Until they had consented to a generous treatment of the Loyalists, we
ought to have withheld the restitution of the many strong places still
remaining in our hands, and made the surrender of them the price of
their acquiescence in our demands in favour of the brave and faithful
people who had suffered so much on our account." (Dr. Andrews' History
of the Late War, Vol. IV., pp. 401, 402.)
"All parties in the Commons unanimously demanded amnesty and indemnity
for the Loyalists." (Bancroft, Vol. X., Chap, xxix., p. 586.)]
[Footnote 67: Dr. Ramsay justly remarks: "The operation of treason laws
added to the calamities of the war. Individuals on both sides, while
they were doing no more than they supposed to be their duty, were
involved in the penal consequences of capital crimes. The Americans, in
conformity to the usual policy of nations, demanded the allegiance of
all who resided among them; but many preferred the late royal
government, and were disposed, when opportunity offered, to support it.
While they acted in conformity to these sentiments, the laws enacted for
the security of the new government condemned them to death. Of all wars,
civil are most to be dreaded. They are attended with the bitterest of
resentments, and produce the greatest quantity of human woes. In the
American war the distresses of the country were greatly aggravated from
the circumstance that every man was obliged, some way or other, to be in
the public service. In Europe, where the military operations are carried
on by armies hired and paid for the purpose, the common people partake
but little of the calamities of the war; but in America, where the whole
people were enrolled as a militia, and where both sides endeavoured to
strengthen themselves by oaths and by laws, denouncing the penalties of
treason on those who aided or abetted the opposite party, the sufferings
of individuals were renewed as often as fortune varied her standard.
Each side claimed the co-operation of the inhabitants, and was ready to
punish them when it was withheld.
"In the first institution of the American governments the boundaries of
authority were not properly fixed. Committees exercised legislative,
executive, and judicial powers. It is not to be doubted that in many
instances these were improperly used, and that private resentments were
often covered under the specious veil of patriotism. The sufferers, in
passing over to the Loyalists, carried with them a keen remembrance of
the vengeance of Committees, and when opportunity presented were tempted
to retaliate. From the nature of the case, the original offenders were
less frequently the objects of retaliation than those who were entirely
innocent. One instance of severity begat another, and they continued to
increase in a proportion that doubled the evils of common war. * * The
Royalists raised the cry of persecution, and loudly complained that,
merely for supporting the Government under which they were born, and to
which they owed a natural allegiance, they were doomed to suffer all the
penalties of capital offenders. Those of them who acted from principle
felt no consciousness of guilt, and could not but look with abhorrence
upon a Government which could inflict such severe punishments for what
they deemed a laudable line of conduct. Humanity would shudder at a
particular recital of the calamities which the Whigs inflicted on the
Tories and the Tories on the Whigs. It is particularly remarkable, that
many on both sides consoled themselves with the belief that they were
acting and suffering in a good cause." (History of the United States,
Vol. II., Chap. xxvi., pp. 467, 468, 469.)]
CHAPTER XXXII.
ORIGIN OF REPUBLICANISM AND HATRED OF MONARCHY IN AMERICA--THOMAS PAINE:
A SKETCH OF HIS LIFE, CHARACTER, AND WRITINGS, AND THEIR EFFECTS.
No social or political phenomenon in the history of nations has been
more remarkable than the sudden transition of the great body of the
American colonists, in 1776, from a reverence and love of monarchical
institutions and of England, in which they had been trained from their
forefathers, to a renunciation of those institutions and a hatred of
England. Whatever influence the oppressive policy of the British
Administration may have had in producing this change, was confined to
comparatively few in America, was little known to the masses, and had
little influence over them. This sudden and marvellous revolution in the
American mind was produced chiefly by a pamphlet of forty pages, written
at the suggestion of two or three leaders of the American
revolutionists, over the signature of "An Englishman." This Englishman
was no other than Thomas Paine, better known in after years as Tom
Paine, "the blasphemous infidel and beastly drunkard," as the New York
_Observer_, in answer to a challenge, proved him to be beyond the
possibility of successful contradiction. Tom Paine was of a Quaker
family; was a staymaker by trade, but an agitator by occupation. He had
obtained an appointment as exciseman, but was dismissed from his office,
and emigrated to America in 1774. He somehow obtained an introduction to
Dr. Franklin in London, who gave him a letter of introduction to a
gentleman in Philadelphia, through whom he procured employment in the
service of a bookseller. Beginning forthwith to write for a leading
newspaper on the agitated questions of the day, his articles attracted
attention and procured him the acquaintance of some influential persons,
and he at length became editor of the "Pennsylvania Magazine." He was
the master of a singularly attractive, lucid, and vituperative style,
scarcely inferior to that of _Junius_ himself. At the suggestion of
Franklin and one or two other leaders of the revolution, he wrote a
pamphlet of forty pages in favour of Independence, entitled "Common
Sense," and over the signature of "An Englishman," yet bitter against
England and English institutions. It was addressed to the inhabitants of
America, and was arranged under four heads: first, "Of the origin and
design of government in general, with concise remarks on the English
Constitution;" secondly, "Of monarchy and hereditary succession;"
thirdly, "Thoughts on the present state of military affairs;" fourth,
"Of the present ability of America, with some miscellaneous
reflections." Mr. Frothingham says: "The portion on Government has
little of permanent value; the glance at the English Constitution is
superficial; and the attack on Monarchy is coarse. The treatment of the
American question under the two last heads gave the pamphlet its
celebrity."[68]
Mr. Gordon says that "No publication so much promoted the cause of
Independence as that. The statements which are now adopted were then
strange, and Paine found difficulty in procuring a publisher to
undertake it."
Dr. Ramsay says: "The style, manner, and language of Thomas Paine's
performance were calculated to interest the passions and to rouse all
the active powers of human nature. With the view of operating on the
sentiments of religious people, Scripture was pressed into his service;
and the powers and name of a king were rendered odious in the eyes of
numerous colonists who had read and studied the history of the Jews, as
recorded in the Old Testament. Hereditary succession was turned into
ridicule. The absurdity of subjecting a great continent to a small
island on the other side of the globe was represented in such striking
language as to interest the honour and pride of the colonists in
renouncing the government of Great Britain. The necessity, the advantage
and practicability of independence were forcibly demonstrated.
"Nothing could be better timed than this performance. It was addressed
to freemen, who had just received convincing proof that Great Britain
had thrown them out of her protection, and engaged foreign mercenaries
to make war upon them, and seriously designed to compel their
unconditional submission to her unlimited power. It found the colonists
most thoroughly alarmed for their liberties, and disposed to do and
suffer anything that promised their establishment. In union with the
feelings and sentiments of the people, it produced surprising effects.
Many thousands were convinced, and were led to approve and long for a
separation from the mother country. Though that measure, a few months
before, was not only foreign to their wishes, but the object of their
abhorrence, the current suddenly became so strong in its favour that it
bore down all opposition. The multitude was hurried down the stream; but
some worthy men could not easily reconcile themselves to the idea of an
eternal separation from a country to which they had long been bound by
the most endearing ties. * * The change of the public mind of America
respecting connection with Great Britain is without a parallel. In the
short space of two years, nearly three millions of people passed over
from the love and duty of loyal subjects to the hatred and resentment of
enemies."[69]
The American press and all the American historians of that day speak of
the electric and marvellous influence of Tom Paine's appeal against
kings, against monarchy, against England, and in favour of American
independence.
The following remarks of the London _Athenæum_ are quoted by the New
York _Observer_ of the 10th of April, 1879:
"A more despicable man than Tom Paine cannot be found among the ready
writers of the eighteenth century. He sold himself to the highest
bidder, and he could be bought at a very low price. He wrote well;
sometimes as pointedly as Junius or Cobbett (who had his bones brought
to England). Neither excelled him in coining telling and mischievous
phrases; neither surpassed him in popularity-hunting. He had the art,
which was almost equal to genius, of giving happy titles to his
productions. When he denounced the British Government in the name of
'Common Sense,' he found willing readers in the rebellious American
colonists, and a rich reward from their grateful representatives. When
he wrote on behalf of the 'Rights of Man,' and in furtherance of the
'Age of Reason,' he convinced thousands by his title-pages who were
incapable of perceiving the inconclusiveness of his arguments. His
speculations have long since gone the way of all shams; and his
charlatanism as a writer was not redeemed by his character as a man.
Nothing could be worse than his private life; he was addicted to the
most degrading vices. He was no hypocrite, however, and he cannot be
charged with showing that respect for appearances which constitute the
homage paid by vice to virtue. Such a man was well qualified for earning
notoriety by insulting Washington. Only a thorough-paced rascal could
have had the assurance to charge Washington with being unprincipled and
unpatriotic."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 68: Frothingham's Rise of the Republic of the United States,
Chap, xi., p. 472.
The pamphlet was called "Common Sense," and was written by Thomas Paine,
an Englishman, who held and expressed extreme opinions upon the "Rights
of Man." He had been a staymaker in England, and was ruined; when, in
the winter of 1774, by Franklin's advice, he came to America and rapidly
grasped and comprehended the position of affairs. (Elliott's History of
New England, Vol. II., Chap, xxviii., p. 383.)
Referring to this demagogue of the American and French Revolution, his
American biographer, Cheetham, says: "All sects have had their
disgraceful members and offspring. Paine's father, a peaceful and
industrious Quaker, connects him with the exemplary sect of the Friends.
He received his education at the Grammar School of his native place,
Thetford, in Norfolk, but attained to little beyond the rudiments of
Latin. His first application to business was in the trade of his father,
that of staymaker, which he followed in London, Dover, and Sandwich,
where he married; afterwards he became a grocer and an exciseman, at
Lewes, in Sussex. This situation he lost through some misdemeanor. After
this, however, so well were the public authorities of his native country
disposed to serve him, that one of the Commissioners of Excise gave him
a letter of recommendation to Dr. Franklin, then a colonial agent in
London, who recommended him to go to America. At this period he had
first exercised his talents as a writer by drawing up a pamphlet
recommending the advance of the salaries of excisemen.
"His age at this time was thirty-seven. His first engagement in
Philadelphia was with Mr. Aitkin, a respectable bookseller, who, in
January, 1775, commenced the 'Pennsylvania Magazine,' the editorship of
which work became the business of Mr. Paine, who had a salary of £50
currency a year. When Dr. Rush, of Philadelphia, suggested to Paine the
propriety of preparing the Americans for a separation from England, it
seems that he seized with avidity the idea, and immediately commenced
his famous pamphlet on that subject, which being shown in MS. to Doctors
Franklin and Rush and Mr. Samuel Adams, was, after some discussion,
entitled, at the suggestion of Dr. Rush, 'Common Sense.' For this
production the Legislature of Pennsylvania voted him £500. Shortly
afterwards Paine was appointed Secretary to the Committee of the United
States on Foreign Affairs. His business was merely to copy papers,
number and file them, and generally do the duty of what is now called a
clerk in the Foreign Department. But in the title-page of his 'Rights of
Man,' he styles himself 'Secretary for Foreign Affairs to the Congress
of the United States in the Late War.' While in this office, he
published a series of appeals on the struggle between Great Britain and
the colonies. In 1777 he was obliged to resign his secretaryship on
account of a quarrel with Silas Deane, American agent in France. The
next year, however, he obtained the appointment of Clerk to the Assembly
of Pennsylvania; and in 1785, on the rejection of a motion to appoint
him historiographer to the United States, the Congress granted him three
thousand dollars, and the Legislature of New York granted him an estate
of 500 acres of highly cultivated land, the confiscated property of a
Loyalist. Having no more revolutionary occupation in the United States,
he embarked for France in 1787, with a letter of recommendation from Dr.
Franklin to the Duke de la Rochefoucault. From Paris he went to London,
where, the following year, he was arrested for debt, but was bailed by
some American merchants. He went to Paris in 1791 to publish, under the
name of 'Achilles Du Chatellet,' a tract _recommending the abolition of
royalty_. He again returned to London and wrote the first part of his
'Rights of Man,' in answer to Mr. Burke's 'Reflections on the French
Revolution.' The second part was published early in 1792. He was ordered
to be arrested and prosecuted for his seditious and blasphemous
writings, but escaped to France, and was elected a member of the French
National Convention--grateful for the honour which the bloody anarchists
had conferred upon him by electing him a member of their order. His
conduct, however, offended the Jacobins, and towards the close of the
year 1793 he was excluded from the convention, was arrested and
committed to the prison of the Luxembourg. Just before his confinement
he had finished the first part of his 'Age of Reason,' and confided it
to the care of his friend Joel Barlow for publication. He was now taken
ill, to which circumstance he ascribed his escape from the guillotine;
and on the fall of Robespierre was released. In 1795 he published, at
Paris, the second part of his 'Age of Reason.' He returned to America in
1802, bringing with him a woman named Madame Bonneville, whom he had
seduced away from her husband, with her two sons, and whom he seems to
have treated with the utmost meanness and tyranny. His friend and
American biographer, Mr. Cheetham, in continuation, gives the following
account of Paine's arrival at New York in 1802: 'The writer,' says Mr.
Cheetham, 'supposing him (Paine) to be a gentleman, was employed to
engage a room for him at Lovett's hotel, New York. On his arrival, in
1802, about ten at night, he wrote me a note, desiring to see me
immediately. I waited on him at Lovett's, in company with Mr. George
Clinton, jun. We rapped at the door. A small figure opened it within,
meanly dressed, having an old top-coat, without an under one; a dirty
silk handkerchief loosely thrown around his neck, a long beard of more
than a week's growth, a face well carbuncled as the setting sun, and the
whole figure staggering under a load of inebriation. I was on the point
of inquiring for Mr. Paine, when I noticed something of the portraits I
had seen of him. We were desired to be seated. He had before him a small
round table, on which were a beefsteak, some beer, a pint of brandy, a
pitcher of water and a glass. He sat eating, drinking, and talking with
as much composure as if he had lived with us all his life. I soon
perceived that he had a very retentive memory, and was full of anecdote.
The Bishop of Llandaff (Dr. Watson) was almost the first word he
uttered, and it was followed by his informing us that he had in his
trunk a manuscript reply to the bishop's 'Apology for the Bible.' He
then calmly mumbled his steak, and ever and anon drinking his brandy and
beer, repeated the introduction to his reply, which occupied nearly half
an hour. This was done with deliberation and the utmost clearness, and a
perfect apprehension, intoxicated as he was, of all that he repeated.
Scarcely a word would he allow us to speak. He always, I afterwards
found, in all companies, drunk or sober, would be listened to; in his
regard, there were no _rights of men_ with him--no equality, no
reciprocal immunities and obligations--for he would listen to no one.'
"On the 13th of October, 1802, he arrived at Baltimore, under the
protection of Mr. Jefferson. But it appears that curiosity induced no
one of distinction to suffer his approach. While at his hotel he was
principally visited by the lower class of emigrants from Scotland,
England, and Ireland, who had read and admired his 'Rights of Man.' With
them, it appears, 'he drank grog in the tap-room morning, noon, and
night, admired and praised, strutting and staggering about, showing
himself to all and shaking hands with all. The leaders of the party to
which he had attached himself paid him no attention.'"
Paine's subsequent years, until his miserable death in 1809, were
characterized by the lowest degradation, blasphemy, drunkenness, and
filthiness, which rendered him unfit for any human society, as his
biographies, written even by his friends, abundantly testify.
Those who knew Paine in his earlier years were, of course, not
responsible for the depravity and degradation of his subsequent years;
but from the beginning he was an infidel and an enemy of all settled
government.
Such was the author of American republicanism and of American hatred to
England, to all British institutions, to all monarchy, and the advocate
of the abolition of kings.]
[Footnote 69: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xii., pp. 161, 162, 163.]
CHAPTER XXXIII.
HIRING OF FOREIGNERS AND EMPLOYMENT AND TREATMENT OF INDIANS IN THE
AMERICAN WAR.
No two acts of the British Government in connection with the American
war were more deprecated on both sides of the Atlantic than the
employment of foreign troops and Indians against the colonists; they
were among the alleged and most exciting causes of the Declaration of
Independence; they weakened British influence throughout the colonies;
they roused thousands to arms who would have otherwise remained
peacefully at home. In England they were denounced by the highest
personages both in and out of Parliament, and by the public at
large.[70]
These Hessian mercenaries, though much lauded at first, and dreaded by
the colonists, proved to be inferior to the British soldiers, were not
reliable, deserted in large numbers, and plundered everywhere, without
regard to Loyalists or Disloyalists, and strengthened the American
resistance far more than they strengthened the British army.[71]
But if the hiring of foreign troops at an enormous expense was
disgraceful and impolitic, the employment _of Indians_ against the
colonists was still more impolitic and unnatural an outrage upon
civilization and humanity; and what is still even more to be lamented is
that this enlistment of savages in the warfare of one branch of the
British family against another was sanctioned if not instigated by the
King himself.[72]
During the war between France and England, which commenced in 1755, both
parties sought the alliance and support of the Indians, and employed
them in the savage work of border warfare. The French succeeded in
securing the greater number of the Indians, and used them with dreadful
effect, murdering and scalping thousands of the British colonists along
the inland frontiers of the several colonies. At the termination of the
war by the Treaty of Paris, in 1763, and the extinction of French power
in America, the French authorities commended the Indians to cultivate
the friendship of England, whose great superiority and success in the
war tended to turn the Indian affections and interest in favour of the
British. Dr. Ramsay observes: "The dispute between Great Britain and her
colonies began to grow serious, and the friendship of the Indians became
a matter of consequence to both parties. Stretching for fifteen hundred
miles along the whole north-western frontier of the colonies, they were
to them desirable friends and formidable enemies. As terror was one of
the engines by which Great Britain intended to enforce the submission of
the colonies, nothing could be more conducive to the excitement of this
passion than the co-operation of the Indians. Policy, not cruelty, led
to the adoption of this expedient, but it was of that over refined
species which counteracts itself. In the competition for the friendship
of the Indians, the British had advantages far superior to any possessed
by the colonists. The expulsion of the French from Canada--an event
which had taken place only thirteen years before--was still fresh in the
memory of many of the savages, and had inspired them with high ideas of
the martial superiority of the British troops. The first steps taken by
Congress to oppose Great Britain put it out of their power to gratify
the Indians. Such was the effect of the non-importation agreement of
1774. While Great Britain had access to the principal Indian tribes
through Canada on the north, and Florida on the south, and was
abundantly able to supply their many wants, the colonists had debarred
themselves from importing the articles which were necessary for the
Indian trade."[73]
The employment of the Indians in this civil war was in every respect
disadvantageous to England. It was disapproved and denounced throughout
England and Europe, as unnatural and inhuman; it was disapproved by the
English commanders and even Loyalists in America, and inflamed the
colonists to the highest degree. Wherever the Indians were employed,
they were a source of weakness to the English army, while their ravages
and cruelties disgusted the Loyalists and brought disgrace upon the
English arms and cause. Sir Guy Carleton forbade their crossing from
Canada into the colonies, and was afterwards accused in England for
disobedience in not employing them;[74] and General Burgoyne gave the
strictest orders against their murdering and plundering. His defeat near
Saratoga was largely owing to the conduct of the Indians in his army.
American historians dilate with much eloquence and justice upon the
employment of Indians against the colonists, and narrate, with every
possible circumstance of aggravation, every act of depredation and
cruelty on the part of the Indians against the white inhabitants that
espoused the cause of Congress; but they omit to state in like manner
that Congress itself endeavoured to enlist the Indians in its quarrel
with the mother country; that General Washington recommended their
employment against the English,[75] and that the very idea of engaging
the Indians in this civil war originated with the first promoters of the
revolution in Massachusetts. Nor do American historians state frankly
and fairly that for every aggression and outrage committed by the
Indians, the American soldiers, even under the express order of
Congress, retaliated with a tenfold vengeance--not in the manner of
civilized warfare, but after the manner and destruction of the savages
themselves. The American writers had also great advantages in
representing everything in regard to the proceedings of the
revolutionists in the brightest light, and everything connected with the
Loyalists and the English in the darkest colours, as they had the
reports, letters, and all other papers relating to these subjects in
their own exclusive possession, and published only such and so much of
them as answered their purpose; even the internal proceedings of
Congress were secret,[76] and only became known after the close of the
war. And many of the most important historical facts relating to the war
have been brought to light in the biographies and correspondence of the
men who figured in the revolution; and many letters and papers of great
historical value in throwing light upon the events and conduct of
parties during that period have only been published during the present
century, and some of them for the first time during the present
generation. This is true in regard to much that relates to the
employment and proceedings of the Indians, as well as in regard to those
of the Loyalists and various events of the American revolution.
According to American historians, the idea of employing the Indians in
the civil war was the wicked conception of British malignity, and
everywhere reprobated in America; while the idea was actually first
conceived and embodied in a resolution by the Provincial Congress of
Massachusetts. At Cambridge a new Provincial Congress had assembled,
with the popular feeling in their favour, and with several thousands of
militia or minute men under their command. But the most determined of
all their measures was to enlist a company of Stockbridge Indians
residing in their province. Further still, they directed a secret
letter--and a secret it has been kept for more than fifty years--to a
missionary much esteemed by the Indians in the western parts of New
York, entreating "that you will use your influence with them to join us
in the defence of our rights,"--in other words, to assail and scalp the
British soldiers.[77] It is worthy of remark, that the Massachusetts
delegates, the framers of this letter, were among those who expressed
the highest astonishment and indignation when, at a later period, a
similar policy was adopted on the British side.[78]
"Under date of the 27th of July, 1776, General Washington wrote to
Congress," says Mr. Allen, "expressing respectful anxiety that the
Stockbridge Indians shall be employed, and remarks that they were
dissatisfied at not being included in the late order for enlisting their
people, and had inquired the cause of General Putman.
"The reasons he assigns for recommending their employment are such as
have influenced, and probably determined, the Americans from that time
to the termination of the last war (1812-1815) with Great Britain--that
is, the impossibility of keeping them neutral; the fear of their joining
the enemy; while the customs of savage warfare are so repulsive to all
the feelings of humanity and pride of the soldier, that it would seem no
palliation could be received for the crime of having sanctioned them by
example. Indians are active and serviceable when properly employed. They
are the best defence against Indians. Acquainted from their birth with
wiles and stratagems, they can trace the enemy, and tell its numbers,
its footsteps, when the eye of the white man cannot discover a trace;
and the moving of grass or rushes, which would be unregarded by a
regular soldier, as the natural effect of winds, leads the Indian to be
prepared for an ambush. The certainty that Indians can be restrained
when it is wished, reconciles the opposite contradictions which are so
often seen between the complaints made by the Americans that the enemy
employed savages, at the very moment that they also employed them."[79]
It is thus clear that both parties courted the co-operation of the
Indians, and employed them to the utmost of their power; and therefore
one party has no just ground of reproach against or advantage over the
other party for the inhuman policy of enlisting the Indians in their
cause, though the British had larger means and greater facilities in
securing this savage co-operation.
It has been alleged, and no doubt truly, that the American commanders
restrained the cruel and plundering propensities of the Indians, and the
English commanders did the same; but neither the English nor the
Americans were always able to control their Indian allies on or after
the day of battle. American writers have, however, charged the outrages
of the Indians in the English army, and scouting parties, to the
sanction of the British generals,[80] and the prompting of the British
Loyalists, and some English writers have reiterated the charge. The
employment of the Indians at all was against the judgment of both
General Burgoyne and Sir Guy Carleton,[81] and only submitted to in
obedience to the King's authority. As early as the 11th of July, 1776,
Burgoyne (while pursuing his enterprise from Montreal to Albany)
complains as follows of the conduct of the Indians to the Secretary of
State: "Confidentially to your Lordship, I may acknowledge that in
several instances I have found the Indians little more than a name. If,
under the management of their conductors, they are indulged for
interested reasons in all the caprices and humours of spoiled children
like them, they grow more unreasonable and importunate upon every new
favour. Were they left to themselves, enormities too horrid to think of
would ensue; guilty and innocent, women and infants, would be a common
prey."[82]
While the Indians were an incumbrance to Burgoyne's army during his
whole campaign, and forsook him in the eventful hour when he most needed
them, their barbarities contributed greatly to swell the revolutionary
army, and to alienate great numbers of Loyalists, weakening Burgoyne's
army in the very country where he expected most support from the
inhabitants, and giving the American general, Gates, a great
preponderance of strength over him--the army of Burgoyne being reduced
to 3,500 men fit for actual service, while that of Gates was increased
to upwards of 16,000 fit for actual service.[83]
But if the British exceeded the Americans in gaining the greater part of
the Indians to their cause, and the corresponding disgrace and
disadvantage of their accompanying the army, the Americans far outdid
the English and the Indians themselves in the work of desolation and
destruction. Dr. Ramsay remarks:
"The undisturbed tranquillity which took place in South Carolina and the
adjacent States after the British had failed in their designs against
them in the spring and summer of 1776, gave an opportunity of carrying
war into the Indian country. This was done, not so much to punish what
was past, as to prevent all future co-operation between the Indians and
British in that quarter. Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia sent about the same time a considerable force, which traversed
the Indian settlements, burned their towns, and destroyed their fields
of corn. Above 500 of the Cherokees were obliged, from want of
provisions, to take refuge in Florida, and were fed at the expense of
the British Government."[84]
It is to be observed that this was not an invasion of the white
settlements by the Indians, but an invasion of the Indian settlements by
the whites; it was a "carrying war into the Indian country;" it was not
provoked by the Indians, but "was done to prevent all future
co-operation between the Indians and British in that quarter." Yet this
war of _invasion_, this war of _precaution_, was also a war more
destructive to the Indians than any which they, even under the French,
had inflicted on the white colonists; for not an Indian cornfield was
left undestroyed, nor an Indian habitation unconsumed.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 70: The royal historian, Dr. Andrews, says:
"The colonies were particularly exasperated at the introduction of
foreign troops into this quarrel. They looked upon this measure as an
unanswerable proof that all regard for their character as Englishmen was
fled, and that Great Britain viewed them as strangers, whom, if she
could not conquer and enslave, she was determined to destroy. This
persuasion excited their most violent indignation; they considered
themselves as abandoned to plunder and massacre, and that Britain was
unfeelingly bent on their ruin, by whatsoever means she could compass
it.
"While the colonists represented this measure in so sanguinary a light,
it was depicted at home in the same colour by their partisans. It was
even reprobated by many individuals who were not averse to the other
parts of the Ministerial plan, but who could not bring themselves to
approve of the interference of foreign mercenaries in our domestic
feuds.
"It was not only throughout the public at large this measure occasioned
so much discontent; after having in Parliament undergone the keenest
censure of the Opposition, it fell under the displeasure of a
considerable number of those who sided with the Minister and were
generally used to support the measures of Government; but on this
occasion they loudly dissented from them. Several quitted the House
without voting; others, who voted in his favour, obliged him previously
to give them an assurance that he would remove all their doubts and
scruples, and satisfy them clearly on this subject." (Dr. Andrews'
History of the Late War, Vol. II., Chap. xviii., pp. 76, 77.)]
[Footnote 71: "The employment of foreign troops to reduce America was an
object animadverted upon by the Opposition with peculiar violence and
indignation. This, indeed, of all the Ministerial measures, met with the
most acrimonious notice both in and out of Parliament. * * Foreigners
said the Opposition were now taught that Britain, with all its boasted
greatness, could not find people at home to fight its battles. * * Who
could behold so disgraceful a measure without feeling for that loss of
national honour which it must occasion? * * But exclusive of the
disgrace entailed upon our character, the danger of the system was no
less apparent. What reason had we to trust an army of foreigners, who
could possibly harbour no motives of enmity to the people against whom
they were to be employed? The country where these foreigners were to
wage war for us, was precisely that to which we had so often enticed
numbers to emigrate from their native homes by promises of more _ease_
and happiness than they could enjoy in their own country. * * Of all the
measures that had been taken against the Americans, that of hiring
foreigners to invade their country had given the highest offence.
British soldiers, though acting in the capacity of foes, still retained
the feelings of countrymen, and would not shed blood without some
compunction. They were born and bred in a country noted for humanity,
and the constitution of which inculcated mildness. But the Hessians were
of a ferocious disposition; educated under a despotic Government, they
knew no rights but those of force. They carried destruction wherever
they were masters, plundering all before them without distinction, and
committing the most barbarous ravages.
"They had, it was said, been told before their departure from Germany
that they were to be put in possession of the lands of those whom they
conquered, and they were full of this expectation at their arrival. But
upon discovering their mistake, they resolved, however, to make
themselves amends by appropriating whatever they could lay their hands
upon. * * The conduct of the Hessians was extremely offensive to the
British commanders, but they were too powerful a body to restrain by
compulsion, as they composed almost one-half of the army.
Notwithstanding the prudence and steadiness with which General Howe
conducted himself upon this emergency, it was not possible to restrain
their excesses, nor even prevent them from spreading among the English
troops in a degree to which they would not have certainly been carried
had they not such examples for a plea.
"The depredations of the Hessians grew at last, it was said, so
enormous, that the spoils they were loaded with became an absolute
incumbrance to them, and a frequent impediment to the discharge of their
military duties.
"The desolation of the Jerseys was one of the consequences of this
spirit of rapine. The Americans who adhered to Britain attributed to it
the subsequent decline of the British cause in these and other parts. As
the devastation was extended indiscriminately to friend and foe, it
equally exasperated both parties; it confirmed the enmity of the one,
and raised up a new enemy in the other; and it injured the British
interest in all the colonies." (Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War,
Vol. II., Chaps. xvii. and xxii., pp. 53, 54-268, 269.)
Dr. Andrews adds, in another place, that--
"The resentment occasioned by the depredations that had been carried on
in the Jerseys had left few, if any, friends to Britain in that
province. The dread of seeing those plunderers return, who had spared
neither friend nor foe, rendered all parties averse to the cause in
which they were employed. To this it was owing that their motions were
observed with such extreme vigilance, that they stood little or no
chance of succeeding in any of their enterprises. So many had suffered
through them, that there was no deficiency of spies to give instant
information of whatever they were suspected to have in view; and as much
mischief was done them by such as acted secretly from motives of private
revenge, as by those who took an open part against them in the field."
(Dr. Andrews' History of the American War, etc., Vol. II., Chap, xxiii.,
pp. 301, 302.)]
[Footnote 72: "At the north, the King called to mind that he might 'rely
upon the attachment of his faithful allies, the Six Nations of Indians,'
and he turned to them for immediate assistance. To insure the fulfilment
of his wishes, the order to engage them was sent directly in his name to
the unscrupulous Indian agent, Guy Johnson, whose functions were made
independent of Carleton. 'Lose no time,' it was said; 'induce them to
take up the hatchet against his Majesty's rebellious subjects in
America. It is a service of very great importance; fail not to exert
every effort that may tend to accomplish it; use the utmost diligence
and activity.'" (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VII.,
Chap. xxxiii., p. 349.)]
[Footnote 73: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xix., pp. 320, 321.
"It was unfortunate for the colonies that since the peace of Paris,
1763, the transactions with the Indians had been mostly carried on by
superintendents appointed and paid by the King of Great Britain. These
being under obligations to the Crown, and expectants of further favours
from it, generally used their influence with the Indians in behalf of
the mother country and against the colonies. * * The Americans were not
unmindful of the savages on their frontier. They appointed commissioners
to explain to them the grounds of their dispute, and to cultivate their
friendship by treaties and presents. They first sought to persuade the
Indians to join them against Great Britain, but having failed in that,
they endeavoured to persuade the Indians that the quarrel was by no
means relative to them, and that therefore they should take part with
neither side.
"For the greater convenience of managing the intercourse between the
colonies and the Indians, the latter were divided into three
departments--the northern, southern, and middle--and commissioners were
appointed for each. Congress also resolved to import and distribute
among them a suitable assortment of goods, to the amount of £40,000
sterling, on account of the United States; but this was not executed."
(Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xix., p.
321.)]
[Footnote 74: "Anxious (1775, October) to relieve St. John's, Carleton,
after the capture of Allen, succeeded in assembling about nine hundred
Canadians at Montreal; but a want of mutual confidence, and the
certainty that the inhabitants generally favoured the Americans,
dispirited them, and they disappeared by desertions thirty or forty of a
night, till he was left almost as forlorn as before. The Indians, too,
he found of little service; 'they were easily dejected, and chose to be
of the strongest side, so that when they were most wanted they
vanished'. But history must preserve the fact that though often urged to
let them loose on the rebel provinces, in his detestation of cruelty he
would not suffer a savage to pass the frontier." (Bancroft's History of
the United States, Vol. VIII., Chap. lii., p. 186.)]
[Footnote 75: "Reading at the present day, we can see how the passionate
and declamatory rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence has left its
stain to this hour on most of the political writing and oratory of
America, and may wish that the birth of a nation had not been screamed
into the world after this fashion. Nothing could have been easier than,
in the like rhetorical language, to draw up a list of lawlessness and
utter outrage committed by the colonists. Some of the charges will not
bear examination.
"For instance, the aid of the Indians had been willingly accepted by the
colonists in the Canadian expedition since September, 1775; the general
question of their employment had been considered by Washington in
conference with a Committee of Congress and delegates of New England
Governments in October of the same year; and the main objection which
Washington and other officers urged against it, as shown by a letter of
his to General Schuyler, January 27, 1776, and the answer from the
latter, was that of expense. He had, nevertheless (April 19, 1776),
advised Congress 'to engage them on our side,' as 'they must, and no
doubt soon will, take an active part either for or against us;' and the
Congress itself had, on June 3rd--not a month before the Declaration of
Independence was actually accepted--passed a resolution to raise 2,000
Indians for the Canadian service, which, shortly afterwards, was
extended by another (referred to in a letter of Washington's of June
20), authorizing General Washington to employ such Indians as he should
take into the service in any place where he might think that they would
be most useful, and to offer them bounties, not indeed for scalps, but
for every officer and soldier of the King's troops whom they might
capture in the Indian country or on the frontiers of the colonies. When
all this had been done, it needed the forgetfulness and the blind
hypocrisy of passion to denounce the King to the world for having
'endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless
Indian savages;' yet the American people have never had the self-respect
to erase this charge from a document generally printed in the fore-front
of their Constitution and Laws, and with which every schoolboy is
sedulously made familiar.
"Perhaps, indeed, it would have been otherwise had not the charge been
one which circumstances appeared to confirm. For, in fact, owing to
causes already indicated, the Americans never could make friends of the
Indians in the contest, and consequently the 'merciless savages'
continue in history to figure on the side of the British. Who could
wonder at it? At the date of the Declaration of Independence, the Indian
child had only just reached man's estate, who in the year of his birth
might have escaped being a victim to the bounty of £20, held out for the
scalp of every Indian woman and child, by Massachusetts, in 1775, whilst
one of £40 had been offered for that of his father, raised in 1776 to
£300. It did not require the retentive memory of the redskin to make him
look with suspicion on solicitations of friendship from men who might
have been parties to such schemes of extermination to his race." (The
Ludlow's History of the War of Independence, 1777-1783, Chap. v., pp.
124-126.)
"But Jefferson's violent pamphlet should, in fact, be looked upon less
as a Declaration of Independence than as a Declaration of War--less as
an assertion of right than as a cry of defiance uttered in the hour of
grave peril, and in the face of a formidable foe."--_Ib._, p. 126.]
[Footnote 76: Some of the members of Congress were, at times, not so
reticent as their oaths of secrecy required, and the squabbles of
Conference became known abroad. It is a curious illustration of the
dignity and character of a body, when the least publication of its
proceedings becomes its disgrace.
"In those days (1779), far unlike our own, the Congress resembled a
Committee or a Junta, much rather than a chamber of debate. The
speeches, it is said, were all in the style of private conversation.
There were never more than forty members present, often no more than
twenty. These small numbers, however, by no means ensured harmony, nor
precluded violent and unseemly quarrels, rumours of which were not slow
in passing the Atlantic. 'For God's sake,' thus wrote La Fayette from
France, 'for God's sake, prevent the Congress from disputing loudly
together. Nothing so much hurts the interest and reputation of America.'
Thus the object of concealment, unless, perhaps, for private purposes,
was most imperfectly attained, although, in name at least, the
deliberations of Congress at this time were secret. Historically, even
the Journal which they kept gives little light as to their true
proceedings. An American gentleman, who has studied that document with
care, laments that it is 'painfully meagre, the object being apparently
to record as little as possible.'" (Lord Mahon's History of England,
Vol. VII., Chap. lviii., pp. 420, 421; quoting as his authority, "Letter
of La Fayette to Washington, June 12, 1779," and "Life of President
Reed," by Mr. Wm. Reed, Vol. II., p. 18.)]
[Footnote 77: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap,
lii., pp. 52, 53.]
[Footnote 78: This letter, dated Concord, April 4, 1775, may be seen at
length in the Appendix to Sparks' edition of Washington's Writings, Vol.
III., p. 495. The letter, it will be seen, was written a fortnight
before the affair of Concord and Lexington, which took place the 19th of
April, when the first blood was shed in the revolution.]
[Footnote 79: Allen's History of the American Revolution, Vol. I., Chap,
xiv., pp. 423, 424.
"Lord Suffolk, in his speech (in reply to Lord Chatham), undertook to
defend the employment of the savages. 'The Congress,' he said,
'endeavoured to bring the Indians over to their side, and if we had not
employed them they would most certainly have acted against us.' This
statement, which at the time was doubted or denied, has been, it must be
owned, in no small degree borne out by documents that have subsequently
come to light. Even several months later, we find Congress in treaty to
engage several parties of Indians in their service." (Lord Mahon's
History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lvi., p. 305.)
"See Washington's Writings, Vol. V., p. 273, and Appendix to Vol. III.,
p. 494. 'Divesting them,' says Washington, 'of the savage customs
exercised in their wars against each other, I think they may be made of
excellent use as scouts and light troops, mixed with our own parties.'
But what more did the English ever design or desire?" (Lord Mahon's
History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lvi., p. 305.)]
[Footnote 80: Even so amiable and generous a man as Burgoyne did not
escape these imputations. "It may well be imagined that while Burgoyne
was advancing, declamations against his and the Indians' cruelty (for no
distinction was admitted) were rife on the American side. By such means,
and still more, perhaps, by the natural spirit of a free-born people
when threatened with invasion, a resolute energy against Burgoyne was
roused in the New England States."--_Ib._, p. 261.]
[Footnote 81: "Carleton from the first abhorred the measure of employing
the Indians, which he was yet constrained to promote." (Bancroft, Vol.
VII., p. 119.)]
[Footnote 82: Quoted in Lord Mahon's History, Vol. VII., Chap. lvi., p.
259. After quoting this letter, Lord Mahon adds:
"It is due to Burgoyne to state, that from the first he had made most
strenuous exertions, both by word and deed, to prevent any such
enormities. The testimony, for example, of his aide-de-camp, Lord
Petersham, when examined before the House of Commons, is clear and
precise upon that point. (See Burgoyne's Narrative and Collection of
Documents, pp. 65, 66, second edition.) But in spite of all restraints,
the cruel temper and lawless habits of these savages would sometimes
burst forth--sometimes not more fatally to their enemies than to their
friends. The tragical fate of Miss MacRea raised one loud cry of
indignation on both sides of the Atlantic. This lady, in the bloom of
youth and beauty, the daughter of an American Loyalist, was betrothed to
an officer in the British provincial troops. Anxious for her security,
the officer engaged some Indians to escort her from her home and convey
her to the British camp, where the marriage would be solemnized. As a
further precaution, he promised to reward the person who should bring
her safe to him with a barrel of rum. But this very precaution, as it
seemed to be, was the cause of the disaster which ensued. Two of the
Indians who took charge of her began a quarrel on the way, as to which
of them should first present her to the bridegroom. Each was eager for
the rum; each resolute that his companion should not receive it in his
place. At last one of them in sudden fury raised his tomahawk, struck
Miss MacRea upon the head, and laid her a corpse at his feet. General
Burgoyne at this news displayed his utmost resentment and concern. He
compelled the Indians to deliver up the murderer, and designed to put
him to death. He was only induced to spare his life upon the Indians
agreeing to terms which the General thought would be more effectual than
any execution, in deterring them from similar barbarities. Deterred,
indeed, they were. But when they found themselves precluded from their
expected delights of plundering and scalping, they began to desert and
go home. Of nearly five hundred who at the outset had joined Burgoyne,
less than threescore at last remained beneath his banner."--_Ib._, pp.
259-261.
At the first general encampment of Burgoyne's army on the western side
of Lake Champlain, he met a deputation of the Indians in alliance with
Great Britain, and made an animated speech to them. "He exhorted them to
behave with courage and fidelity to their friends, and to avoid all
barbarity towards their enemies. He entreated them to be particularly
careful in distinguishing between the adherents and foes to the British
nation. He earnestly requested that they would put none to death but
such as actually opposed them with arms in their hands, and to spare old
men, women, children, and prisoners; to scalp only such as they had
killed in action, and to treat compassionately the wounded and dying. He
promised them a reward for every prisoner they brought in, but assured
them he would look narrowly into every demand for scalps." (Dr. Andrews'
History of the Late War, Vol. II., Chap, xxviii., p. 383.)]
[Footnote 83: "The apprehensions of those who had been averse to the
employment of the Indians in the British army began to be justified.
Notwithstanding the care and precautions taken by General Burgoyne to
prevent the effects of their barbarous disposition, they were sometimes
carried to an excess that shocked his humanity--the more, as it was
totally out of his power to control them in the degree that he had hoped
and proposed. The outrages they committed were such as proved highly
detrimental to the royal cause. They spared neither friend nor foe, and
exercised their usual cruelties with very little attention to the
threats that were held out in order to restrain and deter them.
"Several instances of this nature happened about this time, which
contributed powerfully to alienate the minds of many from the cause in
which they served. One was recorded, in particular, that equally struck
both parties with horror. A young lady, the daughter of Mr. MacRea, a
zealous royalist, being on her way to the British army, where she was to
be married to an officer, unhappily fell into the hands of the Indians,
who, without regarding her youth and beauty, murdered her with many
circumstances of barbarity.
"Scenes of this nature served to render the royal party extremely
odious. However the Americans might be conscious that the Indians were
as offensive, and as much abhorred by their enemies as by themselves,
still they could not forgive them the acceptance of such auxiliaries as
must necessarily disgrace the best cause.
"The resentment occasioned by the conduct of the Indians, and no less
the dread of being exposed to their fury, helped considerably to bring
recruits from every quarter to the American army. It was considered as
the only place of refuge and security at present. The inhabitants of the
tracts contiguous to the British army took up arms against it almost
universally. The preservation of their families was now become an object
of immediate concern. As the country was populous, they flocked in
multitudes to the American general's camp; and he soon found himself at
the head of an army which, though composed of militia and undisciplined
men, was animated with that spirit of indignation and revenge which so
often supplies all military deficiencies." (Dr. Andrews' History of the
Late War, Vol. II., Chap. xxviii., pp. 393, 394.)]
[Footnote 84: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xix., p. 322.]
CHAPTER XXXIV.
THE MASSACRE OF WYOMING--FOUR VERSIONS OF IT BY ACCREDITED AMERICAN
HISTORIANS, ALL DIFFERING FROM EACH OTHER--THE FACTS INVESTIGATED, AND
FALSE STATEMENTS CORRECTED.
It would be useless and tedious to attempt even a condensed account of
the battles and warfare in which the Indians took part between the
English and the Congress; but there is one of these revengeful and
murderous occurrences which must be minutely stated, and the American
accounts of it thoroughly investigated, as it has been the subject of
more misrepresentation, more declamation, more descriptive and poetic
exaggeration, and more denunciation against the English by American
historians and orators than any other transaction of the American
revolution--namely, what is known as the "Massacre of Wyoming." There
are four versions of it, by accredited American histories.
The account of this massacre is thus given in the words of Dr. Ramsay's
history:
"A storm of Indian and Tory vengeance burst in July, 1778, with
particular violence on Wyoming, a new and flourishing settlement on the
eastern branch of the Susquehanna. Unfortunately for the security of the
inhabitants, the soil was claimed both by Connecticut and Pennsylvania.
From the collision of contradictory claims, founded on Royal Charters,
the laws of neither were steadily enforced. In this remote settlement,
where government was feeble, the Tories were under less control, and
could easily assemble undiscovered. Nevertheless, twenty-seven of them
were taken and sent to Hartford, in Connecticut, but they were
afterwards released. These and others of the same description,
instigated by revenge against the Americans, from whom some of them had
suffered banishment and loss of property, made common cause with the
Indians, and attacked the Wyoming settlement with their combined forces,
estimated at 1,100 men, 900 of whom were Indians. The whole was
commanded by Colonel John Butler, a Connecticut Tory. One of the forts
which had been constructed for the security of the inhabitants, being
very weak, surrendered to this party; but some of the garrison had
retired to the principal fort at Kingston, called Forty Fort. Colonel
John Butler next demanded the surrender thereof. Colonel Zebulon Butler,
a continental officer, who commanded, sent a message to him, proposing a
conference at a bridge without the fort. This being agreed to, Colonel
Zebulon Butler, Dennison, and some other officers repaired to the place
appointed, and they were followed by the whole garrison, a few invalids
excepted. None of the enemy appeared. The Wyoming people advanced, and
supposed that the enemy were retiring. They continued to march on till
they were about three miles from the fort. They then saw a few of the
enemy, with whom they exchanged a few shots; but they presently found
themselves ambuscaded and attacked by the whole bodies of Indians and
Tories. They fought gallantly, till their retreat to the fort was cut
off. Universal confusion ensued. Out of 417 who had marched out of the
fort, about 360 were instantly slain. No quarter was given. Colonel John
Butler again demanded the surrender of Forty Fort. This was agreed to,
under articles of capitulation, by which the effects of the people
therein were secured to them. The garrison, consisting of thirty men and
two hundred women, were permitted to cross the Susquehanna, and retreat
through the woods to Northampton county. The most of the other scattered
settlers had previously retired, some through the woods to Northampton,
others down the river to Northumberland. In this retreat, some women
were delivered of children in the woods, and many suffered from want of
provisions. Several of the settlers at Wyoming had erected good houses
and barns, and made considerable improvements. These and the other
houses in the vicinity were destroyed. Their horses, cattle, sheep, and
hogs were, for the most part, killed or driven away by the enemy. A
large proportion of the male inhabitants were in one day slaughtered.
In a single engagement, near two hundred women became widows, and a much
greater number of children were left fatherless." (Dr. Ramsay's History
of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xix., pp. 323, 324.)
REMARKS UPON DR. RAMSAY'S ACCOUNT.
Such is the account of this melancholy affair by Dr. Ramsay, a friend of
General Washington, and a distinguished officer in the American army.
Let us note Dr. Ramsay's admissions and his omissions. He admits that
the Tories or Loyalists had been persecuted, imprisoned, plundered, and
banished; that no less than twenty-seven of them had been taken, and
sent to Hartford, in Connecticut, but were afterwards released; yet he
might have added that they were kept prisoners nearly a year, and then
discharged for want of any evidence against them. It is also admitted
that "others of the same description (as those who had been sent
prisoners to Connecticut) were instigated by _revenge_ against the
Americans, from whom some of them had suffered banishment and loss of
property." It is likewise admitted that the whole invading party
consisted of but 1,100 men, of whom only 200 were Tories, the remaining
900 being Indians. But it is not stated that those Indians were
neighbours, and many of them the connections of the northern tribes of
those Indians whose settlements had been invaded, their fields and towns
destroyed, as a precaution lest they should co-operate with the British;
nor is it said that many of these Indians were residents in the
neighbourhood, and were treated like the Tories.
It furthermore appears from this narrative that the Americans in Wyoming
were not even taken by surprise, but were prepared for their enemy; that
none were killed except in the conflict of the battle; that the thirty
men and two hundred women in the garrison were not murdered, but were
"permitted (with their effects) to cross the Susquehanna and retreat to
Northampton." The taking of the cattle and burning of the houses and
barns was after the example of the Americans in invading and destroying
the Indian settlements. It is therefore clear, according to Dr. Ramsay's
own narrative, that the "Massacre of Wyoming" was not an _unprovoked
aggression_, like that of the Americans against the more Southern
Indians, but a _retaliation_ for injuries previously inflicted by the
aggressors.[85]
But as the "Massacre of Wyoming" is the case selected by American
historians and poets to exhaust their indignation against English
cruelty in employing the Indians in the civil war, we will not dismiss
it with the above cursory remarks, but will examine it with some degree
of minuteness.
Wyoming was a pleasant and fertile valley, situated on the eastern
branch of the Susquehanna, and consisted of eight townships, five square
miles each. It had been claimed as part of Pennsylvania; but
Connecticut, relying upon the authority of a more ancient Charter, had
since the last war made a large settlement on the banks of that
beautiful river. "The exquisitely beautiful valley of Wyoming, where, on
the banks of the Susquehanna, the wide and rich meadows, shut in by
walls of wooded mountains, attracted emigrants from Connecticut, through
their claim of right under the Charter of their native colony, was in
conflict with the territorial jurisdiction of the proprietaries of
Pennsylvania."[86]
Such was the scene of a tragedy which thrilled all America and Europe;
for the accounts published in Europe were the repetitions of the
exaggerated American statements, omitting for the most part the causes
of the tragedy and the retaliation which followed it.
I will now present and collate the three other accounts, with that of
Dr. Ramsay, of those tragical events on both sides.
Mr. Bancroft states as follows:
"The Seneca tribe, fresh from the memory of their chiefs and braves who
fell in conflict with the New York husbandmen at Oriskany. Their king,
Sucingerachton, was, both in war and in council, the foremost man of
all the Six Nations. Compared with him, the Mohawk Brant, who had been
but lately known upon the warpath, was lightly esteemed.[87] His
attachment to the English increased to a passion on the alliance of the
Americans with the French, for whom he cherished implacable hate.
Through his interest, and by the blandishments of gifts and pay and
chances of revenge, Colonel John Butler lured the _Seneca_ warriors to
cross the border of Pennsylvania under the British flag.
"The party of savages and rangers, numbering between five hundred and
seven hundred men, fell down the Tioga river, and on the last day of
June hid in the forests above Wyoming. The next day the two northernmost
forts capitulated. The men of Wyoming, old and young, with one regular
company, in all hardly more than three hundred, took counsel with one
another, and found no hope of deliverance for their families but through
a victorious encounter with a foe twice their number, and more skilful
in the woods than themselves. On the 3rd day of July, the devoted band,
led by Colonel Zebulon Butler, who had just returned from the
continental service, began their march up the river.[88] The horde of
invaders, pretending to retreat, crouched themselves on the ground in
the open wood. The villagers of Wyoming began firing as they drew near,
and at the third volley stood within a hundred yards of the ambush, when
the Seneca braves began the attack, and were immediately seconded by the
rangers. The Senecas gave no quarter, and in less than half an hour took
two hundred and twenty-five scalps, among them those of two field
officers and seven captains. The rangers saved but five of their
captives. On the British side only two whites were killed and eight
Indians wounded. The next day the remaining forts, filled chiefly with
women and children, capitulated. The long and wailing procession of
survivors flying from their fields of corn, their gardens, the flames of
their cottages, the unburied bodies of their beloved defenders, escaped
by a pass through the hills to the eastern settlements. Every fort and
dwelling was burned down.
"The Senecas spread over the surrounding country, adepts in murder and
ruin. The British leader boasted in his report that his party had burned
a thousand houses and every mill (a great exaggeration). Yet, marauders
came to destroy and deal deaths, not to recover or hold; and the ancient
affection for England was washed out in blood (more truly, the revenge
for wrongs previously received). When the leader of the inroad turned to
desolate other scenes, Pennsylvania was left in undisputed possession of
her soil." (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap. v.,
pp. 137, 138.)
Mr. Tucker briefly states the affair in the following words:
"The settlement of Wyoming, in Pennsylvania, was assailed in July by a
large body of savages, who, having obtained easy possession of it,
indiscriminately butchered both the garrison and the inhabitants; and
soon afterwards Wilkesbarre shared the same fate. Near three thousand
had succeeded in effecting their escape.[89]
"To prevent their return to the scenes of their former happiness,
everything that could contribute to their comfort--houses, crops,
animals--were, with an industry equal to their malignity, destroyed by
the savages." (Tucker's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap.
iii., p. 239.)
The following account of the "Wyoming Massacre" appears more
intelligible and consistent than any of the preceding. Says Mr.
Hildreth:
"There had come in among the Connecticut settlers at Wyoming a number of
Dutch and Scotch from New York, some thirty of whom, shortly after the
commencement of the war, had been seized under the suspicion of being
Tories, and sent to Connecticut for trial. They were discharged for want
of evidence; but if not Tories before, they soon became so. Returning
to the valley of the Mohawk, whence they had emigrated to Wyoming, they
enlisted into the partisan corps of Johnson and Butler, and waited
eagerly for chances of revenge.
"Though Wyoming did not number three thousand inhabitants, it had
furnished two full companies (one writer says, a thousand men) to the
continental army, and had thus in a manner deprived itself of the means
of defence. Congress, upon rumours of intended Indian hostilities, had
ordered a third company to be raised as a local garrison; but this corps
was as yet hardly organized, and very imperfectly armed. Such was the
state of the settlement when there appeared at the head of the valley an
overwhelming force of Tories and Indians, principally of the Seneca
tribe of the Six Nations, led by Colonel Butler. Some of the inhabitants
were waylaid and slain. The upper fort, held by disaffected persons,
surrendered at once. The continentals, with such others as could be
mustered, marched out to meet the enemy: but they were surrounded,
defeated, and driven back with heavy loss, and several who were taken
prisoners were put to death by the Indians with horrible tortures. Those
who escaped fled to Fort Wyoming, which was speedily invested. The
surviving continentals, to avoid being taken prisoners, embarked and
escaped down the river; after which the fort surrendered, upon promise
of security of life and property. Desirous to fulfil these terms, Butler
presently marched away with his Tories, but he could not induce the
Indians to follow. They remained behind, burned the houses, ravaged the
fields, killed such as resisted, and drove the miserable women and
children through the woods and mountains to seek refuge where they
might.
"These barbarities, greatly exaggerated by reports embodied since in
poetry and history, excited everywhere a lively indignation. Wyoming was
presently re-occupied by a body of continental troops. A continental
regiment of the Pennsylvania line, stationed at Schoharie, penetrated to
the neighbouring branches of the Upper Susquehanna, and _destroyed the
settlement_ of Unadilla, occupied by a mixed population of Indians and
refugees. The Indians and Loyalists soon took their _revenge_ by
surprising Cherry Valley. The fort, which had a continental garrison,
held out; Colonel Alden, who lodged in the town, was killed, the
lieutenant-colonel was made prisoner, and the settlement suffered
almost the fate of Wyoming." (Hildreth's History of the United States,
Vol. III., Chap, xxxviii., pp. 262, 263.)
REMARKS ON THESE FOUR ACCOUNTS OF THE MASSACRE.
The attentive reader has doubtless observed that the four versions given
above, by four accredited American historians, in regard to the
"Massacre of Wyoming," differ from each other in several essential
particulars.
1. Two of these versions imply that the "massacre" was a mere marauding,
cruel, and murderous invasion of an inoffensive and peaceful settlement;
while the other two versions of Dr. Ramsay and Mr. Hildreth clearly show
the provocation and cruel wrongs which the Loyalists, and even Indians,
had experienced from the continentals and inhabitants of Wyoming; that
the settlement of Wyoming was the hot-bed of revolutionism, in which,
out of three thousand inhabitants, several hundred had volunteered into
the continental army, while they, as may be easily conceived, insulted,
imprisoned, banished and confiscated the property of those who regarded
their oath of allegiance as inviolate as their marriage vow, "for better
for worse," until death released them from it. Instead of treating a
solemn oath as secondary to caprice and passion, the Loyalists carried
it to an excess of integrity and conscience; they were to be the more
respected and honoured, rather than made on that account criminals and
outlaws, subject to imprisonment and banishment of their persons and the
confiscation of their property.
2. Two of these four versions import that the inhabitants, men, women,
and children, were "indiscriminately butchered;" the other two versions
import that none were "butchered" except in battle, and none were
"scalped" except those who had fallen in battle.
3. In two of these versions it is stated that those who were in the
forts after their surrender were "massacred," without respect to age or
sex; in the other two versions it is stated that not one of them was
massacred, but they were all permitted to cross the Susquehanna with
their effects.
4. In one of these versions, Colonel John Butler is represented as not
only the commander of the whole party of invasion, but the author of all
the cruelties perpetrated in the "massacre" of Wyoming; yet Mr.
Hildreth's statement shows the reverse--that Colonel Butler had accepted
the surrender of Fort Wyoming "upon the promise of security to life and
property;" that "desirous to fulfil these terms, he presently marched
away with his Tories; but he could not induce the Indians to follow;"
that "the depredations which followed were inflicted by the Indians
alone, and whom Colonel Butler could not command, and against his
remonstrance and example and that of his Tories."
It is therefore plain that the accounts at the time of the "Massacre of
Wyoming," published by the Congress party, were of the most exaggerated
and inflammatory character, containing the grossest misrepresentation,
and doing the greatest injustice to the leaders and conduct of the
expedition, of which accounts they had no knowledge, nor any means of
correcting them. These partial and shamefully exaggerated accounts and
misrepresentations were spread through Europe, and produced the most
unfavourable impression in regard to the "Tories" and their mixture with
the Indians--the only place of refuge for them, as they were driven from
their homes to escape the sentences of death, imprisonment, or
banishment, subject in all cases, of course, to the destruction and
confiscation of their property. The English Annual Register for 1779,
after reproducing these unjust and inflated accounts, candidly says:
"It is necessary to observe, with respect to the destruction of Wyoming,
that as no narrative of the exploits of the leaders in that transaction,
whether by authority or otherwise, has yet appeared in this country, we
can only rely for the authenticity of the facts which we have stated
upon the accounts published by the Americans.
"Happy should we deem it, for the honour of humanity that, the whole
account was demonstrated to be a fable." (Vol. IV., p. 14.)
The testimony furnished by the four versions of the transaction by
American historians shows how largely the original accounts of it were
fabulous.
Since compiling and analysing the foregoing four historical versions of
the "Massacre of Wyoming," I have read Colonel Stone's _Life of Joseph
Brant, Thayendanegea, including the Border Wars of the American
Revolution_, and have carefully examined his account of the "Massacre of
Wyoming." Colonel Stone visited the place (1838), and obtained all the
information which the oldest inhabitants and family letters could give,
and examined all the papers in the State Paper Office, and obtained much
information from correspondence and personal interviews with aged and
distinguished inhabitants, well acquainted with all the particulars of
the alleged "Massacre." The result of his researches was to justify the
hopes of the British Annual Register, quoted on previous page, which,
after having republished the American accounts of the "Massacre," says:
"Happy should we deem it, for the honour of humanity, that the whole
account were demonstrated to be a fable."
This has been done by Colonel Stone after the lapse of more than half a
century. In the fifteenth chapter of the first volume of his eloquent
and exhaustive work he gives a history of the settlement, and of the
many years' wars between the rival claimants of Connecticut and
Pennsylvania--the former styled "the Susquehanna Company," and the
latter "the Delaware Company." The question was also complicated by
Indian claims, as the land had been once acquired by the Six Nations,
and alleged to have been sold to both companies. Many of the Mohawks and
other Indians resided in and near the settlement. On the breaking out of
the war, politics largely entered into the disputes, and armed conflicts
ensued, and no less than ten forts were erected in the settlement.
According to Colonel Stone, the "Massacre" was not the result of
surprise, nor did it involve the indiscriminate massacre of women and
children, but was the result of a pitched battle between the Loyalists
and Continentals, in which the latter were the assailants and were
defeated, and whatever "massacre" there was followed the battle.[90]
Colonel Stone, after having given an account of the battle, as stated
in previous note, and having corrected several erroneous statements,
makes the following correction of what had been often written and
generally believed respecting the famous Chief Brant:
"There is another important correction to be made in reference to every
written history of this battle extant, not even excepting the revised
edition of the Life of Washington, by Chief Justice Marshall. This
correction regards the name and just fame of Joseph Brant, whose
character has been blackened with all the infamy, both real and
imaginary, connected with this bloody expedition. Whether Captain Brant
was at any time in company with this expedition, is doubtful; but it is
certain, in the face of every historical authority, British and
American, that so far from being engaged in the battle, he was many
miles distant at the time of its occurrence. Such has been the uniform
testimony of the British officers engaged in the expedition, and such
was always the word of Thayendanegea (Brant's Indian name) himself. It
will, moreover, be seen toward the close of the present work that after
the publication of Campbell's 'Gertrude of Wyoming,' in which poem the
Mohawk chieftain is denounced as 'the Monster Brant,' his son repaired
to England, and in correspondence with the poet, successfully vindicated
his father's memory from the calumny."--_Ib._, p. 338.
To all this Colonel Stone adds the following important note. He says:
"Since the present chapter was written, and while the work was under
revision, the author received a letter from Mr. Samuel C. Frey, of Upper
Canada, a son of the late Philip Frey, Esquire, a Loyalist of Tryon
County, who was ensign in H.B.M.'s Eighth Regiment, and who, with his
regiment, was engaged in the campaign and battle of Wyoming. Philip R.
Frey, the ensign spoken of, died at Palatine, Montgomery (formerly
Tryon) County, in 1823. It was his uniform testimony that Brant was not
at Wyoming. Mr. Frey writes to the author that there were no chiefs of
any notoriety with the Indians in that expedition, and that the Indians
themselves were led from Detroit by Captain Bird, of the Eighth
Regiment. Bird had been engaged in a love affair at Detroit, but being
very ugly, besides having a hare-lip, was unsuccessful. The affair
getting wind, his fellow-officers made themselves merry at his expense;
and in order to steep his grief in forgetfulness, he obtained permission
to lead an expedition somewhere against the American frontier. Joining
the Indians placed under him and a detachment of his regiment to
Butler's Rangers, they concerted the descent upon Wyoming. Ensign Frey
stated that Bird was ill-natured during the whole march, and acted with
foolhardiness at the battle. He further stated, according to the letter
of his son, that the American colonel challenged them to a fair
field-fight, which challenge was accepted. 'The next morning, about nine
o'clock, the Americans poured out of the fort, about 340 in number; the
Indians fell back over a hill; the troops on both sides drew up in
battle array and soon commenced. After a few rounds fired, the American
colonel ordered his drum-major to beat a charge; the drum-major mistook
the order, and beat a retreat; the Americans became disordered
immediately, and ran helter-skelter; the moment the Indians saw them
running, they poured down upon them from their hiding-places, so that no
more than about forty survived out of 340.'"
"Rarely, indeed," adds Colonel Stone, "does it happen that history is
more at fault in regard to facts than in the case of Wyoming. The remark
may be applied to nearly every writer who has attempted to narrate the
events connected with the invasion of Colonel John Butler. Ramsay and
Gordon and Marshall--nay, the British historians themselves have written
gross exaggerations. Marshall, however, in his revised edition, has made
corrections, and explained how and by whom he was led into error. My
excellent friend, Charles Miner, Esq., long a resident of Wyoming, a
gentleman of letters and great accuracy, furnished the biographer of
Washington with a true narrative of the transactions which he made the
basis of the summary account contained in his revised edition. Other
writers, of greater or less note, have gravely recorded the same
fictions, adding, it is to be feared, enormities not even conveyed to
them by tradition. The grossest of these exaggerations are contained in
Thatcher's Military Journal and in Drake's Book of the Indians. The
account of the marching out of a large body of the Americans from one of
the forts to hold a parley, by agreement, and then being drawn into an
ambuscade and all put to death, is false; the account of seventy
continental soldiers being butchered after having surrendered, is
totally untrue. No regular troops surrendered, and all escaped who
survived the battle of the 3rd. Equally untrue is the story of the
burning of the houses, barracks, and forts, filled with women and
children."--_Ib._, p. 338, 339.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 85: "The aggressors on this occasion were a troop of wild
Indians, in conjunction with some Tory exiles. They were headed by
Colonel Butler, a partisan commander of note, and by Joseph Brant, a
half Indian by birth, a whole Indian in cruelty. Unhappily, at Wyoming,
the soil was claimed both by Connecticut and Pennsylvania. From this
conflict of pretensions and consequent laxity of law, there had been the
freer license for rigours against the Loyalists. Few of them in that
district but had undergone imprisonment, or exile, or confiscation of
property; and thus they were provoked to form a savage alliance and to
perpetrate a fierce revenge." (Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII.,
Chap. lviii., pp. 382, 383.)]
[Footnote 86: Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. V., Chap.
ix., p. 165.]
[Footnote 87: Brant was not at Wyoming. This appears from Butler's
report; and compare Broadhead documents, Vol. VIII., p. 572 (note by Mr.
Bancroft).]
[Footnote 88: This is what Dr. Ramsay, in his account quoted above, on
pages 85 and 86, erroneously states was a proposed conference as to
terms of capitulation.]
[Footnote 89: _Note._--Mr. Hildreth says that "Wyoming did not number
three thousand inhabitants." (History of the United States, Vol. III.,
Chap. xxxviii., p. 262.) The number of the slain could not have been
greater than those mentioned above by Dr. Ramsay (p. 86), who states
that, instead of those in the garrison being "indiscriminately
butchered," they were allowed to cross the Susquehanna and make their
way through the woods to neighbouring settlements.]
[Footnote 90: Colonel Stone states that the Provincials "intended to
make a quick movement, and take the enemy by surprise;" but their
purpose was discovered by an Indian scout. He then gives the following
account of the battle and of the "massacre" which followed:
"The Provincials pushed rapidly forward; but the British and Indians
were prepared to receive them, 'their line being formed a small distance
in front of their camp, in a plain thinly covered with pine, shrub, oaks
and undergrowth, and extending from the river to a marsh at the foot of
the mountain' (Marshall). 'On coming in view of the enemy, the
Americans, who had previously marched in a single column, instantly
deployed into a line of equal extent, and attacked from right to left at
the same time' (Col. Z. Butler's letter). 'The right of the Americans
was commanded by Colonel Zebulon Butler, opposed to Colonel John Butler,
commanding the enemy's left. Colonel Dennison commanded the left of the
Americans, and was opposed by the Indians forming the enemy's right'
(Chapman). The battle commenced at about forty rods distance, without
much execution at the onset, as the brushwood interposed obstacles to
the sight. The militia stood the fire well for a short time, and as they
pressed forward there was some giving way on the enemy's right.
Unluckily, just at this moment the appalling war-whoop of the Indians
rang in the rear of the Americans' left; the Indian leader, having
conducted a large party of his warriors through the marsh, succeeded in
turning Dennison's flank. A heavy and destructive fire was
simultaneously poured into the American ranks; and amidst the confusion,
Colonel Dennison directed his men to 'fall back,' to avoid being
surrounded, and to gain time to bring his men into order again. This
direction was mistaken for an order to 'retreat,' whereupon the whole
line broke, and every effort of their officers to restore order was
unavailing. At this stage of the battle, and while thus engaged, the
American officers mostly fell. The flight was general. The Indians,
throwing away their rifles, rushed forward with their tomahawks, making
dreadful havoc; answering the cries for mercy with the hatchet, and
adding to the universal consternation those terrific yells which invest
savage warfare with tenfold horror. So alert was the foe in his bloody
pursuit, that less than sixty of the Americans escaped either the rifle
or the tomahawk. Of the militia officers, there fell one
lieutenant-colonel, one major, ten captains, six lieutenants, and two
ensigns. Colonel Durkee and Captains Hewett and Ransom were likewise
killed. Some of the fugitives escaped by swimming the river, and others
by flying to the mountains. As the news of the defeat spread down the
valley, the greater part of the women and children, and those who had
remained to protect them, likewise ran to the woods and mountains, while
those who could not escape thus sought refuge in Fort Wyoming. The
Indians, apparently wearied with pursuit and slaughter, desisted and
betook themselves to secure the spoils of the vanquished.
"On the morning of the 4th, the day after the battle, Colonel John
Butler, with the combined British and Indian forces, appeared before
Fort Wyoming and demanded its surrender. 'The inhabitants, both within
and without the fort, did not on that emergency sustain a character for
courage becoming men of spirit in adversity. They were so intimidated as
to give up without fighting; great numbers ran off; and those who
remained all but betrayed Colonel Zebulon Butler, their commander' (Col.
Z. Butler's letter). 'The British Colonel Butler sent several flags,
requiring an unconditional surrender of his opposing namesake and the
few continental troops yet remaining, but offering to spare the
inhabitants their property and effects. But with the American colonel
the victor would not treat on any terms; and the people thereupon
compelled Colonel Dennison to comply with conditions which his commander
had refused.' The consequence was that Colonel Zebulon Butler contrived
to escape from the fort with the remains of Captain Hewett's company of
regulars (_Idem._), and Colonel Dennison entered into articles of
capitulation. 'By these it was stipulated that the settlers should be
disarmed, and their garrison demolished; that all prisoners and public
stores should be given up; that the property of the people called Tories
should be made good, and they be permitted to remain peaceably upon
their farms. In behalf of the settlers it was stipulated that their
lives and property should be preserved, and that they should be left in
the unmolested occupancy of their farms' (Chapman's History).
"Unhappily, however, the British commander either could not or would not
enforce the terms of capitulation (see page 91, where Mr. Hildreth says
that 'Colonel Butler, desirous to fulfil these terms of capitulation,
presently marched away with his Tories, but he could not induce the
Indians to follow. They remained behind, burned the houses, ravaged the
fields, killed such as resisted, and drove the miserable women and
children through the woods and mountains to seek refuge where they
might.'), which were to a great extent disregarded as well by the Tories
as the Indians. Instead of finding protection, the valley was again laid
waste, the houses and improvements were destroyed by fire, and the
country plundered. Families were broken up and dispersed, men and their
wives separated, mothers torn from their children and some of them
carried into captivity, while far the greater number fled to the
mountains, and wandered through the wilderness to the older settlements.
Some died of their wounds, others from want and fatigue, while others
were still lost in the wilderness or were heard of no more. Several
perished in a great swamp in the neighbourhood, which, from the
circumstance, acquired the name of 'the Shades of Death,' and retains it
to this day. These were painful scenes. But it does not appear that
anything like a massacre followed the capitulation." (Life of Joseph
Brant, and Border Wars of the American Revolution, Vol. I., Chap. xv.,
pp. 334-336.)]
CHAPTER XXXV.
AMERICAN RETALIATION FOR THE ALLEGED "MASSACRE OF WYOMING," AS NARRATED
BY AMERICAN HISTORIANS.
We will now state from the same historical authorities the _revenge_
which the continentals took for the "Massacre of Wyoming."
Dr. Ramsay says: "Soon after the destruction of the Wyoming settlement,
an expedition was carried on against the Indians by Colonel Zebulon
Butler, of the Pennsylvania troops. He and his party having gained the
head of the Delaware, October 1st, marched down the river two days, and
then struck across the country to the Susquehanna. They burnt or
destroyed the Indian villages both in that quarter and the other
settlements; but the inhabitants escaped. The destruction was extended
for several miles on both sides of the Susquehanna. They completed the
expedition in sixteen days."[91]
This destruction of "Indian villages" and "other settlements" to the
extent of "several miles on both sides of the Susquehanna" was more than
an equivalent revenge for the destruction of Wyoming. But it was only
the beginning of vengeance and destruction, not only against the
immediate offenders in the case of Wyoming, but the pretext for a
resolution and order of Congress itself for the entire destruction of
the Six Indian Nations, though their chiefs had held no council and
given no order as to the attack upon the settlement of Wyoming, and had
nothing to do with it, except that one of their tribes, with possibly a
few stragglers from some of the other tribes. With this exception, as is
shown by the narratives above quoted, the Six Nations had no connection
with the destruction of Wyoming; were living quietly and industriously
on their well-cultivated farms, though friendly to the royal cause. Yet
Congress, by an order which, we believe, has no parallel in the annals
of any civilized nation, commands the complete destruction of those
people as a nation. It is cruel, indeed, and revolting to humanity, to
kill and scalp ever so small a number of individuals, including women
and children; but is it less cruel and revolting to render them
houseless by thousands, to destroy the fruits of their labours, to exile
them from their homes (after having destroyed them), and leave them to
nakedness and starvation? Yet such was the case in the execution of the
order of Congress for the extermination of the Six Nations.
"The determination," says Dr. Andrews, "was now taken by Congress to
destroy this Indian nation. * * The intelligence of the preparations
that were making against them was received by the Indians with great
courage and firmness. * * They took a strong position in the most woody
and mountainous part of the country, which they fortified with great
judgment. * * General Sullivan attacked them in this encampment on the
29th of August. They stood a hot cannonade for more than two hours; but
the breastwork of logs being almost destroyed, and the Americans having
reached the top of the hill on their left, they were apprehensive of
being surrounded, and retreated immediately with the utmost speed. * *
The behaviour of the Indians on this day was very courageous; they
returned the fire of the Americans with great spirit and regularity; and
would, it was thought, have maintained their ground had not the
Americans been provided with a train of artillery, to which the defeat
of the Indians was principally owing. * * This engagement proved
decisive. After their trenches were forced, they fled without making any
further endeavour to rally. They were pursued two or three miles; but
their flight was so swift that they could not be overtaken. Their loss
in slain and wounded was very considerable, though few prisoners were
made.
"The consternation occasioned among the Indians by this defeat was such,
that they lost all hope of retrieving their fortunes, and dropped all
idea of further resistance. As the Americans advanced, they retreated
before them with the utmost precipitation, and suffered them to proceed,
without any obstruction, in the destructive operations they were
commissioned to perform.
"In pursuance of the orders he had received, General Sullivan penetrated
into the heart of the country inhabited by the Five Nations, spreading
everywhere the most extensive desolation. His letter to the Congress,
giving an account of the progress and proceedings of the army under his
command, was as complete a journal of destruction as ever was penned. No
less than forty towns and settlements were destroyed, besides detached
habitations. All their fields of corn and all their orchards and
plantations; whatever, in short, was in a state of cultivation,
underwent the same fate. The devastation was such, that on the American
army's leaving that country not a house was left standing to their
knowledge, nor an Indian to be seen.
"Such was the issue of this celebrated expedition, undertaken by way of
retaliation for the outrages which the Indians (Senecas) had committed
on the frontiers, and particularly in destroying the unfortunate
settlement of Wyoming during the preceding summer.
"What rendered this total ruin of the country possessed by the Five
Nations the more remarkable was the degree of knowledge and expertness
in agriculture and in various domestic arts to which it was now for the
first time discovered that the Indians had attained. It appeared by
General Sullivan's account that the lands about the towns were
excellently cultivated, and their houses large and elegantly
constructed. The extent of their industry may be conjectured by his
asserting that the quantity of corn destroyed could not, by a moderate
computation, amount to less than 160,000 bushels; that their orchards
were so well stocked that no less than 1,500 trees were cut down in one
orchard only, numbers of which had evidently been planted many years;
and that their garden grounds contained immense quantities of vegetables
of every kind."[92]
Mr. Bancroft represents what he in one place terms "the great
expedition" as a mere raid for the chastisement of the Seneca Indians.
He says: "Moved by the massacres of Wyoming and Cherry Valley, Congress,
on the 25th of February, had directed Washington to protect the inland
frontiers and chastise the Seneca Indians. * * The best part of the
season was gone when Sullivan, on the last of July, moved from Wyoming.
His arrival at Tioga sent terror to the Indians. * * Several of the
chiefs said to Colonel Bolton, in council, 'Why does not the great king,
our father, assist us? Our villages will be cut off, and we can no
longer fight his battles.'
"On the 22nd of August, the day after he was joined by New York troops
under General James Clinton, Sullivan began his march up the Tioga into
the heart of the Indian country. On the same day, Little David, a Mohawk
chief, delivered a message from himself and the Six Nations to General
Haldimand, then Governor of Canada: 'Brother! for these three years past
the Six Nations have been running a race against fresh enemies, and are
almost out of breath. Now we shall see whether you are our loving strong
brother, or whether you deceive us. Brother! we are still strong for the
King of England, if you will show us that he is a man of his word, and
that he will not abandon his brothers the Six Nations.' * * The march
into the country of the Senecas, on the left, extended to Genesee; on
the right, detachments reached Cayuga lake. After destroying eighteen
villages and their fields of corn, Sullivan, whose army had suffered for
want of supplies, returned to New Jersey."[93]
Mr. Hildreth's account of this expedition, though brief, is more
comprehensive and satisfactory than that of Mr. Bancroft. Mr. Hildreth
says:
"The command of the enterprise against the Indians, declined by Gates,
was given to Sullivan. Three brigades from the main army, under Poor,
Hand, and Maxwell--New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey
troops--were assembled at Wyoming. A New York brigade ('upwards of 1,000
men,' says Dr. Ramsay), under General James Clinton, hitherto employed
in guarding the frontier of that State, crossed from the Mohawk to Lake
Otsego (one of the sources of the Susquehanna), dammed the lake, and so
raised its level, and then by breaking away the dam produced an
artificial flood, by the aid of which the boats were rapidly carried
down the north-east branch of the Susquehanna, to form a junction with
Sullivan. * *
"Sullivan's army, amounting to 5,000 men, passed up the Chemung branch
of the Susquehanna. At Newton, now Elmira, they encountered a strong
body of the enemy,[94] partly Indians and partly Tories, under Brant,
the Butlers and Johnson, entrenched on a rising ground and disposed in
ambuscade. Sullivan detached Poor to gain the rear, while he attacked
them in front with artillery. Having put them to rout, he crossed to
the hitherto unexplored valley of the Genesee. That want of food might
compel the Indians and their Tory allies to emigrate, everything was
ravaged. The ancient Indian orchards were cut down; many bushels of corn
were destroyed, and eighteen villages, composed largely of frame houses,
were burned. Provisions failed. Such at least was the reason that
Sullivan gave, and the attack upon Niagara, the great object of the
enterprise, was abandoned.
"A simultaneous expedition from Pittsburg ascended the Alleghany, and
visited with similar devastation all the villages along the river.
Pending these operations, and to prevent any aid from Canada, divers
artifices were employed by Washington to create the belief of an
intended invasion of that province."[95]
The account of this expedition given by Dr. Ramsay corresponds, with
some additional particulars, with that given by Dr. Andrews, as above
quoted, and almost in the same words. He says:
"The Indians who form the confederacy of the Six Nations, commonly
called Mohawks, were the objects of this expedition. They inhabit that
immense and fertile tract of country which lies between New England, the
Middle States, and the Province of Canada. * * The Indians, on hearing
of the expedition projected against them, acted with firmness. They
collected their strength, took possession of proper ground, and
fortified it with judgment. General Sullivan, on the 29th of August,
attacked them in their works. They stood a cannonade for more than two
hours, but then gave way. This engagement proved decisive. After the
trenches were forced, the Indians fled without making any attempt to
rally. The consternation occasioned among them by this defeat was so
great, that they gave up all ideas of further resistance. As the
Americans advanced into their settlements, the Indians retreated before
them, without throwing any obstruction in their way. General Sullivan
penetrated into the heart of the country inhabited by the Mohawks, and
spread desolation everywhere. Many settlements in the form of towns were
destroyed. All their fields of corn, and whatever was in a state of
cultivation, underwent the same fate. Scarcely anything in the form of
a house was left standing, nor was an Indian to be seen.
"To the surprise of the Americans, they found the lands about the Indian
towns well cultivated, and their houses both large and commodious. The
quantity of corn destroyed was immense. Orchards, in which were several
hundred fruit trees, were cut down; and of them many appeared to have
been planted for a long series of years. Their gardens, replenished with
a variety of useful vegetables, were laid waste."[96]
From this review of the invasions and contests between the Americans and
Indians, it is clear that the Indians were the greater sufferers in life
and property. The mutual hatreds of former years, when the colonies were
warring with the French (instead of being, as now, in alliance with
them), and the Indians were in the interest and service of the French,
seems to have been perpetuated on both sides, and to have become more
intense on the part of the Americans after the failure of their efforts
to secure the Indians to their side. The old contests between the
Southern colonists and the Indians were renewed and repeated with
intense bitterness; and in the Northern colonies the policy of Congress
and its agents was to crush and exterminate the Indians altogether. In
acts of individual cruelty, their historical and characteristic mode of
war, the Indians exceeded the Americans; but in acts of wholesale
destruction of life and property, the Americans far outdid the Indians,
adopting the Indian instead of a civilized mode of warfare, and
including in their sweep of destruction women and children as well as
men.
The employment of Indians at all on the part of Great Britain against
the colonists, is, in our opinion, the blackest crime recorded in the
annals of the British Government, prompted apparently by the cowardly
and execrable General Gage, but condemned by Generals Carleton and
Burgoyne, as well as by General Howe. The use, however, which the
Americans sought to make of the Indians, and their cruel and
exterminating mode of warfare against them, leave them no ground of
boasting on the score of humanity against either the British Government
or the Indians.
To this may be added the unfortunate condition and treatment of the
Loyalists or "Tories" among the Indians. For adhering, or suspected of
adhering to the faith of their fathers, and even of the present
persecution down to within less than six years, they were, however
peaceably they might be living, driven from their homes and their
property seized and alienated, and they left no place for the soles of
their feet except among the Indians, and then termed monsters and
treated as traitors, for joining their protectors in the defence of
their places of refuge, and, as far as possible, for the recovery of
their homes. What else, as men, as human beings, could they do? They
were denied and banished from the homes which they had, unless they
would reverse their political faith and oath of allegiance, and forswear
allegiance, to enrol themselves in arms against the country of their
forefathers and of their affection. They could not but be chafed with
the loss of their freedom of speech and of conviction of their
citizenship and their property, and of being driven into exile; and they
must have been more or less than men had they not acted loyally and to
the best of their ability with their protectors, however abhorrent to
their views and feelings were many acts of the Indians--acts imitated
and even excelled, in so many respects, by the Americans themselves, in
their depredations into the Indian territories.
COLONEL STONE'S ACCOUNT, IN DETAIL, OF GENERAL SULLIVAN'S EXPEDITION OF
EXTERMINATION OF THE SIX NATIONS OF INDIANS.
In his _Life of Brant, including the Border Wars of the American
Revolution_, Colonel Stone gives a much more elaborate account of this
expedition of destruction against the Six Nations, or rather the Five
Nations, for the Oneidas and some of the Tuscaroras joined the
Americans. Colonel Stone narrates the progress and work of General
Sullivan from place to place. We will add a few extracts from his
narrative, after some preliminary explanations.
Colonel Stone corrects a very common error, which views the whole race
of North American Indians as essentially alike--"all as the same roving,
restless, houseless race of hunters and fishermen, without a local
habitation and with scarce a name." He gives examples of the varieties
of Indian character, not less marked than between the English and the
French--some following the buffalo in his migrations, others finding a
precarious subsistence in the forest chase, others again fishing and
trapping; tribes who pass most of their time in canoes, while others,
woodland tribes, cultivate the soil, and gradually become organized, and
acquire a higher state of civilization, and present a marked difference
of character and taste from the hunter and fishermen tribes. "This
higher state of social organization among the Six Nations," says Colonel
Stone "greatly increased the difference. They had many towns and
villages giving evidence of perseverance. They were organized into
communities whose social and political institutions, simple as they
were, were still as distinct and well-defined as those of the American
Confederacy. They had now acquired some arts, and were enjoying many of
the comforts of civilized life. Not content with small patches of
cleared lands for the raising of a few vegetables, they possessed
cultivated fields and orchards of great productiveness at the West.
Especially was this the fact with regard to the Cayugas and Senecas. The
Mohawks having been driven from their own rich lands (in the valley of
the Mohawk and Susquehanna rivers), the extensive domains of the
westernmost tribes of the confederacy (in the Genesee country) formed
the granary of the whole. And in consequence of the superior social and
political organization just referred to, and the Spartan-like character
incident to the forest life, the Six Nations, though not the most
numerous, were beyond doubt the most formidable of the tribes then in
alliance with the Crown. It was justly considered, therefore, that the
only way _to strike them effectively would be to destroy their homes_
and the growing produce of their farms, and thus, _by cutting off their
means of supply, drive them from their own country deeper into the
interior, and perhaps throw them altogether upon their British allies
for subsistence_."
These facts will go far to account for the desire of the Mohawks to
recover the homes from which they had been driven, and for the relations
between the Six Nations to the Crown of Great Britain and the revolting
portion of the colonists.
It has been intimated that the Oneida Indians and part of the Onondagos
adhered to the revolting colonists. Colonel Stone observes: "It was the
intention of General Sullivan that General Clinton should employ in his
division as large a number of the Oneida warriors as could be induced to
engage in the service. The latter officer was opposed to this
arrangement; but through the importunities of Sullivan, the Rev. Mr.
Kirkland, their missionary, who was now a chaplain in the army, had been
summoned to Albany for consultation. From thence Mr. Kirkland was
despatched to Pennsylvania, directly to join Sullivan's division; while
to Mr. Deane, the interpreter connected with the Indian Commissioner at
Fort Schuyler (formerly Fort Stanwix), was confided the charge of
negotiating with the Oneida chiefs on the subject. The Oneidas
volunteered for the expedition almost to a man; while those of the
Onondagos who adhered to the cause of the Americans were equally
desirous of proving their fidelity by their deeds. Under these
circumstances, Clinton wrote to Sullivan on the 26th, that on the
following Saturday Mr. Deane, with the Indian warriors, would join him
at the head of the lake. A sudden revolution, however, was wrought in
their determination by an address to the Oneidas from General Haldimand
(Governor of Canada), received at Fort Schuyler the 22nd. This document
was transmitted to them in their own language; and its tenor was so
alarming as to induce them suddenly to change their purpose, judging
very correctly, from the threats of Haldimand, that their presence was
necessary at home for the defence of their own castles. Still Mr. Deane
wrote that an arrangement was on foot by which he hoped to obtain the
co-operation of a considerable number of the Oneida warriors."
"General Haldimand's address was written in the Iroquois (Mohawk)
language, of which a translation was made by Mr. Deane and enclosed to
General Clinton."
In this address General Haldimand charged the Oneida Indians with having
"taken a different course from the rest of the Five Nations, your
confederates, and have likewise deserted the King's cause through the
deceitful machinations and snares of the rebels, who intimidated you
with their numerous armies, by which means you became bewildered and
forgot all your engagements with and former care and favour from the
Great King of England, your Father. You also soon forgot the frequent
bad usage and continual encroachments of the Americans upon the Indian
lands throughout the continent. I say, therefore, that at the breaking
out of these troubles, you firmly declared to _observe a strict
neutrality in the dispute_, and made your declaration known to Sir Guy
Carleton, my predecessor, _who much approved of it, provided you were in
earnest_.[97] I have hitherto strictly observed and examined your
conduct, and find that you did not adhere to your assertion, although I
could trace no reason, on the side of Government as well as the Indians,
why you should act so treacherous and double a part; by which means we,
not mistrusting your fidelity, have had many losses among the King's
subjects, and the Five Nations, your friends and connections."
After further reproaches, admonitions, and threatenings, General
Haldimand concluded in the following severe words: "These are facts,
Brothers, that, unless you are lost to every sense of feeling, cannot
but recall in you even a most hearty repentance and deep remorse for
your past vile actions."
The effect of General Haldimand's address was to cause a conference--Mr.
Deane, at the head of thirty-five Oneida warriors--with General Clinton,
to apologize for the absence of their brethren from the expedition, and
to make those explanations in regard to their own situation already
communicated by Mr. Deane by letter, together with the address of
General Haldimand. In his reply, General Clinton, among other things,
said: "It is not my desire that the whole of your warriors should leave
their castles. I have given a general invitation to our brethren the
Oneidas, the Tuscaroras, and such of the Onondagos as have entered into
friendship with us. In order to give all our Indian friends an equal
chance of evidencing their spirit and determination to partake of our
fortune, I am entirely satisfied that such only should join me as think
proper."
Colonel Stone, after stating that on the 22nd of August General Clinton
arrived at Tioga, and formed a junction with General Sullivan, says:
"The entire command amounted to 5,000, consisting of the brigades of
Generals Clinton, Hand, Maxwell, and Poor, together with Proctor's
artillery and a corps of riflemen." Then, after relating the battle of
Newton (the present site of Elmira), as described in extracts from the
historians in previous pages, Colonel Stone narrates the progress and
work of the invading army of extermination and destruction. We give the
following extracts from his narrative:
"It is apprehended that but few of the present generation are thoroughly
aware of the advances which the Indians, in the wide and beautiful
country of the Cayugas and Senecas, had made in the march of
civilization. They had several towns and many large villages laid out
with a considerable degree of regularity. They had framed houses, some
of them well furnished, having chimneys, and painted. They had broad and
productive fields; and in addition to an abundance of apples, were in
the enjoyment of the pear, and the still more delicious peach. But after
the battle of Newton, the Indians everywhere fled at Sullivan's
advance, and the whole country was swept as with a besom of destruction.
On the 4th (September), as the army advanced, they destroyed a small
settlement of eight houses, and two days afterwards reached the more
considerable town of Kendaia, containing about twenty houses, neatly
built and well finished. These were reduced to ashes, and the army spent
nearly a day in destroying the fields of corn and the fruit trees. Of
these there were great abundance, and many of them appeared to be
ancient."
"On the 7th, Sullivan crossed the outlet of Seneca Lake, and moved in
three divisions upon the town of Kanadaseagea, the Seneca capital,
containing about sixty houses, with gardens and numerous orchards of
apple and peach trees. It was Sullivan's object to surround the town and
take it by surprise. But although Butler had endeavoured to induce the
Indians to make a stand at the place, his importunities were of no
avail. They said it was no use to contend with such an army; and their
capital was consequently abandoned as the other towns had been before
the Americans could reach it. A detachment of 400 men was sent down on
the west side of the lake to destroy Gotheseunquean, and the plantations
in the neighbourhood; while at the same time a number of volunteers,
under Colonel Harper, made a forced march in the direction of Cayuga
Lake, and destroyed Schoyere. Meantime the residue of the army was
employed, on the 8th, in the destruction of the town, together with the
fruit trees and fields of corn and beans. Here, as elsewhere, _the work
of destruction was thorough and complete_."
"The main army then moved forward upon Kanandaigua, at which place it
arrived in two days. Here they 'found twenty-three very elegant houses,
mostly framed, and in general large, together with very extensive fields
of corn--all of which were destroyed. From Kanandaigua they proceeded to
the small town of Honeoye, consisting of ten houses, which were
immediately burnt to the ground. A post was established by General
Sullivan at Honeoye, to maintain which a strong garrison was left, with
heavy stores and one field-piece. With this precautionary measure the
army prepared to advance upon the yet more considerable town of
Genesee--the great capital of the western tribes of the
confederacy--containing their stores and their broadest cultivated
fields."
"The valley of the Genesee, for its beauty and fertility, was beheld by
the army of Sullivan with astonishment and delight. Though an Indian
country, and peopled only by wild men of the woods, its rich intervales
presented the appearance of long cultivation, and were then smiling with
the harvests of ripening corn. Indeed, the Indians themselves professed
not to know when or by whom the lands upon that stream were first
brought into cultivation. Instead of a howling wilderness, Sullivan and
his troops found the Genesee flats, and many other districts of the
country, resembling much more the orchards and farms and gardens of
civilized life. But all was now doomed to speedy devastation. The
Genesee Castle was destroyed. The troops scoured the whole region round
about, and burnt and destroyed everything that came in their way. The
town of Genesee contained 128 houses, mostly large and very elegant. It
was beautifully situated, almost encircled with a clear flat, extending
a number of miles, over which extensive fields of corn were waving,
together with every kind of vegetable that could be conceived. But the
entire army was immediately engaged in destroying it, and the axe and
the torch soon transformed the whole of that beautiful region from the
character of a garden to a scene of sickening desolation. Forty Indian
towns, the largest containing 128 houses, were destroyed. Corn, gathered
and ungathered, to the amount of 160,000 bushels, shared the same fate;
the fruit trees were cut down; and the Indians were hunted like wild
beasts, till neither house, nor fruit tree, nor field of corn, nor
inhabitant remained in the whole country. The gardens were enriched with
great quantities of useful vegetables of different kinds. The size of
the corn-fields, as well as the high degree of cultivation, excited
wonder, and the ears of corn were so remarkably large that many of them
measured twenty-two inches in length. So numerous were the fruit trees,
that in one orchard they cut down 1,500."
"Having completed the objects contemplated by the expedition to the
point at which he had arrived, General Sullivan recrossed the Genesee
with his army the 16th of September, and set out on his return. Why he
did not follow up his success, and strike the enemy's citadel at
Niagara, which at that time was in no situation for formidable
resistance, is a question difficult of solution. Unquestionably, in the
organization of the expedition, the conquest of Niagara, the
headquarters of the foe of all descriptions, and the seat of British
influence and power among the Indians, was one of the principal objects
in view. Certain it is, that the most important feature of the
enterprise was not undertaken; and it will be seen in the sequel that
but small ultimate advantage resulted from the campaign. Stimulated by a
keener thirst for revenge, clouds of savages were again and again seen
to sweep through the valley of the Mohawk with the scalping knife and
the torch."
"The return of the army was along the same tract by which it had
advanced. On the 20th, having recrossed the outlet of Seneca Lake,
Colonel Zebulon Butler was detached with the rifle corps of 500 men to
pass round the foot of Cayuga Lake, and lay waste the Indian towns on
its eastern shore; while Lieutenant-Colonel Dearborn, with 200 men, was
detached to perform the same service on the south-western shore. The
main army pursued the most direct route to the Chemung and Tioga. On the
26th Colonel Dearborn's detachment returned, and on the 28th they were
rejoined by Colonel Zebulon Butler, who had burnt three towns of the
Cayugas, including their capital. Dearborn had burnt six towns in his
route, destroying at the same time large quantities of corn. On the same
day, Colonels Van Courtlandt and Dayton were detached upon a similar
service--for the destruction of large fields of corn growing upon the
banks of the Tioga and its tributaries."
"The army then resumed its march, and passing through Wyoming, arrived
at Easton on the 15th of October. The distance thence to Genesee Castle
was 280 miles. With the exception of the action at Newton, the
achievements of the army in battle were not great. But it had scoured a
broad extent of country, and had laid more towns in ashes than had ever
been destroyed on the continent before. The red men were driven from
their beautiful country, their habitations left in ruins, their fields
laid waste, their orchards uprooted, and their altars and the tombs of
their fathers overthrown."[98]
All the devastations of settlements, burnings and slaughter committed by
the "Tories and Indians" during the whole war shrink into insignificance
in regard to extent of territory, the number of inhabitants and towns,
the extent of cultivated farms and gardens, when compared with General
Sullivan's one vast sweep of ruin and misery, in the course of which, as
the historian says, "_the Indians were hunted like wild beasts, till
neither house nor fruit tree, nor field of corn nor inhabitant, remained
in the whole country_."
All this was done by an express order of Congress to the
Commander-in-Chief; and for doing this General Sullivan and his army
received the cordial approbation and thanks of the Congress.
It was very natural that the survivors of the Six Nations and the
"Tories," who took refuge and resided among them, should seek revenge on
every possible occasion, in months following, in the regions of their
own sufferings, especially upon those individuals and communities who
they knew had prompted and aided the executioners of Congress. There
were partizan leaders, with adventurous followers, on both sides, in the
Southern as well as in the Northern States, who inflicted many acts of
barbarity and desolation; but these retaliatory cruelties and raids of
destruction acquired a greater intensity of bitterness and cruelty after
the terrible ravages and cruelties perpetrated by General Sullivan and
his army.
Besides, the history of the Indians, as well as of the "Tories,"
throughout the whole war, was written by their adversaries, and it was
considered a master-stroke of policy to exaggerate the alleged misdeeds
and paint the character of both the Indians and Tories in the blackest
colours. The story of the "Massacre of Wyoming" is a sample of the
manner in which the American writers of the day made history against the
Indians and the "Tories." When facts could not be sufficiently seasoned
to stimulate recruits for the army and appropriations from the people
for its support, fiction pure and simple was resorted to; and Dr.
Franklin himself did not think it unworthy of his antecedents, age and
position to employ this method to bring disrepute upon the "Tories," the
Indians, and the British Government itself, and to excite the hatred of
his countrymen against them. The accomplished author of the _Life of
Brant and the Border Wars of the American Revolution_ forcibly observes:
"The Indians of the Six Nations, in common with their chief, were loaded
with execrations for atrocities of which all were alike innocent,
because the deeds recorded were never committed, it having been the
policy of the public writers and those in authority, not only to magnify
actual occurrences, but sometimes, when those were wanting, to draw upon
their imaginations for such deeds of ferocity and bloodshed as might
best serve to keep alive the strongest feelings of indignation against
the parent country, and likewise induce the people to take the field in
revenge, if not driven thither by the nobler impulse of patriotism."[99]
Such deliberate fictions, for political purposes, as that by Dr.
Franklin, just referred to, were probably rare; but the investigations
into which the author has been, in the preparation of the present work,
have satisfied him that, from other causes, much exaggeration and
falsehood has obtained a permanent footing in American history. Most
historians of that period, English and American, wrote too near the time
when the events they were describing occurred, for a dispassionate
investigation of the truth; and other writers who have succeeded, have
too often been content to follow the beaten track, without incurring the
labour of diligent and calm inquiry. Reference has been made above to
Wyoming, concerning which, to this day, the world has been abused with
monstrous fictions, with tales of horror never enacted. Nor were the
exaggerations in regard to the invasion of Wyoming greater than were
those connected with the irruption into and destruction of Cherry
Valley, as the reader will discover in the course of the ensuing pages.
Indeed, the writer, in preparation of materials for this work, has
encountered so much that is false recorded in history as sober verity,
that he has at times been disposed almost to universal scepticism in
regard to uninspired narration.
The "deliberate fictions, for political purposes, by Dr. Franklin," as
the biographer of Brant expresses it, "were written as facts;" or, as
the author quoted expresses it, "the well-known scalp story of Dr.
Franklin was long believed, and recently revived and included in several
books of authentic history." The details of Dr. Franklin's publication
were so minute and varied as to create a belief that they were perfectly
true. "It was long supposed to be authentic," as the author quoted says
in introducing the document, in Appendix No. 1 to Volume I., "but has
since been ascertained to be a publication from the pen of Dr. Franklin,
for political purposes."
The names introduced are of course fictitious, as well as the
statements, but introduced with such an air of plausibility as to
preclude the suspicion that they were fictitious. The publication will
be a curiosity to most of the readers of these pages, as it has been to
the writer. It is as follows:
_Extract of a letter from Captain Gerrish, of the New England Militia,
dated Albany, March 7th_, 1782:
"The peltry taken in the expedition will, as you see, amount to a good
deal of money. The possession of this booty at first gave us pleasure;
but we were struck with horror to find among the packages eight large
ones, containing scalps of our unhappy folks taken in the last three
years by the Seneca Indians, from the inhabitants of the frontiers of
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, and sent by them as a
present to Colonel Haldimand, Governor of Canada, in order to be
transmitted by him to England. They were accompanied by the following
curious letter to that gentleman:
"TIOGA, January 3rd, 1782.
"May it please Your Excellency,
"At the request of the Seneca chiefs, I send herewith to your
Excellency, under the care of James Boyd, eight packs of scalps, cured,
dried, hooped, and painted with all the Indian triumphal marks, of which
the following is invoice and explanation:
"No. 1, containing forty-three scalps of Congress soldiers killed in
different skirmishes; these are stretched on black hoops, four inch
diameter; the inside of the skin painted red, with a small black spot to
note their being killed with bullets. Also sixty-two farmers, killed in
their houses, the hoops red; the skin painted brown, and marked with a
hoe; a black circle all round, to denote their being surprised in the
night; and a black hatchet in the middle, signifying their being killed
with that weapon.
"No. 2, containing ninety-eight farmers killed in their houses; hoops
red; figure of a hoe, to mark their profession; great white circle and
sun, to show they were surprised in the daytime; a _little red foot_,
to show they stood upon their defence, and died fighting for their lives
and families.
"No. 3, containing ninety-seven farmers; hoops green, to show they were
killed in the fields; a large white circle, with a little round mark on
it for the sun, to show that it was in the daytime; black bullet mark on
some, hatchet on others.
"No. 4, containing 102 farmers, mixed of the several marks above; only
eighteen marked with a little yellow flame, to denote their being
prisoners burnt alive, after being scalped, their nails pulled out by
the roots, and other torments; one of these latter supposed to be of a
rebel clergyman; his band being fixed to the hoop of his scalp. Most of
the farmers appear by the hair to be young or middle-aged men; there
being but sixty-seven grey heads among them all, which makes the service
more essential.
"No. 5, containing eighty-eight scalps of women; hair long, braided in
the Indian fashion, to show they were mothers; hoops blue; skin yellow
ground, with red tadpoles, to represent, by way of triumph, the tears of
grief occasioned to their relations; a black scalping-knife or hatchet
at the bottom, to mark their being killed with these instruments;
seventeen others, hair very grey; black hoops; plain brown colour, no
mark but the short club or cassetete, to show that they were knocked
down dead, or had their brains beat out.
"No. 6, containing 193 boys' scalps, of various ages; small green hoops;
whitish ground on the skin, with red tears in the middle, and black
bullet marks, knife, hatchet, or club, as their death happened.
"No. 7, 211 girls' scalps, big and little; small yellow hoops; white
ground; tears, hatchet, club, scalping knife, etc.
"No. 8. This package is a mixture of all the varieties above mentioned,
to the number of 122; with a box of birch bark, containing twenty-nine
little infants' scalps of various sizes; small white hoops, white
ground.
"With these packs, the chiefs send to your Excellency the following
speech delivered by Coneiogatchie in council, interpreted by the elder
Moore, the trader, and taken down by me in waiting:
"'_Father!_--We send you herewith many scalps, that you may see that we
are not idle friends.--A blue belt.
"'_Father!_--We wish you to send these scalps over the water to the
Great King, that he may regard them and be refreshed; and that he may
see our faithfulness in destroying his enemies, and be convinced that
his presents have not been made to ungrateful people.--A blue and white
belt with red tassels.
"'_Father!_--Attend to what I am going to say; it is a matter of much
weight. The Great King's enemies are many, and they grow fast in number.
They were formerly like young panthers; they could neither bite nor
scratch; we could play with them safely; we feared nothing they could do
to us. But now their bodies are become big as the elk and strong as the
buffalo; they have also got great and sharp claws. They have driven us
out of our country by taking part in your quarrel. We expect the Great
King will give us another country, that our children may live after us,
and be his friends and children as we are. Say this for us to the Great
King. To enforce it we give this belt.--A great white belt with blue
tassels.
"'_Father!_--We have only to say further, that your traders exact more
than ever for their goods; and our hunting is lessened by the war, so
that we have fewer skins to give for them. This ruins us. Think of some
remedy. We are poor, and you have plenty of everything. We know you will
send us powder and guns, and knives and hatchets; but we also want
shirts and blankets.--A little white belt.'
"I do not doubt but that your Excellency will think it proper to give
some further encouragement to those honest people. The high prices they
complain of are the necessary effect of the war. Whatever presents may
be sent for them through my hands shall be distributed with prudence and
fidelity. I have the honour of being
"Your Excellency's most obedient and most humble servant,
"JAMES CRAUFURD."
This chapter of Congress vengeance to exterminate the Six Nations of
Indians, and of its writers to picture them as human monsters, cannot be
better concluded than in the words of the historian of Brant,[100] and
of the Border Wars of the American Revolution:
"No Indian pen traces the history of their tribes and nations, or
records the deeds of their warriors and chiefs, their prowess and their
wrongs. Their spoilers have been their historians; and although a
reluctant assent has been awarded to some of the nobler traits of their
nature, yet, without yielding a due allowance for the peculiarities of
their situation, the Indian character has been presented with singular
uniformity as being cold, cruel, morose, and revengeful; unrelieved by
any of those varying traits and characteristics, those lights and
shadows which are admitted in respect to other people no less wild and
uncivilized than they.
"Without pausing to reflect that, even when most cruel, they have been
practising the trade of war--always dreadful--as much in conformity to
their own usages and laws as have their more civilized antagonists, the
white historian has drawn them with the characteristics of demons.
Forgetting that the second of Hebrew monarchs did not scruple to saw his
prisoners with saws, and harrow them with harrows of iron; forgetful
likewise of the scenes of Smithfield, under the direction of our own
British ancestors; the historians of the poor untutored Indians, almost
with one accord, have denounced them as monsters _sui generis_, of
unparalleled and unapproachable barbarity; as though the summary
tomahawk were worse than the iron tortures of the harrow, and the torch
of the Mohawk hotter than the faggots of Queen Mary.
"Nor does it seem to have occurred to the 'pale-faced' writers that the
identical cruelties, the records and descriptions of which enter so
largely into the composition of the earlier volumes of American history,
were not barbarities in the estimation of those who practised them. _The
scalp lock was an emblem of chivalry._ Every warrior shaving his head
for battle was careful to leave _the lock of defiance upon his crown_,
as for the bravado, 'Take it if you can.' The stake and the torture
were identified with their rude notions of the power of endurance. They
were inflicted upon captives of their own race, as well as upon whites;
and with their own braves these trials were courted, to enable the
sufferer to exhibit the courage and fortitude with which they could be
borne--the proud scorn with which all the pain that a foe might inflict
could be endured.
"But (it is said) they fell upon slumbering hamlets in the night and
massacred defenceless women and children. This, again, was their own
mode of warfare, as honourable in their estimation as the more courteous
methods of committing wholesale murder laid down in the books.
"But of one enormity they were ever innocent. Whatever degree of
personal hardship and suffering their female captives were compelled to
endure, their persons were never dishonoured by violence; a fact which
can be predicated, we apprehend, of no other victorious soldiery that
ever lived.
"In regard, moreover, to the countless acts of cruelty alleged to have
been perpetrated by the savages, it must still be borne in mind that the
Indians have had no writer to relate their own side of the story. The
annals of man, probably, do not attest a more kindly reception of
intruding foreigners than was given to the Pilgrims landing at Plymouth
by the faithful Massassoit, and the tribes under his jurisdiction. Nor
did the forest kings take up arms until they but too clearly saw that
either their visitors or themselves must be driven from the soil which
was their own--the fee of which was derived from the Great Spirit. And
the nation is yet to be discovered that will not fight for their homes,
the graves of their fathers, and their family altars. Cruel they were in
the prosecution of their contests; but it would require the aggregate of
a large number of predatory incursions and isolated burnings to balance
the awful scene of conflagration and blood which at once extinguished
the power of Sassacus, and the brave and indomitable Narragansets over
whom he reigned. No! until it is forgotten that by some Christians in
infant Massachusetts it was held to be right to kill Indians, as the
agents and familiars of Azazel; until the early records of even tolerant
Connecticut, which disclose the fact that the Indians were seized by the
Puritans, transported to the British West Indies, and sold as slaves,
are lost; until the Amazon and La Plata shall have washed away the
bloody history of the Spanish American conquest; and until the fact that
Cortez stretched the unhappy Guatimozin naked upon a bed of burning
coals (or General Sullivan's devastation of the Six Indian Nations) is
proved to be a fiction, let not the American Indians be pronounced the
most cruel of men."[101]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 91: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xix., p. 325.
"About four weeks after Colonel Zebulon Butler's return, some hundreds
of Indians, a large body of Tories, and about fifty regulars, entered
Cherry Valley, within the State of New York. They made an unsuccessful
attempt on Fort Alden; but they killed and scalped thirty-two of the
inhabitants, mostly women and children; and also Colonel Alden and ten
soldiers."--_Ib._, p. 325. Then, on the side of the continentals,
"Colonel G. Van Shaick, with fifty-five men, marched from Fort Schuyler
to the Onondago settlements, and on the 19th of April, 1779, burnt the
whole, consisting of about fifty houses, together with a large quantity
of provisions. Horses and stock of every kind were killed. The arms and
ammunition of the Indians were either destroyed or brought off, and
their settlements were laid waste. Twelve Indians were killed and
thirty-four made prisoners. This expedition was performed in less than
six days, and without the loss of a man."--_Ib._, pp. 326, 327.]
[Footnote 92: Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol. III., Chap.
xli., pp. 436-439.]
[Footnote 93: Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap.
x., pp. 230, 231, 232.
Mr. Bancroft's tame account of "the great expedition" against the Five
Nations, limiting it to a chastisement of the Senecas, can only be
accounted for from his contempt of General Sullivan, his desire to pass
over as slightly as possible an expedition of destruction so
disproportionate to the alleged cause of it, and against a whole rural
and agricultural people for the alleged depredations of some of them.
There were, as might be expected, marauding parties along the borders on
the part of both the Indians and Americans, but the former always seem
to have suffered more, and the latter to have excelled the former in
their own traditionary mode of savage warfare.
"Other expeditions," says Mr. Holmes, "besides this decisive one were
conducted against the Indians in course of the year. In April, Colonel
Van Shaick, with fifty-five men, marched from Fort Schuyler, and burnt
the whole Onondago settlements, consisting of about fifty houses, with a
large quantity of provisions, killed twelve Indians and made thirty-four
prisoners, without the loss of a single man. In the month of August,
Colonel Broadhead made a successful expedition against the Mingo,
Munsey, and Seneca Indians." (American Annals, Vol. II., p. 302.)]
[Footnote 94: Mr. Bancroft says that "the British Rangers and men of the
Six Nations (who constructed the defensive breastwork at Newton) _were
in all about_ 800." (History of the United States, Vol. X., Chap. x, p.
232.)
It was certainly no great feat of military courage and skill for 5,000
men, with the aid of artillery, to defeat and disperse 800 Indians and
Tories, without artillery, and then ravage and devastate an undefended
country.]
[Footnote 95: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap.
xxxix., pp. 287-289.]
[Footnote 96: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap.
xix., pp. 327-329.
We will select from the same historian, though the same facts may be
found in other histories of the time, a few examples in addition to
those already given of the terrible retribution which the Americans
inflicted upon the Indians in retaliation for any incursions which they
may have made into the white settlements.
"The Cherokee Indians made an incursion into Ninety-Six district, in
South Carolina, massacred some families and burned several houses.
General Pickens, in 1781, collected a party of the militia, and
penetrated into their country. This he accomplished in fourteen days, at
the head of 394 horsemen. In that short space he burned thirteen towns
and villages, killed upwards of forty Indians, and took a number of
prisoners. Not one of his party was killed, and only two were wounded.
The Americans did not expend over two pounds of ammunition, and yet only
three Indians escaped after having been once seen. * *
"Towards the end of the war, in 1782, there was a barbarous and
unprovoked massacre of some civilized Indians who had settled near the
Muskingum. These, under the influence of some pious missionaries of the
Moravian persuasion, had been formed into some degree of religious
order. They abhorred war, and would take no part therein, giving for a
reason that 'the Great Spirit did not make men to destroy men, but to
love and assist each other.' From love of peace they advised those of
their own colour, who were bent on war, to desist from it. They were
also led from humanity to inform the white people of their danger, when
they knew their settlements were about to be invaded. This provoked the
hostile (American) Indians to such a degree, that they carried these
quite away from Muskingum to a bank of the Sandusky Creek. They, finding
corn dear and scarce in their new habitations, obtained liberty to come
back in the fall of the same year to Muskingum, that they might collect
the crops they had planted before their removal.
"While the white (American) people at and near the Monongahela heard
that a number of Indians were at the Moravian towns on the Muskingum,
they gave out that their intentions were hostile. Without any further
enquiry, 160 of them crossed the Ohio, and put to death these harmless,
inoffensive people, though they made no resistance. In conformity to
their religious principles, these Moravians submitted to their hard
fate, without attempting to destroy their murderers. Upwards of ninety
of this pacific race were killed by men who, while they called
themselves Christians, were more deserving of the name of savages than
those whom they inhumanly murdered." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United
States, Vol. II., Chap. xix., pp. 330-332.)
Mr. Hildreth gives the following account of the proceedings of the
eighty or ninety men who murdered the peaceful Indians: "Arrived at the
middle Moravian village, they found a party of Christian Indians
gathering corn. The Indians at another neighbouring village were sent
for, and the whole were placed together in two houses. A council was
then held to decide upon their fate. Williamson, their Commander,
heretofore accused of too great lenity to the Indians, referred the
matter to his men. Only sixteen voted for mercy; all the rest,
professing a faith common on the frontier, that 'an Indian has no more
soul than a buffalo,' were for murder. They rushed on their prey,
scalping-knife in hand, and upwards of ninety Indians, men, women, and
children, soon lay bleeding and gasping." (History of the United States,
Vol. III., Chap. lxv., p. 423.)
"Soon after this unprovoked massacre, a party of Americans set out for
Sandusky, to destroy the Indian towns in that part; but the Delawares,
Wyandots, and other Indians opposed them. An engagement ensued, in which
some of the white people were killed, and several were taken prisoners.
Among the latter were Colonel Crawford and his son-in-law. The colonel
was sacrificed to the manes of those Indians who were massacred in the
Moravian towns. The other prisoners were put to death with the tomahawk.
"Throughout the American war, the desolation brought by the Indians on
the frontier settlements of the United States, and on the Indians by the
Americans, was sufficient to excite compassion in the most obdurate
heart.
"Not only men and warriors, but women and children indiscriminately
murdered, while whole settlements were involved in promiscuous
desolation. Each was made a scourge to the other; and the unavoidable
calamities of war were rendered doubly distressing by the dispersion of
families, the breaking up of settlements, and an addition of savage
cruelties, to the most extensive devastation of those things which
conduce to the comfort of human life."]
[Footnote 97: The biographer of Brant and historian of the Border Wars
of the American Revolution thinks that Sir Guy Carleton was not opposed
to the employment of the Indians in the war with the Congress (Vol. I.,
pp. 89, 90), and quotes Brant as his authority; but General Haldimand
(who himself favoured the employment of the Indians in the war) appears
to be the safest interpreter of the views of Sir Guy Carleton, who
intended, by the friendly alliance of the Indians with the King, that
they should be neutral.]
[Footnote 98: Stone's Life of Joseph Brant, including the Border Wars of
the American Revolution, Vol. II., Chap. i.]
[Footnote 99: Life of Brant, including the Border Wars of the American
Revolution.]
[Footnote 100: Brant himself was educated at Philadelphia, married and
lived quietly on his land in the Mohawk Valley, entertained the
missionaries, and assisted in translating portions of the New Testament;
but when the revolution commenced he was not allowed to live in peace
unless he joined the revolutionary party. He determined to maintain, as
he said, the covenant faith of his forefathers to the King of England,
and entered upon the "warpath," in which he became so distinguished a
hero; in the course of which he perpetrated many deeds of cruelty, but
also, as his biographer records, performed many acts of humanity,
kindness, and generosity.]
[Footnote 101: Stone's Brant and the Border Wars of the American
Revolution, Vol. I., Introduction, pp. 13, 14, 15.]
CHAPTER XXXVI.
SITUATION AND TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS DURING THE WAR.
The condition of the United Empire Loyalists for several months before,
as well as after, the Declaration of Independence, was humiliating to
freemen and perilous in the extreme; and that condition became still
more pitiable after the alliance of the revolutionists with the
French--the hereditary enemies of both England and the colonies. From
the beginning the Loyalists were deprived of the freedom of the press,
freedom of assemblage, and under an espionage universal, sleepless,
malignant--subjecting the Loyalists to every species of insult, to
arrest and imprisonment at any moment, and to the seizure and
confiscation of their property.
Before the Declaration of Independence, both parties were confessedly
British subjects, professing allegiance to the same sovereign and
constitution of government, both professing and avowing their adherence
to the rights of British subjects; but differing from each other as to
the extent of those rights in contradistinction to the constitutional
rights of the Crown and those of the people--as in the case of party
discussions of all constitutional questions, whether in the colonies or
mother country for centuries past. Both parties had their advocates in
the British Parliament; and while the prerogative advocates supported
the corrupt Ministry of the day--or the King's party, as it was
called--the Opposition in Parliament supported the petitions and
remonstrances of those colonists who claimed a more popular colonial
government; but all the advocates of the constitutional rights of the
colonists, in both Houses of Parliament, disclaimed, on the part of
those whom they represented, the least idea of independence or
separation from England. The Declaration of Independence essentially
changed the relations of parties, both in Great Britain and America. The
party of independence--getting, after months of manipulation by its
leaders, first a majority of one in the Congress, and afterwards
increasing that majority by various means--repudiated their former
professed principles of connection with England; broke faith with the
great men and parties in England, both in and out of Parliament, who had
vindicated their rights and professions for more than ten years; broke
faith also with their numerous fellow-subjects in America who adhered to
the old faith, to the old flag, and connection with England, and who
were declared by resolutions of Conventions, from Congress, provinces,
counties, to townships and towns, enemies of their country, rebels and
traitors, and treated as such.[102] Even before the Declaration of
Independence, some of these popular meetings, called Conventions,
assumed the highest functions of legislation and government, and dealt
at pleasure with the rights, liberties, property, and even lives of
their Tory fellow citizens. There had been violent words, terms of
mutual reproach, as in all cases of hot political contests; but it was
for the advocates of independent liberty to deny to the adherents of the
old faith all liberty of speech or of opinion, except under penalties of
imprisonment or banishment, with confiscation of property. For a large
portion of the community[103] to be thus stript of their civil rights by
resolutions of a Convention, and reduced to the position of proscribed
aliens or slaves, must have been galling to Loyalists beyond
expression, and well calculated to prompt them to outbreaks of passion,
and retaliations of resentment and revenge, each such act followed by a
corresponding act from the opposite party.[104]
It might be supposed that forbearance and respect would have been shown
to those who remained "steadfast and immovable" in the traditional faith
of British monarchy and British connection, notwithstanding a corrupt
and arbitrary party was in power for the time being; but the very
reverse of this was the case on the part of those who professed, as one
cardinal article of their political creed, that "all men are born free
and equal," and therefore that every man had an equal right to his
opinions, and an equal right to the expression of them; but all this was
reversed in the treatment of the Loyalists. Mr. Hildreth well describes
the position and treatment of the Loyalists, both before and after the
Declaration of Independence, in the following words:
"In the position of that considerable class of persons who had remained
in doubt, the Declaration of Independence and the assumption of State
government made a decided change. It was now necessary to choose one
side or the other.
"Very serious, too, was the change in the legal position of the class
known as Tories, in many of the States a large minority, and in all
respectable for wealth and social position. Of those thus stigmatized,
some were inclined to favour the utmost claims of the mother country;
_but the greater part, though determined to adhere to the British
connection, yet deprecated the policy which had brought on so fatal a
quarrel_. This loyal minority, especially its more conspicuous members,
as the warmth of political feeling increased, had been exposed to the
violence of mobs, and to all sorts of personal indignities, in which
private malice or a wanton and insolent spirit of mischief had been too
often gratified under the disguise of patriotism. The barbarous and
disgraceful practice of tarring and feathering and carting Tories,
placing them in a cart and carrying them about as a sort of spectacle,
had become in some places a favourite amusement. To restrain these
outrages, Congress had specially committed the oversight of Tories and
suspected persons to the regularly appointed Committees of Inspection
and Observation for the several counties and districts. But even these
Committees were not always very judicious or discriminating in the
exercise of despotic powers implied in that delicate trust.
"By the recent political changes, Tories and suspected persons became
exposed to dangers from the law as well as from mobs. Having boldly
seized the reins of government, the new State authorities claimed the
allegiance of all residents within their limits, and under the lead and
recommendation of Congress, those who refused to acknowledge their
authority, or who adhered to their enemies, were exposed to severe
penalties, confiscation of property, imprisonment, banishment, and
finally death."[105]
It does not appear that these lawless outrages upon "Tories" were ever
checked or discountenanced, or their authors ever even reproved by the
so-called authorities, but were actively or tacitly encouraged; so that
before and during the very first months of Independence, the Loyalists
were subject to the penalties of the mobs on one side and to the more
cruel penalties of new-made law by a newly self-created authority on the
other side. Perhaps no one did as much to promote this cruel policy
against the Loyalists as Mr. John Adams, who was the ruling spirit in
all the proceedings of Boston for years, the advocate of the Declaration
of Independence, and the chief member of the Secret Committee of
Congress for years, and was at length appointed Ambassador from the
American Congress to Holland, whence he wrote a letter to Thomas
Cushing, then Lieutenant-Governor of Massachusetts, but which was
intercepted on board of the prize brigantine _Cabot_, and carried to St.
Christopher's, in the West Indies. This letter was published in the
Annual Register for 1781, pp. 259-261. It is dated "Amsterdam, December
15th, 1780," more than four years after the Declaration of Independence,
and fully indicates the source of all those cruel acts against the
Loyalists at the commencement and during the early years of the American
civil war. Mr. Adams says:
"It is true, I believe, what you suggest, that Lord North showed a
disposition to give up the contest, but was diverted from it not
unlikely by the representation of the Americans in London, who, in
connection with their coadjutors in America, have been thorns to us
indeed on both sides of the water; but I think their career might have
been stopt on your side if the executive officers had not been too timid
in a point which I so strenuously recommended at the first--namely, to
fine, imprison, and hang all inimical to the cause, without favour or
affection. I foresaw the evil that would arise from that quarter, and
wished to have timely stopt it. I would have hanged my own brother had
he taken a part with our enemy in the contest."
Such was the "strenuously recommended" wholesale hanging policy of Mr.
John Adams for the extermination of the "Tories"--a curious illustration
of his professed doctrine, that "all men are born free and equal," and
which largely accounts for the treatment of Loyalists during the war,
and for the exasperated feelings which existed between them and their
persecutors and oppressors of the Independence party. One of the first
manifestations of this relentless feeling against the Loyalists occurred
in Mr. Adams' native city of Boston, on its evacuation by General Howe,
who, as Lord Mahon says, "had taken with him, at their own urgent
request, above a thousand of the inhabitants of Boston, who had espoused
the cause of the parent State, and who dreaded on that account the
vengeance of their countrymen. Before they had embarked, they had, as
Washington informs his brother, publicly declared that 'if they thought
the most abject submission would procure them peace, they never would
have stirred.'"[106] (Letter to John Augustine Washington, March 13th,
1776, as printed in the American Archives.)
"Indeed, throughout this contest, and amidst all those qualities
displayed by the Americans, many of those qualities being entitled to
high respect and commendation, there was none certainly less amiable
than their merciless rancour against those among them who adhered to the
royal side. In reference to those, a ferocious saying came to be current
in America, that though we are commanded to forgive our enemies, we are
nowhere commanded to forgive our friends. In reference to them, true
Jetburgh justice was more than once administered--first the punishment,
then the accusation, and last of all the evidence."[107]
The Convention of the State of New York (1776) resolved that "any person
being an adherent to the King of Great Britain should be guilty of
treason and suffer death."[108]
The Loyalists experienced similar treatment in other provinces.
"Previous to their evacuation of Philadelphia, the Congress had ordered
some of the principal Quakers and other gentlemen of the first
consideration in that place, above twenty in number, to be taken into
custody, as strongly attached to the royal cause, and known enemies to
the ruling powers. These gentlemen had repeatedly refused to give any
written or verbal acknowledgment of allegiance or submission to the
American Government, or promise of holding no correspondence with its
enemies. Notwithstanding the evident danger their persons were in, they
had even the resolution to refuse confining themselves to their
respective dwellings. The spirit of these gentlemen was unconquerable to
the last, as they still persisted, in defiance of threats, and in spite
of all solicitations and entreaty, immovable in their principles and in
their determination to reject the test that was proposed to them. They
were sent prisoners to Stanton, in Virginia, as soon as it was
apprehended that the British troops would take possession of
Philadelphia."[109]
After the surrender of Lord Cornwallis, at Yorktown, the defenceless
Loyalists were the objects of vengeance as they went further north. The
army of Lord Cornwallis received civil treatment from Washington's
army,[110] and great kindness from the French officers and soldiers.
Lord Mahon observes:
"The followers of the English army, left defenceless at Yorktown, were
exposed to much ill-treatment on the part of the native soldiers,
thirsting, it was said, for vengeance. Abbé Robin[111] saw an English
lady, a colonel's wife, come in tears to implore for herself and for her
children the protection of French generosity against American outrage.
On the other hand, we find the English officers and soldiers, the actual
prisoners of war, bear willing testimony to the kindness they received.
Thus speaks Lord Cornwallis in his letter to Sir Henry Clinton: 'The
treatment in general that we have received from the enemy since our
surrender has been perfectly good and proper. But the kindness and
attention that has been shown us by the French officers in particular,
their delicate sensibility of our situation, their generous and pressing
offer of money, both public and private, to any amount, has really gone
beyond what I can possibly describe, and will, I hope, make an
impression on the breast of every English officer, whenever the fortune
of war should put any of them into our power.'" (Lord Mahon's History of
England, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxiv., pp. 181, 182.)
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER XXXVI.
THE ACTS OF LEGISLATIVE BODIES FOR THE PUNISHMENT OF THE ADHERENTS TO
THE CROWN WERE NUMEROUS.
"In _Rhode Island_, death and _confiscation_ of estate were the
penalties by law for any person who communicated with _the Ministry_ or
their agents, _or_ who afforded supplies to the forces, _or_ piloted the
armed ships of the King. Besides these general statutes, several Acts
were passed in that State to confiscate and sequester the property of
certain persons who were designated by name.
"In _Connecticut_, the offences of supplying the royal army or navy, of
giving them information, of enlisting or procuring others to enlist in
them, and of piloting or assisting naval vessels, were punished more
mildly, and involved only the loss of estate and personal liberty for a
term not exceeding three years. To _speak_ or _write_ or act against the
doings of Congress or of the Assembly of Connecticut, was punishable by
_disqualification for office, imprisonment_, and the disarming of the
offender. Here, too, was a law for seizing and confiscating the estates
of those who sought royal protection, and absented themselves from their
homes or the country.
"In _Massachusetts_, a person _suspected_ of enmity to the Whig cause
could be _arrested_ under a magistrate's warrant and banished, unless he
would swear fealty to the friends of liberty; and the select men of
towns could prefer charges of political treachery in town meetings, and
the individual accused, if convicted by a jury, could be sent into the
enemy's jurisdiction (banished). Massachusetts also designated by name,
and generally by occupation and residence, 380 of her people, of whom
seventeen had been inhabitants of Maine, who had fled from their homes,
and denounced against any one of them who should return, apprehension,
imprisonment, and transportation to a place possessed by the British;
and for a second voluntary return, without leave, _death_ without the
benefit of clergy. By another law, the property of twenty-nine persons
who were denominated 'notorious conspirators,' was confiscated--two had
been governors, one lieutenant-governor, one treasurer, one
attorney-general, one chief justice, and four commissioners of customs.
"_New Hampshire_ passed Acts similar to these, under which seventy-six
of her former citizens were prohibited from coming within her borders,
and the estates of twenty-eight were declared to be forfeited.
"_Virginia_ passed a resolution to the effect that persons of a given
description should be deemed and treated as aliens, and that their
property should be sold, and the proceeds go into the public treasury
for future disposal; and also a law prohibiting the migration of certain
persons to that commonwealth, and providing penalties for the violation
of its provisions.
"In _New York_, the County Committees were authorized to apprehend and
decide upon the guilt of such inhabitants as were _supposed_ to hold
correspondence with the enemy, or had committed some other specified
act; and they might punish those whom they adjudged to be guilty with
imprisonment for three months, or banishment. There, too, persons
opposed to liberty and independence were prohibited from practising law
in the Courts; and the effects of fifty-nine persons, of whom three were
women, and their rights of remainder and reversion, were to pass by
confiscation from them to the people. So, also, a parent whose sons went
off and adhered to the enemy was subjected to a tax of ninepence on the
pound of the parents' estate for each and every such son; and until a
revision of the law, Whigs were as liable to this tax as others.
"In _New Jersey_, one Act was passed to punish traitors and disaffected
persons; another, for taking charge of and leasing the real estates, and
for forfeiting the personal estates of certain fugitives and offenders;
and a third for forfeiting to, and vesting in the State, the real
property of the persons designated in the second statute; and a fourth,
supplemental to the Act first mentioned.
"In _Pennsylvania_, sixty-two persons, who were designated by name, were
required by the Executive Council to surrender themselves to some Judge
of a Court, or Justice of the Peace, within a specified time, and abide
trial for _treason_, or in default of appearance to stand attainted; and
by an Act of a subsequent time, the estates of thirty-six other persons,
who were also designated by name, and who had been previously attainted
of treason, were declared to be confiscated.
"The Act of _Delaware_ provided that the property, both real and
personal, of certain persons who were named, and who were forty-six in
number, should be forfeited to the State, 'subject, nevertheless, to the
payment of the said offenders' just debts,' unless, as in Pennsylvania,
they gave themselves up to trial for _the crime of treason in adhering
to the royal cause_.
"_Maryland_ seized, confiscated, and appropriated all property of
persons in allegiance to the British Crown, and appointed Commissioners
to carry out the terms of three statutes which were passed to effect
these purposes.
"In _North Carolina_, the Confiscation Act embraced sixty-five specified
individuals, and four mercantile firms, and by its terms not only
included the 'lands' of these persons and commercial houses, but their
'negroes and other personal property.'
"The law of _Georgia_, which was enacted very near the close of the
struggle, declared certain persons to have been guilty of treason
against that State, and their estates to be forfeited for their
offences."[112]
"_South Carolina_ surpassed all the other members of the confederacy,
Massachusetts excepted. The Loyalists of the State, whose rights,
persons, and property were affected by legislation, were divided into
four classes. The persons who had offended the least, who were
forty-five in number, were allowed to retain their estates, but were
amerced twelve per cent. of their value. Soon after the fall of
Charleston, and when disaffection to the Whig cause was so general, 210
persons, who styled themselves to be 'principal inhabitants' of the
city, signed an address to Sir Henry Clinton, in which they state that
they have every inducement to return to their allegiance, and ardently
hope to be re-admitted to the character and condition of British
subjects. These 'addressers' formed another class. Of these 210,
sixty-three were banished and lost their property by forfeiture, either
for this offence or the graver one of affixing their names to a petition
to the royal general, to be armed on the royal side. Another class,
composed of the still larger number of eighty persons, were _also
banished and divested of their estates_, for the crime of holding civil
or military commissions under the Crown, after the conquest of South
Carolina. And the same penalties were inflicted upon thirteen others,
who, on the success of Lord Cornwallis at Camden, presented his lordship
with congratulations. Still fourteen others were _banished and deprived
of their estates_ because they were _obnoxious_. Thus, then, the
'addressers,' 'petitioners,' 'congratulators,' and 'obnoxious
Loyalists,' who were proscribed, and who suffered the loss of their
property (in South Carolina), were 170 in number; and if to these we add
the forty-five who were fined twelve pounds in the hundred of the value
of their estates, the aggregate will be 215.
"Much of the legislation of the several States appears to have
proceeded from the recommendations made from time to time _by Congress_,
and that body passed several acts and resolutions of its own. Thus they
subjected to _martial law_ and to _death_ all who should furnish
provisions and certain other articles to the King's troops in New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware; and they resolved that all Loyalists
taken in arms should be sent to the States to which they belonged, there
to be _dealt with as traitors_" (not as prisoners of war, as were
Americans taken in arms against the British).[113]
REMARKS ON THE CONFISCATION ACTS ABOVE CITED.
The Draconian Code or the Spanish Inquisition can hardly be said to
exceed in severity and intolerance, the acts of the several State
Legislatures and Committees above quoted, in which mere opinions are
declared to be treason, as also the refusal to renounce a solemn oath of
allegiance. The very place of residence, the non-presenting one's self
to be tried as a traitor, the mere _suspicion_ of holding Loyalist
opinions, involved the loss of liberty and property. Scores of persons
were made criminals, not after trial by a verdict of a regularly
empanelled jury, but by name, in acts or resolutions of Legislatures,
and sometimes of Committees. No modern civilized country has presented
such a spectacle of the wholesale disposal, by name, of the rights,
liberties and properties, and even lives of citizens, by inquisition and
various bodies, as was here presented against the Loyalists, guilty of
no crime against their neighbours except holding to the opinions of
their forefathers, and the former opinions of their present persecutors,
who had usurped the power to rob, banish, and destroy them--who embodied
in themselves, at one and the same time, the functions of law makers,
law judges, and law executioners, and the receivers and disposers, or,
as was the case, the possessors of the property which they confiscated
against the Loyalists.
Is it surprising, then, that under such a system of oppression and
robbery, Loyalists should be prompted to deeds of heroism, and sometimes
of desperation and cruelty, to avenge themselves for the wrongs
inflicted upon them, and to recover the liberties and properties of
which they had thus been deprived, rendering themselves and their
families homeless, and reducing them to poverty and distress? No one can
justify many deeds of the Loyalists; but who could be surprised had they
been more desperate than they were? And this the more so as they were,
probably, superior in wealth and nearly equal in numbers to their
oppressors, who had suddenly seized upon all military sources of power,
disarmed the Loyalists, and erected tribunals for their ruin.[114]
American writers often speak of the havoc committed by the "Tories," but
the acts of Legislatures and Committees above quoted furnish ample
causes and provocation for retaliation, and the most desperate
enterprises and efforts to recover lawful rights and hard-earned
property. Where these Confiscating Acts had been most sweeping and
severe, as in the case of South Carolina, and the two parties nearly
equal, this internecine war against life and property was the most
relentless.[115]
It is as easy as it is unfair for American writers to narrate and
magnify the murderous acts of the "Tories," and omit those perpetrated
by the "Whigs," as well as the cruel laws against the liberties,
property, and lives of the "Tories," which gave rise to these barbarous
acts.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 102: "Committees exercised legislative, executive, and
judicial powers. It is not to be doubted that, in many instances, these
were improperly used, and that private resentments were often covered
under the specious veil of patriotism. The sufferers, in passing over to
the Royalists, carried with them a keen remembrance of the vengeance of
Committees, and when opportunity presented were tempted to retaliate."
(Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap. xxvi., pp.
467, 468.)]
[Footnote 103: "Until the Declaration of Independence they were by far
the largest party, who not only expected but prayed for a
reconciliation. England was their home, and by that affectionate name
was always spoken of; all the wrongs which were heaped upon the children
could not make them forget their home, or entirely alienate them from
their parent. The ligaments that connect nations are never less
powerful, though less tender, than those which unite individuals,
families, and clans. Consanguinity, affinity, alliance, operate alike on
each." (Allen's History of the American War.)
"The disaffected, or rather the Loyalists, were a formidable party in
the Middle States. They might be forgiven--many of them acted from
principle, from a conscientious regard to their duty, from affection to
their 'Sovereign,' and however mistaken they may have been, they deserve
no censure. It is the infirmity of men's nature to err, and the majority
cannot complain if the minority insist on the same privilege for which
the predominant party are contending--the liberty of judging for
themselves."--_Ib._, Vol. I., p. 483.]
[Footnote 104: Even in South Carolina. Mr. Hildreth remarks:
"Not, however, by armies alone were hostilities carried on. All the
scattered settlements bristled in hostile array. Whigs and Tories
pursued each other with little less than savage fury. Small parties,
everywhere under arms, some on one side, some on the other, with very
little reference to greater operations, were desperately bent on plunder
and blood." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap.
xli., p. 329.)]
[Footnote 105: Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap,
xxxiii., pp. 137, 138.]
[Footnote 106: Having thus recovered their capital (Boston), one of the
first acts of government exercised by the Provincial Assembly was to
order the effects and the estates of those who fled with the British
troops to Halifax to be publicly disposed of, and their produce applied
to the use of the State. Such adherents to Britain as had risked to
remain behind, were treated with great severity. They were prosecuted as
enemies and betrayers of their country, and their estates were
confiscated accordingly. (Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol.
II., Chap. xix., p. 159.)]
[Footnote 107: Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VI., Chap. liii., pp.
127, 128.
"The American Loyalists, in arms on the side of England, had grievous
cause throughout the war to complain of the merciless treatment of such
among them as fell into their countrymen's hands."--_Ib._, Vol. VII.,
Chap. lxvi., p. 250.
"The Legislature of North Carolina passed a law (1780) to put a stop to
the robbery of poor people under the pretence that they were Tories--a
practice carried on even to the plundering of their clothes and
household furniture." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol.
III., Chap. xli., p. 329.)
"In New York, in 1776, a rage for plundering, under pretence of taking
Tory property, infected many of the common soldiery, and even some of
the officers." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,
Chap. xi., p. 154.)]
[Footnote 108: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,
Chap. xi.]
[Footnote 109: Dr. Andrews' History of the Late War, Vol. II., Chap.
xxvi., pp. 370, 371.]
[Footnote 110: In connection with these transactions, we have an
illustration of the uniform and generous treatment of Loyalists by
General Washington, although he once gave expression to ill-feeling
towards them at Boston in the spring of 1775; for says Lord Mahon:
"Cornwallis, on his part, was honourably anxious to protect from harm
the native Loyalists within his lines; and he proposed, as the tenth
Article, that no such men were to be punished on account of having
joined the British army. Washington wrote in reply: 'This cannot be
assented to, being altogether of civil resort.' Means were found,
however, with Washington's connivance, to obtain the same object in
another form. It was stipulated that, immediately after the
capitulation, the _Bonetta_ sloop-of-war was to sail for New York,
unsearched, with despatches from Lord Cornwallis to Sir Henry Clinton,
and with as many soldiers on board as he should think fit to send;
provided only that the vessel was returned, and that the soldiers were
accounted for as prisoners in a future exchange. By this expedient was
the British chief enabled to secure a safe conduct for his American
adherents." (Lord Mahon's History, etc., Vol. VII., Chap. lxiv., p.
179.)]
[Footnote 111: "The abbé was struck at seeing, from several indications,
how much keener was at that time the animosity between the English and
Americans than between the English and French. Thus the English
officers, when they laid down their arms and were passing along the
enemy's lines, courteously saluted every French officer, even of the
'lowest rank,' a compliment which they withheld from every American man
of the highest." (Voyage en Amerique, par l'Abbé Robin, p. 141, ed.
1782; quoted in Lord Mahon's History, Vol. VI., Chap. lxiv., p. 181.)]
[Footnote 112: _Note_ by the Author.--The above statement of the
confiscating law of Georgia gives a very inadequate idea of that law.
Savannah was taken, and General Lincoln and his army were driven out of
Georgia by Lieutenant-Colonel Campbell, in 1778, who treated all classes
with such kindness and generosity that the Legislature and Government,
as previously existed, was restored and remained until 1782, when
Savannah was evacuated by the British. Just at the juncture of Colonel
Campbell's conquest of Georgia, the Legislature of that State was
passing a Confiscation Act against "Tories" and preparing to carry it
into effect. During the latter part of the nearly four years of British
occupation, the Congress party elected a Governor and organized their
Legislature, meeting at Augusta. Two months before the evacuation of
Savannah by the British, the Legislature of the Congress party passed
the Confiscation Act referred to in the text. We find a copy of this act
in a pamphlet published in London in 1783, entitled _The Particular Case
of the Georgia Loyalists_. This Act may serve as a specimen of
Confiscation Acts passed in other States. We give it entire, remarking
that it curiously assumes in the preamble that there had been no break
in the Government of the State from 1778 to 1782, though the English had
ruled the State during the whole of that period. The Act is as follows:
"Whereas on the 1st day of March, which was in the year of our Lord
1778, an Act was passed for attainting certain persons therein mentioned
of treason, and confiscating their estates for the use and benefit of
this State, which said Act has not yet been carried into full execution:
And whereas it is necessary that the names of the said persons so
attainted by the same law should be inserted in a law, with the names of
various other persons who have since the aforesaid time been guilty of
treason against this State, and the authority of the same, by
traitorously adhering to the King of Great Britain, and by aiding,
assisting, abetting, and comforting the generals and other officers,
civil and military, of the said King, to enforce his authority in and
over this State, and the good people of the same: And whereas the
_aforesaid treason_, and other atrocious crimes, justly merit forfeiture
of protection and property:
"Be it enacted, by the representatives and freemen of the State of
Georgia in General Assembly met, and by the authority of the same, that
all and each of the following persons, viz. (here follow the names of
286 persons, late inhabitants of Georgia), be and they are hereby
declared to be banished from this State for ever; and if any of the
aforesaid shall remain in this State sixty days after the passing of
this Act, or shall return to this State, the Governor or
Commander-in-Chief for the time being is hereby authorised and required
to cause such persons so remaining in or _returning_ to this State to be
apprehended and committed to jail, there to remain without bail or
mainprize, until a convenient opportunity shall offer for transporting
the said persons beyond the seas to some part of the British King's
dominions, which the Governor or Commander-in-Chief for the time being
is hereby required to do; and if any of the said persons shall return to
this State after such transportation, then and in such case he or they
shall be adjudged and hereby declared to _be guilty of felony_, and
shall, on conviction of their having so returned as aforesaid, _suffer
death_ without the benefit of clergy.
"And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that all and
singular the estates, real and personal, of each and every one of the
aforesaid persons, which they held, possessed or were entitled to, in
law or equity, on the 19th of April, 1775, or which they have held
since, or do hold in possession, or others hold in trust for them, or to
which they are or may be entitled in law or equity, or which they may
have, hold, or be possessed of, in right of others, together with all
debts, dues, and demands that are or may be owing to the aforesaid
persons, or either of them, _be confiscated to and for the use and
benefit of this State_; and the monies arising from the sales which take
place by virtue of and in pursuance of this Act, to be applied to such
uses and purposes as the Legislature shall hereafter direct.
"And whereas divers others persons, citizens of this State, and owing
allegiance thereto (whose names are not herein recited), did, in
violation of said allegiance, traitorously assist, abet, and participate
in the aforesaid treasonable practices: Be it therefore enacted, by the
authority of the aforesaid, that all and every of the person or persons
under this description shall, on full proof and conviction of the same
in a court of law, be liable and subjected to all the like pains,
penalties, and forfeitures inflicted by this Act on those offenders
whose names are particularly mentioned therein.
"And be it further enacted, that all debts, dues, or demands due or
owing to merchants and others residing in Great Britain, be and they are
hereby sequestered, and the Commissioners appointed by this Act, or a
majority of them, are hereby empowered to recover, receive, and deposit
the same in the Treasury of this State, in the same manner and under the
same regulations as debts confiscated, there to remain for the use of
this State until otherwise appropriated by this or any other House of
Assembly.
"And whereas there are various persons, subjects of the King of Great
Britain, possessed of or entitled to estates, real and personal, which
justice and sound policy require should be applied to the benefit of
this State: Be it therefore enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that
all and singular the estates, real and personal, belonging to persons
being British subjects, of whatever kind or nature, of which they may be
possessed, or others in trust for them, or to which they are or may be
entitled in law or equity, and also all debts, dues, or demands owing or
accruing to them, be confiscated to and for the use and benefit of this
State; and the monies arising from the sale which shall take place by
virtue of and in pursuance of this Act, to be applied to such uses and
purposes as the Legislature shall hereafter direct.
"And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that the State
will and do guarantee and defend the Commissioners appointed by this
Act, or a majority of them, in all their proceedings for carrying the
powers and authorities given them by the same into full effect; and will
also warrant and for ever defend all and every sale or sales which the
said Commissioners, or a majority of them, shall make to any purchaser
or purchasers of any part or parts of the real and personal estates
confiscated by this Act.
"Augusta, State of Georgia, 4th May, 1782."]
[Footnote 113: Historical Introduction to Col. Sabine's Biographical
Sketches of the American Loyalists, pp. 77-81.]
[Footnote 114: In the historical essay above quoted, the author says:
"The examination now completed of the political condition of the
colonies, of the state of parties, and of the divisions in particular
classes in society, and avocations in life, leads to the conclusion that
the number of our countrymen who wished to continue their connection
with the mother country was very large. In nearly every Loyalist letter
or other paper which I have examined, and in which the subject is
mentioned, it is either assumed or stated in terms that the LOYAL were
_the majority_; and this opinion, I am satisfied, was very generally
entertained by those who professed to have a knowledge of public
sentiment. That the adherents of the Crown were mistaken, is certain.
But yet in the Carolinas, and Georgia, and possibly in Pennsylvania the
two parties differed but little in point of strength, while in New York
the Whigs were far weaker than their opponents." (Historical
Introduction to Col. Sabine's Biographical Sketches of the American
Loyalists, p. 65.)]
[Footnote 115: In the historical essay above quoted we have the
following words:
"What was the nature of the conflict between the two parties in South
Carolina? Did the Whigs and their opponents meet in open and fair fight,
and give and take the courtesies and observe the rules of civilized
warfare? Alas, no! They murdered one another. I wish it were possible to
use a milder word; but murder is the only one that can be employed to
express the truth. Of this, however, the reader shall judge. I shall
refrain from a statement of my own, and rely on the testimony of others.
"Gen. Greene thus spoke of the hand-to-hand strifes, which I stigmatize
as murderous. 'The animosity,' said he, 'between the Whigs and Tories
renders their situation truly deplorable. The Whigs seem determined to
extirpate the Tories, and the Tories the Whigs. Some thousands have
fallen in this way in this quarter, and the evil rages with more
violence than ever. If a stop cannot be soon put to these massacres, the
country will be depopulated in a few months more, as neither 'Whig' nor
'Tory' can live." (Historical Introduction to Colonel Sabine's
Biographical Sketches of the American Loyalists, p. 33.)]
CHAPTER XXXVII.
TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS BY THE AMERICANS, AT AND AFTER THE AMERICAN
REVOLUTION.
It remains now to ascertain the reception with which the applications of
Loyalists were met in the several State Legislatures. During the last
three years of the war, the principal operations of the British army
were directed to the Southern States; and there the exasperations of
party feeling may be supposed to have been the strongest.[116]
No where had arbitrary authority been exercised more unmercifully
towards the revolutionists than by Earl Cornwallis and Lord Rawdon in
South and North Carolina. Dr. Ramsay says: "The troops under the command
of Cornwallis had spread waste and ruin over the face of all the
country, for 400 miles on the sea coast, and for 200 miles westward.
Their marches from Charleston to Camden, from Camden to the River Dan,
from the Dan through North Carolina to Wilmington, from Wilmington to
Petersburg, and from Petersburg through many parts of Virginia, till
they finally settled in Yorktown, made a route of more than 1,100 miles.
Every place through which they passed in these various marches
experienced the effects of their rapacity. Their numbers enabled them to
go where they pleased; their rage for plunder disposed them to take
whatever they had the means of removing; and their animosity to the
Americans led them often to the wanton destruction of what they could
neither use nor carry off. By their means, thousands had been involved
in distress."[117]
It was therefore in South Carolina, more than any other State, that
animosity might be expected to be intense and prolonged against the
Loyalists; but among these men of the South, with their love of freedom,
and dash and energy in war, there was a potent element of chivalry and
British generosity which favourably contrasts with the Massachusetts
school of persecuting bigotry and of hatred, from generation to
generation, to England and English institutions. Accordingly we learn
from Moultrie's Memoirs, Vol. II., p. 326, that "after the peace, a
Joint Committee from the Senate and House of Representatives in South
Carolina, chosen to hear the petitions of Loyalists who had incurred the
penalties of the confiscation, banishment, and amercement laws, made a
report to the separate Houses in favour of the great majority of the
petitioners; and a great part of those names which were upon the
confiscation, banishment and amercement lists were struck off."
"The petitions of others were afterwards presented from year to year,
and ultimately almost the whole of them had their estates restored to
them, and they were received as citizens."[118]
As to the proceedings of the other States, after the close of the war,
in regard to the United Empire Loyalists, the following summary, from
the _Historical Introduction_ to Colonel Sabine's _Biography of the
American Loyalists_, will be sufficient:
"At the peace, justice and good policy both required a general amnesty,
and the revocation of the acts of disability and banishment, so that
only those who had been guilty of flagrant crimes should be excluded
from becoming citizens. Instead of this, however, the State Legislatures
generally continued in a course of hostile action, and treated the
conscientious and pure, and the unprincipled and corrupt, with the same
indiscrimination as they had done during the struggle. In some parts of
the country there really appears to have been a determination to place
these misguided but then humbled men beyond the pale of human sympathy.
In one legislative body, a petition from the banished, praying to be
allowed to return to their homes, was rejected without a division; and a
law was passed which denied to such as had remained within the State,
and to all others who had opposed the revolution, the privilege of
voting at the elections or of holding office. In another State, all who
had sought royal protection were declared to be aliens, and to be
incapable of claiming and holding property within it, and their return
was forbidden. Other Legislatures refused to repeal such of their laws
as conflicted with the conditions of the treaty of peace, and carried
out the doctrines of the States alluded to above without material
modification. But the temper of South Carolina was far more moderate.
Acting on the wise principle that 'when the offenders are numerous, it
is sometimes prudent to overlook their crimes,' she listened to the
supplications made to her by the fallen, and restored to their civil and
political rights a large portion of those who had suffered under her
banishment and confiscation laws. The course pursued by New York,
Massachusetts, and Virginia was different. These States were neither
merciful nor just; and it is even true that Whigs, whose gallantry in
the field, whose prudence in the Cabinet, and whose exertions in
diplomatic stations abroad, had contributed essentially to the success
of the conflict, were regarded with enmity on account of their attempts
to produce a better state of feeling and more humane legislation. Had
these States adopted a different line of conduct, their good example
would not have been lost, probably, upon others, smaller and of less
influence; and had Virginia especially been honest enough to have
permitted the payment of debts which her people owed to British subjects
before the war, the first years of our freedom would not have been
stained with a breach of our public faith, and the long and angry
controversy with Great Britain, which well-nigh involved us in a second
war with her, might not have occurred.
"Eventually, popular indignation diminished; the statute book was
divested of its most objectionable enactments, and numbers were
permitted to occupy their old homes, and to recover the whole or part of
their property; but by far the greater part of the Loyalists who quitted
the country at the commencement of, or during the war, never returned;
and of the many thousands who abandoned the United States after the
peace, and while these enactments were in force, few, comparatively, had
the desire or even the means to revisit the land from which they were
expelled. Such persons and their descendants form a very considerable
proportion of the population of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Upper
Canada.
"It is equally to be regretted on grounds of policy that the
_majorities_[119] in the State Legislatures did not remember, with Mr.
Jefferson, that separation from England 'was contemplated with
affliction by all,' and that, like Mr. Adams, many sound Whigs 'would
have given everything they possessed for a restoration to the state of
things before the contest began, provided they could have had sufficient
security for its continuance.' Then they might have done at an early
moment after the cessation of hostilities, what they actually did do in
a few years afterwards--namely, have allowed the banished Loyalists to
return from exile, and, excluding those against whom enormities could
have been proved, have conferred upon them, and upon those who had
remained to be driven away at the peace, the rights of citizens. Most of
them would have easily fallen into respect for the new state of things,
old friendships and intimacies would have been revived, and long before
this time all would have mingled in one mass. * *
"As a matter of _expediency_, how unwise was it to perpetuate the
feelings of the opponents of the revolution, and to keep them a distinct
class for a time, and for harm yet unknown! How ill-judged the measures
that caused them to settle the hitherto neglected possessions of the
British Crown! Nova Scotia had been won and lost, and lost and won, in
the struggle between France and England, and the blood of New England
had been poured out upon its soil like water. But when the Loyalists
sought refuge there, what was it? Before the war, the fisheries of its
coast, for the prosecution of which Halifax itself was founded,
comprised, in public estimation, its chief value; and though Great
Britain had quietly possessed it for about seventy years, the emigration
to it of the adherents of the Crown from the United States, in a single
year, more than doubled its population. Until hostile events brought
Halifax into notice, no civilized people were poorer than the
inhabitants of that colony; since, in 1775, the Assembly estimated that
£1,200 currency--a sum less than $5,000--was the whole amount of money
which they possessed. By causing the expatriation, then, of many
thousands of our countrymen, among whom were the well-educated, the
ambitious, and the well-versed in politics, we became the founders of
two agricultural and commercial colonies; for it is to be remembered
that New Brunswick formed a part of Nova Scotia until 1784, and that the
necessity of the division then made was of our own creation. In like
manner we became the founders of Upper Canada. The Loyalists were the
first settlers of the territory thus denominated by Act of 1791; and the
principal object of the line of division of Canada, as established by
Mr. Pitt's Act, was to place them, as a body, by themselves, and to
allow them to be governed by laws more congenial than those which were
deemed requisite for the government of the French on the St. Lawrence.
Our expatriated countrymen were generally poor, and some of them were
actually without the means of providing for their common wants from day
to day. The Government for which they had become exiles was as liberal
as they could have asked. It gave them lands, tools, materials for
building, and the means of subsistence for two years; and to each of
their children, as they became of age, two hundred acres of land. And
besides this, of the offices created by the organization of a new
Colonial Government, they were the chief recipients. The ties of kindred
and suffering in a common cause created a strong bond of sympathy
between them, and for years they bore the appellation of 'United Empire
Loyalists.'"[120]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 116: Writing under date of January, 1782, Mr. Hildreth says:
"The surrender of Cornwallis was soon felt in the Southern department.
Wilmington was evacuated, thus dashing all the hopes of the North
Carolina Tories. Greene approached Charleston, and distributed his
troops so as to confine the enemy to the neck and adjacent islands.
"In re-establishing the State Government of _South Carolina, none were
allowed to vote who had taken British protection_. John Matthews was
elected Governor. Among the earliest proceedings of the Assembly was the
passage of a law _banishing the most active British partisans and
confiscating their property_. The services of Greene were also
gratefully remembered in a vote of 10,000 guineas, or $50,000, to
purchase him an estate.
"The Georgia Assembly, in meeting at Augusta, chose John Martin as
Governor, _and passed a law of confiscation and banishment very similar
to that of South Carolina_. Greene presently received from this
Province, also, the present of a confiscated plantation. _North
Carolina_ acknowledged his services by a grant of wild lands." (History
of the United States, Vol. III., Chap. xliii., p. 373.)]
[Footnote 117: Dr. Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II.,
Chap, xxv., p. 456.
"Under the immediate eye of Cornwallis," says Mr. Bancroft, "the
prisoners who had capitulated in Charleston were the subjects of
perpetual persecution, unless they would exchange their paroles for
oaths of allegiance. Mechanics and shopkeepers could not collect their
dues except after promises of loyalty.
"Lord Rawdon, who had the very important command on the Santee, raged
equally against deserters from his Irish regiment and against the
inhabitants. The chain of forts for holding South Carolina consisted of
Georgetown, Charleston, Beaufort, and Savannah on the sea; Augusta,
Ninety-Six, and Camden in the interior. Of these, Camden was the most
important, for it was the key between the north and south. On the rumour
of an advancing American army, Rawdon called on all the inhabitants
round Camden to join in arms. One hundred and sixty who refused he shut
up during the heat of midsummer in one prison, and loaded more than
twenty of them with chains, some of whom were protected by the
capitulation of Charleston." (Bancroft's History of the United States,
Vol. X., Chap. xv., pp. 311, 312, 313.)
"Peace was restored to Georgia (July, 1782), after having been four
years in possession of the British. That State is supposed to have lost
1,000 of its citizens and 4,000 slaves." (Moultrie's Memoirs, Vol. II.,
p. 340; quoted in Holmes' American Annals, Vol. II., p. 340.)]
[Footnote 118: Quoted in Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., p. 351.]
[Footnote 119: "I say _majorities_, because I am satisfied that in
almost every State there were minorities, more or less numerous, who
desired the adoption of a more moderate course. In New York it is
certain that the first political parties, after the peace, were formed
in consequence of divisions which existed among the Whigs as to the
lenity or severity which should be extended to their vanquished
opponents."]
[Footnote 120: Historical Essay, introductory to Colonel Sabine's
Sketches of the American Loyalists, pp. 86-90.]
APPENDIX A. TO CHAPTER XXXVII.
REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, AND
REMARKS ON THE FEELINGS WHICH SHOULD NOW BE CULTIVATED BY BOTH OF THE
FORMER CONTENDING PARTIES.
The entire failure of the Americans to conquer Canada in the war of
1812-1815 is an illustration of the folly of coercing the allegiance of
a people against their will. Upper Canada at that time consisted of less
than 100,000 inhabitants; yet, with the extra aid of only a few hundred
English soldiers, she repelled for three years the forces of the United
States--more than ten times their number, and separated only by a river.
Mr. J.M. Ludlow, in his brief but comprehensive "History of the War of
American Independence, 1775-1783," Chapter vii., well states _the folly
of England in endeavouring to conquer by arms the opinions_ of three
millions of people, and the impossibility of the American colonists
achieving their independence without the aid of men and money, and ships
from France, to which, in connection with Spain and Holland, the
Americans are actually indebted for their independence, and not merely
to their own sole strength and prowess, as American writers so
universally boast. Mr. Ludlow observes:
"At a time when steam had not yet baffled the winds, to dream of
conquering by force of arms, on the other side of the Atlantic, a people
of the English race, numbering between 3,000,000 and 4,000,000, with
something like 1,200 miles of seaboard, was surely an act of enormous
folly. We have seen in our own days the difficulties experienced by the
far more powerful and populous Northern States in quelling the secession
of the Southern, when between the two there was no other frontier than
at most a river, very often a mere ideal line, and when armies could be
raised by 100,000 men at a time. England attempted a far more difficult
task, with forces which, till 1781, never exceeded 35,000 men, and never
afterwards exceeded 42,075, including 'Provincials,' _i.e._, American
Loyalists." (But England, repeatedly on the verge of success, failed
from the incapacity and inactivity of the English generals.)
"Yet it is impossible to doubt that not once only, but repeatedly during
the course of the struggle, England was on the verge of triumph. The
American armies were perpetually melting away before the
enemy--directly, through the practice of short enlistments; indirectly,
through desertions. These desertions, if they might be often palliated
by the straits to which the men were reduced through arrears of pay and
want of supplies, arose in other cases, as after the retreat from New
York, from sheer loss of heart in the cause. The main army, under
Washington, was seldom even equal in numbers to that opposed to him. In
the winter of 1776-77, when his troops were only 4,000 strong, it is
difficult to understand how it was that Sir William Howe, with more
than double the number, should have failed to annihilate the American
army."
"WEAKNESS OF THE AMERICAN ARMY.
"In the winter of 1777-78 the 'dreadful situation of the army for want
of provisions,' made Washington 'advise' that they should not have been
excited to a general mutiny and desertion. In May, 1779, he hardly knew
any resource for the American cause _except in reinforcements from
France_, and did not know what might be the consequence if the enemy had
it in their power to press the troops hard in the ensuing campaign. In
December of that year his forces were 'mouldering away daily,' and he
considered that Sir Henry Clinton, with more than twice his numbers,
could 'not justify remaining inactive with a force so superior.' A year
later he was compelled, for want of clothing, to discharge the levies
which he had always so much trouble in obtaining; and 'want of flour
would have disbanded the whole army' if he had not adopted this
expedient.
"In March, 1781, again the crisis was 'perilous,' and though he did not
doubt the happy issue of the contest, he considered that the period for
accomplishment might be too far distant for a person of his years. In
April he wrote: 'We cannot transport provisions from the States in which
they are assessed to the army, because we cannot pay the teamsters, who
will no longer work for certificates. It is equally certain that our
troops are approaching fast to nakedness, and that we have nothing to
clothe them with; that our hospitals are without medicines, and our sick
without nutriment, except such as well men eat; and that all our public
works are at a stand, and the artificers disbanding. * * It may be
declared in a word that we are at the end of our tether, and that now or
never our deliverance must come.' Six months later, when Yorktown
capitulated, the British forces remaining in North America, after the
surrender of that garrison by Cornwallis, were more considerable than
they had been as late as February, 1779, and Sir Henry Clinton even then
declared that with a reinforcement of 10,000 he would be responsible for
the conquest of America.
"_The main hope of success on the English_ side lay in the idea that the
spirit and acts of resistance to the authority of the mother country
were in reality only on the part of a turbulent minority--that the bulk
of the people desired to be loyal. It is certain indeed that the
struggle was, in America itself, much more of a civil war than the
Americans are now generally disposed to admit. In December, 1780, there
were 8,954 'Provincials' among the British forces in America, and on
March 7th, 1781, a letter from Lord George Germaine to Sir H. Clinton,
intercepted by the Americans, says: 'The American levies in the King's
service are more in number than the whole of the enlisted troops in the
service of the Congress.' As late as September 1st, 1781, there were
7,241. We hear of loyal 'associations' in Massachusetts, Maryland, and
Pennsylvania; of 'associated Loyalists' in New York; and everywhere of
'Tories,' whose arrest Washington is found suggesting to Governor
Trumbull, of Connecticut, as early as November 12th, 1775. But New York,
New Jersey, and Pennsylvania remained long full of Tories. By June 28th,
1776, the disaffected on Long Island had taken up arms, and after the
evacuation of New York by Washington a brigade of Loyalists was raised
on the island, and companies were formed in two neighbouring counties to
join the King's troops. During Washington's retreat through New Jersey,
'the inhabitants, either from fear or disaffection, almost to a man
refused to turn out.' In Pennsylvania, the militia, instead of giving
any assistance in repelling the British, exulted at their approach and
over the misfortunes of their countrymen. On the 20th of that month the
British were 'daily gathering strength from the disaffected.' In 1777,
the Tories who joined Burgoyne in his expedition from the North are said
to have doubled his force. In 1778, Tories joined the Indians in the
devastation of Wyoming and Cherry Valley; and although the
indiscriminate ravages of the British, or of the Germans in their pay,
seem to have aroused the three States above mentioned to self-defence,
yet, as late as May, 1780, Washington still speaks of sending a small
party of cavalry to escort La Fayette safely through the 'Tory
settlements' of New York. Virginia, as late as the spring of 1776, was
'alarmed at the idea of independence.' Washington admitted that his
countrymen (of that State), 'from their form of government, and steady
attachment heretofore to royalty,' would 'come reluctantly' to that
idea, but trusted to 'time and persecution.' In 1781, the ground for
transferring the seat of war to the Chesapeake was the number of
Loyalists in that quarter. In the Southern States the division of
feeling was still greater. In the Carolinas, a royalist regiment was
raised in a few days in 1776, and again in 1779. In Georgia and in South
Carolina the bitterest partisan warfare was carried on between Whig and
Tory bands; and a body of New York Tories contributed powerfully to the
fall of Savannah in 1778, by taking the American forces in the rear.
"On the other hand, the British generals did not receive that support
from the Loyalists which they had expected. They seem to have looked
upon the Loyalists as an inferior class of aids to the regular soldiery;
their advice seems to have been unsought, and the mode of war pursued
was European, and not adapted to the peculiar circumstances of America.
The Loyalist volunteers were looked upon as the rivals to rather than
fellow-soldiers of the regular army; and no provincial Loyalist was
promoted to lead any expedition or command any position of importance.
This depreciation of the Loyalists by the English (utterly incompetent)
generals exactly answered the purposes of American writers. _But the
real cause of its protraction_, though it may be hard to an American to
admit the fact, lay in the incapacity of the American politicians, and,
it must be added, in the supineness and want of patriotism of the
American people. If indeed importing into the views of later date, we
look upon it as one between two nations, the mismanagement of the war by
the Americans on all points save one--the retention of Washington in the
chief command--is seen to have been so pitiable, from first to last, as
to be in fact almost unintelligible."
"DESCRIPTION OF THE AMERICAN ARMY, AND THE MANNER OF RAISING IT.
"We can only understand the case when we see there was no such thing as
an American nation in existence, but only a number of revolted colonies,
jealous of one another, and with no tie but that of common danger. Even
in the army divisions broke out. Washington, in a General Order of
August, 1776, says: 'It is with great concern that the general
understands that jealousies have arisen among the troops from the
different provinces, and reflections are frequently thrown out which
can only tend to irritate each other and injure the noble cause in
which we are engaged.'"
"WANT OF PUBLIC SPIRIT AND PATRIOTISM IN THE STATES.
"It was seldom that much help could be obtained in troops from any
State, unless the State were immediately threatened by the enemy; and
even then these troops would be raised by that State for its own
defence, irrespectively of the general or 'continental army.' 'Those at
a distance from the seat of war,' wrote Washington, in April, 1778,
'live in such perfect tranquillity, that they conceive the dispute to be
in a manner at an end, and those near it are so disaffected that they
serve only as embarrassments.' In January, 1779, we find him
remonstrating with the Governor of Rhode Island, because that State had
'ordered several battalions to be raised for the State only; and this
before the proper measures are taken to fill the continental regiments.'
The different bounties and rates of pay allowed by the various States
were a constant source of annoyance to him."
"DECLINE OF CONGRESS.
"After the first year, the best men were not returned to Congress, and
did not return to it. Whole States remained frequently unrepresented. In
the winter of 1777-78, Congress was reduced to twenty-one members. But
even with a full representation it could do little. 'One State will
comply with a requisition,' writes Washington in 1780, 'another neglects
to do it, a third executes by halves, and all differ either in the
manner, the matter, or so much in point of time, that we are always
working up-hill.'
"At first, Congress was really nothing more than a voluntary Committee.
When the Confederation was completed, which was only, be it remembered,
on March 1, 1781, it was still, as Washington wrote in 1785, 'little
more than a shadow without a substance, and the Congress a nugatory
body;' or, as it was described by a late writer, 'powerless for
government, and a rope of sand for union.'"
"DECLINE OF ENERGY AND SPIRIT AMONG THE COLONISTS AND ARMY.
"Like politicians, like people. There was, no doubt, a brilliant display
of patriotic ardour at the first flying to arms of the colonists.
Lexington and Bunker's Hill were actions decidedly creditable to their
raw troops. The expedition to Canada, foolhardy though it proved, was
pursued up to a certain point with real heroism. But with it the heroic
period of the war (individual instances excepted) may be said to have
closed. There seems little reason to doubt that the revolution would
never have been commenced if it had been expected to cost so tough a
struggle. 'A false estimate of the power and perseverance of our
enemies,' wrote James Duane to Washington, 'was friendly to the present
revolution, and inspired that confidence of success in all ranks of the
people which was necessary to unite them in so arduous a cause.' As
early as November, 1775, Washington wrote, speaking of military
arrangements: 'Such a dearth of public spirit, and such want of
virtue--such stock-jobbing and fertility in all the low arts to obtain
advantage of one kind or another, I never saw before, and pray God's
mercy that I may never be witness to it again.' Such a 'mercenary
spirit' pervaded the whole of the troops that he should not have been
'at all surprised at any disaster.' At the same date, besides desertion
of thirty or forty soldiers at a time, he speaks of the practice of
plundering as so rife that 'no man is secure in his effects, and
scarcely in his person.' People were 'frightened out of their houses
under pretence of those houses being ordered to be burnt, with a view of
seizing the goods;' and to conceal the villainy more effectually, some
houses were actually burned down. On February 28th, 1777, 'the
scandalous loss, waste, and private appropriation of public arms during
the last campaign' had been 'beyond all conception.' Officers drew
'large sums under pretence of paying their men, and appropriated them.'
"'Can we carry on the war much longer?' Washington asks in 1778, after
the treaty with France and the appearance of the French fleet off the
coast. 'Certainly not, unless some measures can be devised and speedily
executed to restore the credit of our currency and restrain extortion
and punish forestallers.' A few days later: 'To make and extort money in
every shape that can be devised, and at the same time to decry its
value, seems to have become a mere business and an epidemical disease.'
On December 30th, 1778, 'speculation, peculation, and an insatiable
thirst for riches seems to have got the better of every consideration,
and almost of every order of men; * * party disputes and personal
quarrels are the great business of the day (in Congress), whilst the
momentous concerns of an empire, a great and accumulating debt, ruined
finances, depreciated money, and want of credit, which in its
consequences is the want of everything, are but secondary
considerations."
"DECLINE OF PATRIOTIC FEELING ON THE PART OF THE AMERICANS.
"After the first loan had been obtained from France and spent, and a
further one was granted in 1782, so utterly unpatriotic and selfish was
known to be the temper of the people that the loan had to be kept
secret, in order not to diminish such efforts as might be made by the
Americans themselves. On July 10th of that year, with New York and
Charleston still in British hands, Washington writes: 'That spirit of
freedom which at the commencement of the contest would have gladly
sacrificed everything to the attainment of its object, has long since
subsided, and every selfish passion has taken its place.' But, indeed,
the mere fact that from the date of the battle of Monmouth (July 28th,
1778), Washington was never supplied with sufficient means, even with
the assistance of the French fleets and troops, to strike one blow at
the English in New York--though these were but very sparingly reinforced
during the period--shows an absence of public spirit, one might almost
say of national shame, scarcely conceivable, and in singular contrast
with the terrible earnestness exhibited on both sides, some eighty years
later, in the Secession War."
"INCAPACITY OF ENGLISH GENERALS IN AMERICA.
"Why, then, must we ask on the other side, did the English fail at last?
"The English were prone to attribute their ill success to the
incompetency of their generals. Lord North, with his quaint humour,
would say, 'I do not know whether our generals will frighten the enemy,
but I know they frighten me whenever I think of them.' When, in 1778,
Lord Carlisle came out as Commissioner, in a letter speaking of the
great scale of all things in America, he says, 'We have nothing on a
great scale with us but our blunders, our losses, our disgraces and
misfortunes.' No doubt, it is difficult to account for Gage's early
blunders; for Howe's repeated failure to follow up his own success, or
profit by his enemy's weakness; and Cornwallis's movement, justly
censured by Sir Henry Clinton, in transferring the bulk of his army from
the far south to Virginia, within marching distance of Washington,
opened the way to that crowning disaster at Yorktown, without which it
is by no means impossible that Georgia and the Carolinas might have
remained British."
"INEFFECTIVE MILITARY ARRANGEMENTS IN AMERICA.
"Political incapacity was, of course, charged upon Ministers as another
cause of disaster; and no doubt their miscalculation of the severity of
the struggle was almost childish. But no mistakes in the management of
the war by British statesmen can account for their ultimate failure.
However great British mismanagement may have been, it was far surpassed
by the Americans. There was nothing on the British side equal to that
caricature of a recruiting system in which different bounties were
offered by Congress, by the States, by the separate towns, so as to make
it the interest of the intended soldier to delay enlistment as long as
possible, in order to sell himself to the highest bidder; to that
caricature of a war establishment, the main bulk of which broke up every
twelvemonth in front of the enemy, which was only paid, if at all, in
worthless paper, and left continually without supplies. On the whole, no
better idea can be had of the nature of the struggle on the American
side, after the first heat of it had cooled down, than from the words of
Count de Rochambeau, writing to Count de Vergennes, July 10th, 1780:
'They have neither money nor credit; their means of resistance are only
momentary, and called forth when they are attacked in their own homes.
They then assemble for the moment of immediate danger and defend
themselves.'"
"FRENCH MONEY, TROOPS, AND SHIPS TURN THE SCALE IN FAVOUR OF AMERICAN
INDEPENDENCE.
"A far more important cause in determining the ultimate failure of the
British was the aid afforded by France to America, followed by that of
Spain and Holland. It was impossible for England to re-conquer a
continent and carry on a war at the same time with the three most
powerful naval States of Europe. The instincts of race have tended on
both the English and American side to depreciate the value of the aid
given by France to the colonists. It may be true that Rochambeau's
troops, which disembarked on Rhode Island in July, 1780, did not march
till July, 1781; that they were blockaded soon after their arrival,
threatened with attack from New York, and only disengaged by a feint of
Washington's on that city. But more than two years before their arrival,
Washington wrote to a member of Congress: 'France, by her supplies, has
saved us from the yoke thus far.' The treaty with France alone was
considered to afford a 'certain prospect of success' to 'secure'
American independence. The arrival of D'Estaing's fleet, although no
troops joined the American army, and nothing eventually was done,
determined the evacuation of Philadelphia. The discipline of the French
troops, when they landed in 1780, set an example to the Americans;
chickens and pigs walked between the lines without being disturbed. The
recruits of 1780 could not have been armed without fifty tons of
ammunition supplied by the French. In September of that year,
Washington, writing to the French envoy, speaks of the 'inability' of
the Americans to expel the British from the South unassisted, or perhaps
even to stop their career; and he writes in similar terms to Congress a
few days later. To depend 'upon the resources of the country, unassisted
by foreign loans,' he writes to a member of Congress two months later,
'will, I am confident, be to lean upon a broken reed.' In January, 1781,
writing to Colonel Laurens,[121] the American envoy in Paris, he presses
for 'an immediate, ample, efficacious succour in money from France,'
also for the maintenance on the American coasts of 'a constant naval
superiority,' and likewise for 'an additional succour in troops.' And
since the assistance so requested was in fact granted in every shape,
and the surrender of Yorktown was obtained by the co-operation both of
the French army and fleet, we must hold that Washington's words were
justified by the event."[122]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 121: War of American Independence, 1777-1783, by John Malcolm
Ludlow, Chap, vii., pp. 215-227.]
[Footnote 122: Dr. Ramsay says: "Pathetic representations were made to
the Ministers of his Most Christian Majesty by Washington, Dr. Franklin,
and particularly by Lieutenant-Colonel John Laurens, who was sent to the
Court of Versailles as a special Minister on this occasion. The King of
France _gave_ the United States a subsidy [as a present] of six millions
of livres, and became their security for ten millions more, borrowed for
their use in the United Netherlands." (History of the United States,
Vol. II., Chap. xxiii., p. 407.)]
APPENDIX B. TO CHAPTER XXXVII.
REFLECTIONS OF LORD MAHON ON THE AMERICAN CONTEST AND ITS
RESULTS--APOLOGY FOR GEORGE THE THIRD--UNHAPPINESS OF AMERICANS SINCE
THE REVOLUTION--UNITY OF THE ANGLO-SAXON RACE.
At this period (Declaration of Independence), the culminating point in
the whole American war, I may be forgiven for desiring to interrupt its
narrative in order to review its course and its results. That injurious
and oppressive acts of power had been inflicted by England upon America,
I have in many places shown, and do most fully acknowledge. That from
the other side, and above all from Massachusetts, there had been strong
provocation, I must continue to maintain. I should not deem it
consistent with candour to deny that the Americans had sufficient ground
for resisting, as they did resist, the Ministerial and Parliamentary
measures. But whether these had yet attained a pitch to justify them in
discarding and renouncing their allegiance to the Throne is a far more
doubtful question--a question on which perhaps neither an Englishman nor
yet an American could quite impartially decide.
"The time has come, however, as I believe and trust, when it is possible
to do equal justice to the many good and upright men who in this great
struggle embraced the opposite sides. The great mass of the people meant
honestly on both shores of the Atlantic. The two chief men in both
countries were alike pure-minded. On the one side there were deeds that
savoured of tyranny; on the other side there were deeds that savoured of
rebellion; yet at heart George the Third was never a tyrant, nor
Washington ever a rebel. Of Washington I most firmly believe, that no
single act appears in his whole public life proceeding from any other
than public, and those the highest motives. But my persuasion is no
less firm that there would be little flattery in applying the same terms
of respect and commendation to the 'good old king.' I do not deny,
indeed, that some degree of prejudice and pride may, though
unconsciously, have mingled with his motives. I do not deny that at the
outset of these troubles he lent too ready an ear to the glozing reports
of his governors and deputies, the Hutchinsons or Olivers, Gateses,
Dunmores, etc., assuring him that the discontents were confined to a
factious few, and that measures of rigour and repression alone were
needed. For such measures of rigour he may deserve, and has incurred,
his share of censure. But after the insurgent colonies had proclaimed
their independence, is it just to blame King George, as he often has
been blamed, for his steadfast and resolute resistance to that claim?
Was it for him, unless after straining every nerve against it, to
forfeit a portion of his birthright and a jewel of his crown? Was it for
him, though the clearest case of necessity, to allow the rending asunder
his empire--to array for all time to come of several millions of his
people against the rest? After calling on his loyal subjects in the
colonies to rise, after requiring and employing their aid, was it for
him, on any light grounds, to relinquish his cause and theirs, and yield
them over, unforgiven, to the vengeance of their countrymen? Was it for
him to overlook the consequences, not even yet, perhaps in their full
extent unfolded, of such a precedent of victory to popular and colonial
insurrection? May not the King, on the contrary, have deemed that on
such a question, touching as it did both his honour and his rights, he
was bound to be firm--firmer than even the firmest of his Ministers?
Not, of course, that he could be justified for persevering; but in
truth, he did not so persevere after every reasonable hope had failed.
Not, of course, that he could be excused from continuing to demand, or
to expect, unconditional submission; but, as his own letters to Lord
North assure us, such an idea was never harboured in his mind. To do his
duty conscientiously, as he should answer it to God hereafter, and
according to the lights he had received, such was his unceasing aim and
endeavour from the day when, young but superior to the frailties of
youth, he first assumed the reins of government, until that dismal
period, half a century later, when, bowed down by years and sorrows,
and blind, doubly blind, he concluded his reign, though not, as yet, his
life.
"Before the American war had commenced, and during its first period,
nearly all the statesmen and writers of England argued, or rather took
for granted as too plain to stand in need of argument, that separation
from our colonies would most grievously impair, if not wholly ruin, the
parent State. * * It is worthy of note how much our experience has run
counter to the general prognostication--how little the loss was felt, or
how quickly the void was supplied. An historian of high and just
authority--Mr. Macaulay--has observed that England was never so rich, so
great, so formidable to foreign princes, so absolutely mistress of the
sea, as since the alienation of the American colonies. (Essays, Vol.
II.) The true effect of that alienation upon ourselves, as time has
shown, has been not positive, but by comparison it has lain not in the
withdrawal of wealth and population and resources, but in raising up a
rival State from the same race, and with powers and energies not
inferior to our own.
"But how far, and in what degree, has the new form of government
promoted the happiness of the United States themselves? * * It would be
folly, or worse than folly, to deny that since their independence the
prosperity of the United States has advanced with gigantic strides; that
they have grown to be a first-rate power; that immense works of public
utility have been achieved with marvellous speed; that the clearing of
new lands and the building of new cities have been such as to outstrip
the most sanguine calculations; that among them the working classes have
been, in no common degree, well paid and prosperous; that a feeling for
the national honour is in no country stronger; that the first elements
of education have been most widely diffused; that many good and brave
men have been trained and are training to the service of the
Commonwealth. But have their independent institutions made them, on the
whole, a happy and contented people? That, among themselves, is often
proclaimed as undeniable; and certainly among themselves it may not
always be safely denied. That, however, is not always the impression
conveyed to him who only sojourns in their land, by the careworn faces,
by the hurried steps, by the unsocial meals which he sees, or by the
incessant party cries which he hears around him; by the fretful
aspirations and the feverish hopes resulting from the unbounded space of
competition open to them without check or barrier; and by the
innumerable disappointments and heartburnings which in consequence
arise. On the true condition of North America, let us mark the
correspondence between two of the greatest and most highly gifted of her
sons. There is now open before me a letter which, in August, 1837, and
on the annexation of Texas, Dr. Channing wrote to Mr. Clay. In that
letter, as published in Boston, I find the following words (and what Dr
Channing said in 1837 has been illustrated in scores of instances since
that time, and greatly enhanced by the events of the civil war):
"'I cannot do justice to this topic without speaking freely of our
country, as freely as I should of any other; and unhappily we are so
accustomed, as a people, to receive incense, to be soothed by flattery,
and to account reputation a more important interest than morality, that
my freedom may be construed into a kind of disloyalty. But it would be
wrong to make concessions to this dangerous weakness. * * Among us a
spirit of lawlessness pervades the community which, if not repressed,
threatens the dissolution of our present forms of society. Even in the
old States, mobs are taking the government into their hands, and a
profligate newspaper finds little difficulty in stirring up multitudes
to violence. * * Add to all this the invasions of the rights of speech
and of the press by lawless force, the extent and toleration of which
oblige us to believe that a considerable portion of our citizens have no
comprehension of the first principles of liberty. It is an undeniable
fact that, in consequence of these and other symptoms, the confidence of
many reflecting men in our free institutions is very much impaired. Some
despair. That main pillar of public liberty--mutual trust among
citizens--is shaken. That we must seek security for property and life in
a stronger government is a spreading conviction. Men who in public talk
of the ability of our institutions, whisper their doubts, perhaps their
scorn, in private.
"'Whether the people of the United States might have been as thriving
and more happy had they remained British subjects, I will not presume to
say. Certainly not if violent men like Lord Hillsborough, or corrupt men
like Mr. Rigby, had continued to take part in the administration. With
other hands at the helm the case might have been otherwise. Jefferson,
at least, in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, said of
his countrymen and of the English: "We might have been a free and great
people together." One thing, at all events, is plain, that had these
colonies shared the fate of the other dominions of the British Crown,
the main curse and shame--the plague spot of the system of
slavery--would have been long since removed from them (before it was);
but, as in the case of Jamaica, not without a large compensation in
money to the slave owners. It is also plain that in the case supposed
they would have equally shared in our pride and glory at the wondrous
growth of the Anglo-Saxon race--that race undivided and entire,
extending its branches as now to the furthest regions of the earth, yet
all retaining their connection with the parent stem--all its members
bound by the same laws, all animated by the same loyalty, and all
tending to the same public-spirited aim. How great a nation should we
and they be together!--how great in the arts both of peace and war!
scarcely unequal now to all other nations of the world combined!" * *
"Since 1782 at the latest, views like these are merely day-dreams of the
past. In place of them, let us now indulge the hope and expectation that
the American people may concur with ours in desiring that no further
resentment may be nourished, no further strife be stirred, between the
kindred nations; so that both, mindful of their common origin, and
conscious of their growing greatness, may both alike discard, as
unworthy of them, all mean and petty jealousies, and be ever henceforth
what nature has designed them--friends."[123]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 123: Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol. VI., Chap.
liii., pp. 150-160.]
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
TREATMENT OF THE LOYALISTS BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT AND PARLIAMENT
AFTER THE REVOLUTION.
PART I.
PROCEEDINGS IN PARLIAMENT--REFUSAL OF THE STATES TO COMPENSATE THE
LOYALISTS.
It has been seen, by the fact stated in the last preceding chapter, that
the promised recommendations of Congress to the several States, as
agreed upon by the English and American Commissioners of the peace
negotiations at Paris, were, as had been expected and predicted by Dr.
Franklin at the time, without any result, the State Legislatures passing
Acts to proscribe rather than compensate the Loyalists. In justification
of these Acts, the American writers of that period, and largely down to
the present time, assailed the character of the Loyalists in the
grossest language of calumny and abuse; but the most respectable
American writers of the present age bear testimony to the intelligence,
wealth, and respectability of the Loyalists; and the fact, no longer
questionable, that they sacrificed wealth, liberty, country, and chose
poverty and exile, in support of their principles, has fully vindicated
their character and presented their conduct in advantageous contrast
with that of those who deprived them of their liberty, and largely
profited by the confiscation of their immense property, while they and
their families were pining in exile and want.
The only resource of the exiled and impoverished Loyalists, under such
circumstances, was the Government and Parliament of the mother country
to which they had so faithfully adhered, and nothing could be more
honourable than the testimony borne in the British Parliament to their
character and merits, and the consideration given to their wants and
claims. The fifth Article of the Treaty of Paris, leaving the Loyalists
to the recommendation of the Congress to the Legislatures of the several
States, was severely reprobated in both Houses of Parliament. In the
House of Commons, Mr. Wilberforce said that "when he considered the case
of the Loyalists, he confessed he felt himself conquered; there he saw
his country humiliated; he saw her at the feet of America; still he was
induced to believe that Congress would religiously comply with the
Article, and that the Loyalists would obtain redress from America.
Should they not, this country was bound to afford it them. They _must be
compensated_; Ministers, he was persuaded, meant to keep _the faith of
the nation with them_."
Lord North (who had been Prime Minister during twelve years, including
the war) said:
"And now let me, Sir, pause on a part of the treaty which awakens human
sensibility in a very irresistible and lamentable degree. I cannot but
lament the fate of those unhappy men, who, I conceive, were in general
objects of our _gratitude_ and _protection_. The Loyalists, from their
attachments, surely had some claim to our affection. But what were not
the claims of those who, in conformity to their _allegiance_, their
_cheerful obedience_ to the _voice of Parliament_, their confidence in
the proclamation of our generals, invited under every assurance of
_military, parliamentary, political, and affectionate protection,_
espoused with the hazard of their lives, and the forfeiture of their
properties, the cause of Great Britain? _I cannot but feel for men thus
sacrificed for their bravery and principles_--men who have sacrificed
all the dearest possessions of the human heart. They have exposed their
lives, endured an age of hardships, deserted their interests, forfeited
their possessions, lost their connections, and ruined their families _in
our cause_. Could not all this waste of human enjoyment excite one
desire of protecting them from a state of misery, with which the
implacable resentment of the States has desired to punish their loyalty
to their Sovereign and their attachment to their mother country? Had we
not espoused their cause from a _principle of affection and gratitude_,
we should, at least, have _protected_ them _to have preserved our own
honour_. If not tender of _their feelings_, we should have been tender
_of our own character_. Never was the _honour_, the _principles_, the
policy of a nation so grossly abused as in the desertion of those men,
who are now exposed to _every punishment_ that _desertion_ and _poverty_
can inflict, _because they were not rebels_."
Lord Mulgrave said: "The Article respecting the Loyalists he never could
regard but as a lasting monument of _national disgrace_. Nor was this
Article, in his opinion, more reproachful and derogatory to the _honour
and gratitude_ of Great Britain than it appeared to be wanton and
unnecessary. The honourable gentleman who had made the motion had asked
if those gentlemen who thought the present peace not sufficiently
advantageous to Great Britain, considering her circumstances, could
consent to pay the amount which another campaign (twenty millions) would
have put us to, for the degree of advantage they might think we had a
right to expect? In answer to this, he declared, for one, he had rather,
large as the estimated sum in question was, have had it stipulated in
the treaty, _that Great Britain should apply it to making good the
losses of the Loyalists_, than that they should have been so _shamefully
deserted and the national honour so pointedly disgraced_ as it was by
the fifth Article of the treaty with the United States."
_Mr. Secretary Townsend_ (afterwards Lord Sydney) said "he was ready to
admit that many of the Loyalists had the strongest claims upon the
country; and he trusted, should the recommendation of Congress to the
American States prove unsuccessful, which he flattered himself would not
be the case, _this country_ would feel itself bound _in honour to make
them full compensation for their losses_."
_Mr. Burke_ said: "At any rate, it must be agreed on all hands that a
vast number of Loyalists had been deluded by this country, and had
risked everything in our cause; to such men the _nation owed protection,
and its honour was pledged for their security at all hazards_."
_The Lord Advocate_ said: "With regard to the Loyalists, they merited
_every possible effort on the part of this country_."
_Mr. Sheridan_ "execrated the treatment of those unfortunate men, who,
without the least notice taken of their civil and religious rights, were
handed over as subjects to a power that would not fail to take
vengeance on them for their zeal and attachment to the religion and
government of this country. This was an instance of _British degradation
not inferior_ to the unmanly petitions to Congress for the wretched
Loyalists. Great Britain at the feet of Congress, suing in vain, was not
a humiliation or a stigma greater than the infamy of consigning over the
loyal inhabitants of Florida, as we had done, without any conditions
whatsoever."
"_The Honourable Mr. Norton_ said that 'Under the circumstances, he was
willing to approve of the two former (European treaties with France and
Spain); but on account of the Article relating to the Loyalists, he felt
it impossible to give his assent to the latter."
_Sir Peter Burrell_ said: "The fate of the Loyalists claimed the
compassion of every human breast. These helpless, forlorn men, abandoned
by the Ministers of a people on whose _justice, gratitude_, and
_humanity_ they had the best-founded claims, were left at the mercy of a
Congress highly irritated against them. He spoke not from party zeal,
but as an independent country gentleman, who, unconnected with party,
expressed the emotions of his heart and gave vent to his honest
indignation."
_Sir William Bootle_ said: "There was one part of the treaty at which
his heart bled--the Article relative to the Loyalists. Being a man
himself, he could not but feel for men so cruelly abandoned to the
malice of their enemies. It was scandalous; it was disgraceful. Such an
Article as that ought scarcely on any condition to have been admitted on
our part. They had fought for us and run every hazard to assist our
cause; and when it most behoved us to afford them protection, we
deserted them."
Several other members spoke to the same effect. The treaty recognizing
the Independence of America could not be reversed, as an Act passed the
previous session had expressly authorized the King and his Cabinet to
make it; but it was denied that a treaty sacrificing the Loyalists and
making the concessions involved had been authorized; in consequence of
which an express vote of censure was passed by the Commons by a majority
of seventeen. The Earl of Shelburne, the Prime Minister, forthwith
resigned in consequence of this vote of censure, and it was nearly three
months before a new Administration could be formed; and during this
administrative interregnum affairs were in great confusion.
In the _House of Lords, Lord Walsingham_ said that "he could neither
think nor speak of the dishonour of leaving these deserving people to
their fate with patience." _Lord Viscount Townsend_ considered that "to
desert men who had constantly adhered to loyalty and attachment, was a
circumstance of such cruelty as had never before been heard of." _Lord
Stormont_ said that "Britain was bound in justice and honour, gratitude
and affection, and by every tie, to provide for and protect them." _Lord
Sackville_ regarded "the abandonment of the Loyalists as a thing of so
atrocious a kind, that if it had not been painted in all its horrid
colours he should have attempted the ungracious task but never should
have been able to describe the cruelty in language as strong and
expressive as were his feelings;" and again, that "peace on the
sacrifice of these unhappy subjects must be answered in the sight of God
and man." _Lord Loughborough_ said that "the fifth Article of the treaty
had excited a general and just indignation, and that neither in ancient
nor modern history had there been so shameful a desertion of men who had
sacrificed all to their duty and to their reliance on British faith."
In reply, _Lord Shelburne_, the Prime Minister, frankly admitted that
the Loyalists were left without better provision being made for them
"from the unhappy _necessity_ of public affairs, which induced the
extremity of submitting the fate of their property to the discretion of
their enemies;" and he continued: "I have but one answer to give the
House--it is the answer I gave my own bleeding heart--a _part_ must be
wounded, that the whole of the empire may not perish. If better terms
could be had, think you, my lords, that I would not have embraced them?
_I had but the alternative either to accept the terms proposed or
continue the war._" The _Lord Chancellor_ held that the stipulations of
the treaty were "specific," and said: "My own conscious honour will not
allow me to doubt the good faith of others, and my good wishes to the
Loyalists will not let me indiscreetly doubt the disposition of
Congress, since the understanding is that all these unhappy men shall be
provided for; yet, if it were not so, Parliament could take cognizance
of their case, and impart to each suffering individual that relief
which reason, perhaps policy, certainly virtue and religion, required."
Such were the sentiments of members in both Houses of Parliament, and of
both parties, as to the character and merits of the Loyalists. But there
were no prospects of the States compensating them for their losses.
Indeed, this idea was entertained by Lord Shelburne himself, and that
compensation would have to be made to the Loyalists by Parliament when,
in the speech above quoted, he said that "without one drop of blood
spilt, and without one-fifth of the expense of one year's campaign,
happiness and ease can be given to them in as ample a manner as these
blessings were ever in their enjoyment." This was certainly a very low
and mercenary view of the subject. It was one thing for the Loyalists to
have their rights as British subjects maintained while they were obeying
the commands of the King and maintaining their allegiance to the empire,
and another thing for them to become pensioners upon the bounty of the
British Parliament, to be paid in pounds, shillings, and pence for the
rights and privileges which should have been secured to them by national
treaty as British subjects. The House of Commons had adopted a
resolution against continuing the American war for the _purpose of
enforcing the submission of the colonies_; but it had not resolved
against continuing the war to protect the rights and property of British
subjects in the colonies. A campaign for this purpose, on the refusal of
the American Commissioners to recognize what was sanctioned by the laws
and usages of nations, would have been honourable to the British
Government, would have been popular in England, and would have divided
America; for there were many thousand "Whigs" in America, who believed
in the equity of treating the Loyalists after the war as all others were
treated who conformed to the laws, as has been the case in Holland,
Ireland, and Spain. England was then mistress of the seas, held New
York, Charleston, Rhode Island, Penobscot, and other military posts, and
could soon have induced the Americans to do what their Peace
Commissioners at Paris had refused to do--place British subjects in
America upon the same footing as to property that they possessed before
the war, and that they possess in the United States at this day. England
could have easily and successfully refused granting to the United
States a foot of land beyond the limits of the thirteen colonies, and
thus have secured those vast western territories now constituting the
larger part of the United States, and retained the garrisons of New
York, Rhode Island, and Charleston as guarantees until the stipulated
conditions in regard to the Loyalists should be fulfilled. A joint
Commission in America could have settled upon equitable grounds all
disputed claims in much less time than the six years occupied by a
Parliamentary Commission in examining into and deciding upon the
individual claims of Loyalist claimants. If the war to reduce the
colonies to absolute submission had been unpopular in England, the peace
upon the terms submitted to by the English Commissioners and the
Ministry was equally unpopular. If England had been wrong in its war of
coercion against the revolting colonists, was she not equally wrong, and
more than wrong, in abandoning to their enemies those who had abided
faithful to her laws and commands? The language of the speeches of
members of both Houses of Parliament, above quoted, is as just as it is
severe; although much could be and was said in justification of the
policy of the Government in promoting peace upon almost any terms,
seeing that England was at war with the three most powerful naval
nations of Europe, besides that in America.
The fallacy of the argument employed by the advocates of the treaty,
that the Americans would honourably fulfil the recommendations of
Congress, was illustrated by the following facts:
"The province of Virginia, a short time before the peace, had come to an
unanimous conclusion 'that all demands or requests of the British Court
for the restoration of property confiscated by the State were wholly
impossible; and that their delegates should be instructed to move
Congress that they should direct the deputies for adjusting peace not to
agree to any such restitution.'"
_The State of New York_ resolved, "That it appears to this Legislature
that divers of the inhabitants of this State have continued to adhere to
the King of Great Britain, after these States were declared free and
independent, and persevered in aiding the said king, his fleets and
armies, to subjugate the United States to bondage: Resolved, That as on
the one hand the scales of justice do not require, so on the other the
public tranquillity will not permit, that such adherents who have been
attainted should be restored to the rights of citizens, and that there
can be no reason for restoring property which has been confiscated or
forfeited."
PART II.
AGENTS OF LOYALISTS--PROCEEDINGS OF PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSION--RESULTS.
Of course all hope of obtaining relief under the stipulations of the
treaty was abandoned by the Loyalists, who "now applied to the
Government which they had ruined themselves to serve, and many of them,
who had hitherto been 'refugees' in different parts of America, went to
England to state and recover payment for their losses. They organized an
agency, and appointed a Committee composed of one delegate or agent from
each of the thirteen States,[124] to enlighten the British public, and
adopt measures of proceeding in securing the attention and action of the
British Ministry in their behalf. In a tract printed by order of these
agents (which now lies before us, entitled _The Case and Claim of
American Loyalists impartially Stated and Considered_, published in
1783), it is maintained that 'it is an established rule, that all
sacrifices made by individuals for the benefit and accommodation of
others shall be equally sustained by all those who partake of it,' and
numerous cases are cited from Puffendorf, Burlamaqui and Vattel, to show
that the 'sacrifices' of the Loyalists were embraced in this principle.
As a further ground of claim, it is stated that in case of territory
alienated or ceded away by one sovereign power to another, the rule is
still applicable; for that in the treaties of international law it is
held, 'The State ought to indemnify the subject for the loss he has
sustained beyond his proportion.' And in the course pursued at the close
of the civil war in Spain, when the States of Holland obtained their
independence, under the Treaty of Utrecht, and at various other periods,
proved that the _rights_ of persons similarly situated had been
respected and held inviolate. The conclusion arrived at from the
precedents in history, and diplomacy, and in the statute-books of the
realm, is, that as the Loyalists were as 'perfectly subjects of the
British State as any man in London or Middlesex, they were entitled to
the same protection and relief.' The claimants had been 'called by their
sovereign, when surrounded by tumult and rebellion, to defend the
supreme rights of the nation, and to assist in suppressing a rebellion
which aimed at their destruction. They have received from the highest
authority the most solemn assurances of protection, and even reward, for
their meritorious services;' and that 'His Majesty and the two Houses of
Parliament having thought it necessary, as the _price of peace_, or to
the interest and safety of the empire, or from some other motive of
public convenience, to ratify the Independence of America, _without
securing any restitution whatever to the Loyalists_, they conceive that
the nation is bound, as well by the fundamental laws of society as by
the invariable and external principles of natural justice, to make them
compensation.'"[125]
Though the treaty of peace left the Loyalists to the mercy--rather to
the resentment (as the result proved)--of the American States, and as
such received the censure of the House of Commons, British justice and
honour recognized the claims of the Loyalists to compensation for their
losses, as well as to gratitude for their fidelity to the unity of the
empire. The King, at the opening of the session of Parliament, said: "I
have ordered inquiry to be made into the application of the sum to be
voted in support of the American sufferers; and I trust you will agree
with me, that a due and generous attention ought to be shown to those
who have relinquished their properties or professions from motives of
loyalty to me, or attachment to the mother country." Accordingly, a
Bill was introduced and passed without opposition in June, 1783,
entitled "An Act Appointing Commissioners to Inquire into the Losses and
Services of all such Persons who have Suffered in their Rights,
Properties, and Professions, during the late Unhappy Dissensions in
America, in consequence of their Loyalty to his Majesty and Attachment
to the British Government."
The Commissioners named were John Wilmot, M.P., Daniel Parker Coke,
M.P., Esquires, Col. Robert Kingston, Col. Thomas Dundas, and John
Marsh, Esquire, who, after preliminary preparations, began their inquiry
in the first week of October, and proceeded, with short intermissions,
through the following winter and spring. The time for presenting claims
was first limited by the Act to the 20th of March, 1784; but the time
was extended by the renewal of the Act, from time to time, until 1789,
when the Commissioners presented their _twelfth_ and last report, and
Parliament finally disposed of the whole matter in 1790, seven years
after its commencement.
The Commissioners, according to their first report, divided the
Loyalists into _six_ classes, as follows: 1. Those who had rendered
service to Great Britain. 2. Those who had borne arms for Great Britain.
3. Uniform Loyalists. 4. Loyal English subjects resident in Great
Britain. 5. Loyalists who had taken oaths to the American States, but
afterwards joined the British. 6. Loyalists who had borne arms for the
American States, but afterwards joined the British navy or army. The
reason for this classification is not very apparent; for all showed
alike who were able to establish their losses, without reference to
differences of merit, or the time or circumstances of their adhering to
the Crown.
Every applicant was required to furnish proof of his loyalty, and of
every species of loss for which he claimed compensation; in addition to
which each claimant was put upon his oath as to his alleged losses; and
if in any case _perjury_ or _fraud_ were believed to have been
practised, the claimant was at once cut off from his whole claim. The
rigid rules which the Commissioners laid down and enforced in regard to
claimants, examining each claimant and the witnesses in his behalf
separately and apart, caused much dissatisfaction, and gave the
proceeding more the character of an Inquisition than of Inquiry. It
seemed to place the claimants almost in the position of criminals on
whom rested the burden of proof to establish their own innocence and
character, rather than in that of Loyalists who had faithfully served
their King and country, and lost their homes and possessions in doing
so. Very many, probably the large majority of claimants, could not
possibly prove the exact value of each species of loss which they had
sustained years before, in houses, goods, stocks of cattle, fields with
their crops and produce, woods with their timber, etc., etc. In such a
proceeding the most unscrupulous would be likely to fare the best, and
the most scrupulous and conscientious the worst; and it is alleged that
many false losses were allowed to persons who had suffered no loss,
while many other sufferers received no compensation, because they had
not the means of bringing witnesses from America to _prove_ their
losses, in addition to their own testimony.
The chairman of the Commission admits the delay and difficulty caused by
the mode of proceeding adopted by the Commissioners. He says: "The
investigation of the property of each claimant, and of the value of each
article of that property, real and personal, could not but be attended
with a good deal of time as well as much caution and difficulty, each
claim in fact branching out into so many articles, or rather distinct
causes, in which the Commissioners were obliged to execute the office of
both judge and jury, or rather of arbitrators between the nation on one
side, and the individual on the other, whose whole patrimony as well as
character depended on their verdict."[126]
The Act passed in 1783, authorizing the inquiry, being limited to two
years, expired in July, 1785, but was renewed with some additions, one
of which was a clause to empower the Commissioners to appoint proper
persons to repair to America "to inquire into such circumstances as they
might think material for better ascertaining the several claims which
had been or should be presented to them under this or the former Act of
Parliament." The Commissioners appointed John Anstey, Esq., a
barrister-at-law, as agent to the United States, "to obtain information
as to the confiscation, sale, and value of landed estates, and the total
loss of the property of the claimants," respecting which he procured
much valuable and authentic information and testimony. They sent Colonel
Thomas Dundas and Mr. Jeremy Pemberton, two members of the Board, to
visit Nova Scotia and Canada, "to inquire into the claims of such
persons as could not without great inconvenience go over to Great
Britain."
Before the 25th of March, 1784, the latest period allowed by the first
Act for presenting claims, the number of claimants was 2,063, and the
property alleged by them to have been lost, according to their
schedules, amounted to £7,046,278, besides debts to the amount of
£2,354,135. The sum was very large, but the losses were undoubtedly very
great. The Commissioners made their first report in July, 1784; and
after having detailed their assiduous proceeding in the fulfilment of
their trust, and care in examining and deciding on individual cases,
reported on the part of the cases submitted, and awarded £201,750 for
£534,705 claimed, reducing the amount by more than half the amount
claimed.
The _second_ report of the Commissioners was made in December of the
same year, and states that 128 additional cases had been examined and
disposed of, the amount claimed being £693,257, and the amount allowed
was £150,935--less than one-fourth the amount claimed.
One hundred and twenty-two (122) cases were examined into and disposed
of in May and July, 1785, according to the third and fourth reports--the
amount claimed being £898,196, and the amount allowed being
£253,613--less than one-third of the amount claimed.
In April, 1786, the fifth report of the Commissioners was presented,
announcing that 142 other claims had been considered and decided, the
claims amounting to £733,311, on which the Commissioners allowed
£250,506--a little more than one-third of the amount claimed.
The Commissioners proceeded in the same manner with their
investigations, and with about the same results, in 1786 and 1787.[127]
On the 5th of April, 1788, the Commissioners reported that they had
examined into and declared upon 1,680 claims, and had allowed the sum of
£1,887,548 for their payment.
Under all the circumstances, it appears scarcely possible that the
Commissioners could have proceeded with more despatch than they did. But
the delay caused much dissatisfaction among the Loyalists, whose agents
petitioned both King and Parliament on the delay, or on the course
pursued by the Commissioners, or on some subject connected with the
claims of the Loyalists. Essays and tracts were published; letters and
communications appeared in the newspapers on the subject; in 1786, the
agents of the Loyalists presented a petition to Parliament, which
contained among other things the following touching words: "It is
impossible to describe the poignant distress under which many of these
persons now labour, and which must daily increase should the justice of
Parliament be delayed until all the claims are liquidated and reported;
* * ten years have elapsed since many of them have been deprived of
their fortunes, and with their helpless families reduced from
independent affluence to poverty and want; some of them now languishing
in British jails; others indebted to their creditors, who have lent them
money barely to support their existence, and who, unless speedily
relieved, must sink more than the value of their claims when received,
and be in a worse condition than if they had never made them; others
have already sunk under the pressure and severity of their misfortunes;
and others must, in all probability, soon meet the same melancholy fate,
should the justice due them be longer postponed. But, on the contrary,
should provision be now made for payment of those whose claims have been
settled and reported, it will not only relieve them from their distress,
but give credit to others whose claims remain to be considered, and
enable all of them to provide for their wretched families, and become
again useful members of society."
Two years later, in 1788, a tract was published by a Loyalist, entitled
"The Claim of the American Loyalists Reviewed and Maintained upon
Incontrovertible Principles of Law and Justice." The writer of that
tract thus forcibly states the situation of the Loyalists: "It is well
known that this delay of justice has produced the most melancholy and
shocking events. A number of sufferers have been driven into insanity
and become their own destroyers, leaving behind them their helpless
widows and orphans to subsist upon the cold charity of strangers. Others
have been sent to cultivate the wilderness for their subsistence,
without having the means, and compelled through want to throw themselves
on the mercy of the American States, and the charity of former friends,
to support the life which might have been made comfortable by the money
long since due by the British Government; and many others with their
families are barely subsisting upon a temporary allowance from
Government, a mere pittance when compared with the sum due them."
Shortly after the publication of the pamphlet containing these
statements, the Commissioners submitted their eleventh report, April,
1788, and Mr. Pitt, Chancellor of the Exchequer, yielded the following
month to the pressing entreaties of the claimants to allow their
grievances to be discussed in Parliament. "Twelve years had elapsed
since the property of most of them had been alienated under the
Confiscation Acts, and five since their title to recompense had been
recognized by the law under which their claims had been presented and
disposed of."
We will give an abridged account of the proceedings in Parliament and by
the Commissioners in their own words:
"The business came on in the House of Commons on the 6th of June, 1788,
which Mr. Pitt opened in a very handsome and eloquent speech respecting
the merits of the American Loyalists, and which, he did not doubt, would
meet with the unanimous acknowledgment of the House; and he trusted,
therefore, there would be no difference of opinion as to the principle,
though there might be as to the mode of compensation and the
distribution which he thought it his duty to propose.
"The first principle he laid down was, that however strong their claims
might be on the generosity of the nation, the compensation could not be
considered as _a matter of right and strict justice_;[129] in the mode,
therefore, he had pursued, he had marked the principle in the various
quotas of compensation he should propose to be made to the various
classes of the American Loyalists.
"He considered the three first classes of them, stated by the
Commissioners in their reports as the most meritorious, and who were
likewise the most numerous, viz.:
"1st. Loyalists who had rendered services to Great Britain. Number, 204.
"2nd. Loyalists who had borne arms in the service of Great Britain--481.
"3rd. Zealous and uniform Loyalists--626.
"Total number of these three classes--1,311.
"The number of the remaining classes were much fewer, viz.:
"4th. Loyal British subjects resident in Great Britain--20.
"5th. Who took the oath to the Americans, but afterwards joined the
British--27.
"6th. Who bore arms for the Americans, but afterwards joined the
British--23.
"7th. Ditto, losses under the Prohibitory Act--3.
"8th. Loyal British proprietors--2.
"9th. Subject or settled inhabitants of the United States--25.
"10th. Claims disallowed and withdrawn--313.
"11th. Loyal British subjects who appear to have relief by the Treaty of
Peace, but state the impossibility of procuring it--4.
"Mr. Pitt proposed to pay classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, whose liquidated
losses did not amount to more than £10,000 each, the full amount of
their losses; and if they should exceed the sum of £10,000, to deduct
the sum of ten per cent. from excess only of £10,000, provided such
losses did not exceed £35,000; and if they exceeded £35,000, then
fifteen per cent. from the excess of £10,000, and not above £50,000; and
if they exceeded £50,000, then to deduct twenty per cent. from the
excess of £10,000; and which principle, he informed the Committee, he
meant to follow in every other class.
"With regard to the 4th and 8th classes, viz., of loyal British subjects
and loyal British proprietors resident in Great Britain during the war,
he did not mean to propose any deduction from the losses under £10,000;
but from the losses which amounted from £10,000 to £50,000 he proposed a
deduction of twenty per cent. should be made; and a further deduction
from those losses amounting to above £50,000, and a still further
deduction of seventy per cent. from those from £50,000 to £200,000; and
so on in proportion.
"He next considered the case of those Loyalists whose losses
principally, if not solely, arose from their loss of office or
profession, by which they had been deprived of their livelihood, or
means of support, both for themselves or families. These persons were
distinct from those who had been in trade or other branches of business,
or gained their livelihood by their manual labour. Though these losses
were not of so substantial a nature as those who lost property real or
personal, yet they could not be easily reinstated in the same lucrative
professions which they had enjoyed--civil employment, in the law, in the
Church, or in physic--and therefore he thought them entitled to a
liberal compensation. But as they were not precluded from exercising
their industry and talents in this country, he proposed that all those
persons who were reported by Commissioners to have lost incomes not
exceeding £400 _per annum_, should receive pensions at the rate of £50
_per cent._ of such income, and £40 _per cent._ for every £100 above
£400 per annum; where the value did not exceed £1,500 _per annum_, £30
_per cent._ for every £100 per annum exceeding £400; thus the
_percentage_ would be governed by and diminish in proportion to the
increase of the income lost.
"Having expatiated on these various classes of claimants, Mr. Pitt said
he meant to propose that the amount of these various sums should be
issued in debentures bearing interest at three and a half per cent.,
which would be nearly equal to a money payment, and that the whole
should be paid off by instalments.
"He began, therefore, by moving 'that provision should be made
accordingly.'
"This plan met with general approbation and applause from all sides of
the House; not only from the friends of the Minister, but from leaders
of the Opposition, particularly from Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke; and Mr. Pitt
congratulated the House on their concurrence with him in the plan he
laid before the Committee.
"Soon after a motion was made for continuing the Act another year, for
the purpose principally of enabling the Commissioners to inquire into
claims of certain other persons therein specified, who, it was stated,
appeared to have been prevented by particular circumstances from
preferring their claims before; provided the Commissioners were
satisfied, by proof made on oath, with the reasons assigned by those
persons for not having before preferred their respective claims; and the
Act passed, including these and other purposes.
"As the Commissioners who had gone to Nova Scotia and Canada had by this
time returned to England, and Mr. Anstey was daily expected from the
United States, there was more than sufficient to employ the
Commissioners, independent of the Act for carrying into effect the plan
of relief and compensation into execution.
"The Commissioners immediately, viz., in August, 1788, proceeded with
the various matters referred to them.
"Colonel Dundas and Mr. Pemberton, having returned from Nova Scotia and
Canada, made a separate report of the proceedings to the Board of
Treasury and the Secretaries of State;[130] but the Commissioners,
before they finished their deliberations, united the proceedings of both
Boards in order to give a comprehensive view of the whole.
"Mr. Anstey also having returned from the United States in September,
the Commissioners took a general review of the whole of their
proceedings from the commencement of the inquiry, and were thus enabled
to supply any defects, to correct any mistakes, and to reconsider any
points in which, perhaps, too great humanity to the individuals on the
one hand, or too great anxiety to reduce claims which appeared
exaggerated on the other, might have led them into error.
"Having thus wound up the business in the spring of 1789, they presented
their twelfth and last Report on the 15th of May; and likewise, pursuant
to the order of the House of Commons of the 10th of June, 1789,
presented a statement of them to that House, comprising the whole of
their proceedings in one view, specifying what had been granted by
Parliament and what still remained for consideration; but as the
inquiring into these claims was not completed, and the Minister thought
proper to give way once more to strong applications from various
persons, who had been still prevented from preferring or prosecuting
their claims under the former Acts of Parliament, the Commission was
renewed once more, and it was not till the spring of 1790 that the
business was finally settled and adjusted by Parliament. In the
beginning of April, in consequence of an order of the House of Commons,
on the 31st of March, 1790, the Commissioners laid before the House a
statement of the claims and losses of the American Loyalists up to the
25th of March, 1790, with the terms already granted, and of what
remained for the consideration of Parliament.
"The general result of this was, that the number of claims preferred in
England and Nova Scotia was 3,225--
"Of which were examined 3,225
"Disallowed 343 }
"Withdrawn 38 } 934
"Not prosecuted 553 }
"The amount of the claims preferred was £10,358,413.
"The amount of the claims examined was £8,216,126.
"The amount allowed in liquidation thereof amounted to £3,033,091.
"Of which had been provided £2,096,326.
"There remained for consideration of Parliament £936,764.[131]
"The amount of pensions paid to 204 Loyalists, on account of losses of
office or profession, was £25,785 _per annum_, besides annual allowances
to 588 persons, chiefly widows, orphans, and merchants, who had no means
of livelihood, but had lost no real or personal estate except debts due
them,[132] and which had not been gone into for reasons before given.
"As many of the Loyalists who had received pensions or allowances are
since deceased, the Lords of the Treasury, by his Majesty's direction,
have continued some part of those annual payments to their widows.
"Thus had the nation extended an inquiry for seven successive years into
the losses of those who, from motives of loyalty to his Majesty and
attachment to the British Government, had risked their lives and
sacrificed their fortunes in support of the constitutional dependence of
the colonies on Great Britain.
"Whatever may be said of this unfortunate war, either to account for, to
justify, or to apologize for the conduct of either country, all the
world has been unanimous in applauding the virtue and humanity of Great
Britain in rewarding the services, and in compensating, with a liberal
hand, the losses of those who suffered so much for their firm and
faithful adherence to the British Government."
We will conclude these extracts by giving the Commissioners' account of
their mode of proceeding and the reasons for it, together with the
acknowledgment of the agents of the claimants in a formal address to the
King:
"The principle which has directed our mode of conducting the inquiry,"
say the Commissioners, "has been that of requiring the very best
evidence which the nature and circumstances of the case would admit. We
have in no instance hitherto thought fit to dispense with the personal
appearance and examination of the claimant, conceiving the inquiry would
be extremely imperfect and insecure against fraud and misrepresentation
if we had not the advantage of cross-examining the party himself, as
well as his witnesses; nor have we, for the same reason, allowed much
weight to any testimony that has not been delivered on oath before
ourselves. We have investigated with great strictness the titles to real
property, wherever the necessary documents could be exhibited to us; and
where they have not been produced we have required satisfactory evidence
of their loss, or of the inability of the claimant to procure
them."[133]
The Commissioners conclude their twelfth and last Report in the
following words:
"Great as is the length of time which hath been consumed in the
prosecution of this inquiry, it may without difficulty be accounted for
by a survey of the multiplicity and complicated nature of the objects to
which the Acts of Parliament extended our scrutiny; and when to these
are added the investigation (delegated to us by your lordships) of the
numerous claims for present relief and temporary support (which alone
formed a heavy branch of business, demanding daily attention), the
several reviews and modifications of pension lists, and the various
other extraneous matters which have incidentally devolved upon us, we
trust we shall, on due consideration of this extensive scene of
employment, at least stand exculpated by your lordships of inactivity
and unnecessary delay. We have felt with anxious solicitude the urgency
as well as the importance and delicate nature of the trust reposed in
us, and to this impression our exertions towards the speedy, faithful,
and honourable execution of it have been proportioned. We cannot flatter
ourselves that no errors have been committed; but we have this
consolation, that the most assiduous endeavours have not been wanting on
our part to do justice to the individuals and to the public. Supported
by this reflection in our retirement from this arduous and insidious
employment, we shall feel no inconsiderable satisfaction in having been
instrumental towards the completion of a work which will ever reflect
honour on the character of the British nation.
(Signed) "JOHN WILMOT.
"ROBERT KINGSTON.
"JOHN MARSH.
"Office of American Claims,
"Lincoln's Inn Fields,
"May 15th, 1789."
A proper sequel to this whole proceeding will be the following Address
of the Agents for the American Loyalists, presented to the King by Sir
William Pepperell, Bart., and the other agents, being introduced by the
Lord of his Majesty's Bedchamber in waiting; which address his Majesty
was pleased to receive very graciously, and they all had the honour to
kiss his Majesty's hand:
"_To the King's Most Excellent Majesty._
"The Humble Address of the Agents for the American Loyalists.
"Most Gracious Sovereign,--
"Your Majesty's ever dutiful and loyal subjects, the agents of the
American Loyalists, who have heretofore been the suppliants of your
Majesty in behalf of their distressed constituents, now humbly beg leave
to approach your Throne, to pour forth the ardent effusions of their
grateful hearts for your most gracious and effectual recommendation of
their claims to the just and generous consideration of Parliament.
"To have devoted their fortunes and hazarded their lives in defence of
the just rights of the Crown and the fundamental principles of the
British Constitution, were no more than their duty demanded of them, in
common with your Majesty's other subjects; but it was their peculiar
fortune to be called to the trial, and it is their boast and their glory
to have been found equal to the task.
"They have now the distinguished happiness of seeing their fidelity
approved by their Sovereign, and recompensed by Parliament, and their
fellow-subjects cheerfully contributing to compensate them for the
forfeiture their attachment to Great Britain incited them to incur;
thereby adding dignity to their own exalted character among the nations
of the world, and holding out to mankind the glorious principles of
justice, equity, and benevolence as the firmest basis of empire.
"We should be wanting in justice and gratitude if we did not upon this
occasion acknowledge the wisdom and liberality of the provisions
proposed by your Majesty's servants, conformable to your Majesty's
gracious intentions for the relief and accommodation of the several
classes of sufferers to whose cases they apply; and we are convinced it
will give comfort to your royal heart to be assured they have been
received with the most general satisfaction.
"Professions of the unalterable attachment of the Loyalists to your
Majesty's person and government we conceive to be unnecessary; they
have preserved it under persecution, and gratitude cannot render it less
permanent. They do not presume to arrogate to themselves a more fervent
loyalty than their fellow-subjects possess; but distinguished as they
have been by their sufferings, they deem themselves entitled to the
foremost rank among the most zealous supporters of the British
Constitution. And while they cease not to offer up their most earnest
prayers to the Divine Being to preserve your Majesty and your
illustrious family in the peaceful enjoyment of your just rights, and in
the exercise of your royal virtues in promoting the happiness of your
people, they humbly beseech your Majesty to continue to believe them at
all times, and upon all occasions, equally ready, as they have been, to
devote their lives and properties to your Majesty's service and the
preservation of the British Constitution.
"W. Pepperell, for the Massachusetts Loyalists.
"J. Wentworth, for the New Hampshire Loyalists.
"George Rowe, for the Rhode Island Loyalists.
"Ja. Delancey, for the New York Loyalists.
"David Ogden, for the New Jersey Loyalists.
"Joseph Galloway, for the Pennsylvania and Delaware
Loyalists.
"Robert Alexander, for the Maryland Loyalists.
"John R. Grymer, for the Virginia Loyalists.
"Henry Eustace McCulloch, for the North Carolina
Loyalists.
"James Simpson, for the South Carolina Loyalists.
"William Knox, for the Georgia Loyalists.
"John Graham, late Lieutenant-Governor of Georgia,
and joint agent, for the Georgia Loyalists."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 124: The names of the agents, or delegates, are as follows: W.
Pepperell, for the Massachusetts Loyalists; J. Wentworth, jun., for the
New Hampshire Loyalists; George Rowe, for the Rhode Island Loyalists;
Ja. Delancey, for the New York Loyalists; David Ogden, for the New
Jersey Loyalists; Joseph Galloway, for the Pennsylvania and Delaware
Loyalists; Robert Alexander, for the Maryland Loyalists; John R. Grymes,
for the Virginia Loyalists; Henry Eustace McCulloch, for the North
Carolina Loyalists; James Simpson, for the South Carolina Loyalists;
William Knox, for the Georgia Loyalists.]
[Footnote 125: Another very able pamphlet was issued some time
afterwards, entitled "Claims of the American Loyalists Reviewed and
Maintained upon the Incontrovertible Principles of Law and Justice;"
printed in London, 1788.]
[Footnote 126: "Historical View of the Commission for Inquiry into the
Losses, Services, and Claims of the American Loyalists, at the Close of
the War between Great Britain and her Colonies in 1783; with an Account
of the Compensation granted to them by Parliament in 1785 and 1788." By
John Eardley Wilmot, Esq., London, 1815. Dedicated "To His Most Gracious
Majesty George the Third, equally distinguished for justice and
beneficence to his subjects and for humanity to his enemies."]
[Footnote 127: It has already been mentioned that the Legislature of
South Carolina (the only State of the American Republic) had taken steps
to restore the estates of several of her Loyalists. This "caused the
withdrawal of the claims of their owners (before the English
Commissioners), except that in instances of alleged strip and waste,
amercements, and similar losses, inquiries were instituted to ascertain
the value of what was taken compared with that which was returned."
The English Commissioners, in their twelfth and last report, remark on
this subject as follows:
"We thought it our duty to state, in our second report of the 24th
December, 1784, that the State of South Carolina had, by an Act of the
24th March, 1784, restored the confiscated property of certain
Loyalists, subject to the restrictions therein mentioned; and that in
consequence thereof many had withdrawn the claims they had before
presented to us. We find, however, that in many instances the parties
have not been able to reap that advantage they had expected, and which
the Act above-mentioned held out to them. In some instances the property
restored has been so wasted and injured as to be of little value; in
others, the amercements and charges have been nearly equal to the value
of the fee simple of the estates; and in many, where the indents[128]
being the species of money received by the State, have been restored to
the former proprietors, an inevitable and considerable loss has been
sustained by the depreciation. In all these cases we have made minute
inquiry into the real benefit that has been derived from such
restitution, whether of the property itself, or of the _indents_ in lien
of it; and having endeavoured to ascertain, as nearly as the
circumstances would admit, the value of what was lost and the value of
what was restored, we have considered the difference as the real loss of
the party."]
[Footnote 128: _Indent_--A certificate, or indented certificate, issued
by the Government of the United States at the close of the revolution,
for the principal or interest of the public debt.--Webster.]
[Footnote 129: The principle thus laid down was neither just, nor true,
nor generous. The claimants had not asked for _charity_, but for
_compensation_, and that not as a favour, but upon the principles of
"right and of strict justice." The British Ministry and Parliament alone
originated and were responsible for the policy and measures which had
led to the calamities so ruinous to the Loyalists, who now claimed
compensation. The claimants had had nothing to do with passing the Stamp
Act; with imposing duties on tea and other articles imported into the
colonies; with making naval officers collectors of customs; with
erecting courts of admiralty, and depriving the trading colonists of
trial by jury, and of rendering the officers of the admiralty courts,
and the complainants before them, the recipients of the first
confiscations imposed by such events; with the acts to close the Port of
Boston, and supersede the chartered constitution of Massachusetts, all
of which, separately and collectively, with other like measures, roused
and united the colonists to resistance, from Maine to Georgia, and in
consequence of which a majority of the General Congress of the colonists
seized the opportunity to renounce their allegiance to the British
Throne, and to declare their separation from the mother country. And
even after the character of the contest became thus changed from one for
British constitutional rights to one for Republican independence, the
Loyalists had nothing to do with the selection of British generals, or
with their incapacity, their want of tact and energy, their mistakes and
rapacity, together with that of their officers and soldiers, from all
which the Loyalists grievously suffered. In the camp, on the march, and
in the field of battle, the Loyalists were always on the alert, and
performed the severest and most perilous services. No class of men had
stronger claims on the nation, upon the principles of right and strict
justice, than the Loyalist claimants before Parliament. This was
acknowledged by all the speakers on both sides, and in both Houses of
Parliament, and even by Mr. Pitt himself, and the objectionable and
offensive principle which he laid down at the outset was contravened by
the whole tenor and spirit of his speech.]
[Footnote 130: The number of claims examined by the Commissioners in
Nova Scotia and Canada was 1,272; the amount of claims was £975,310; the
losses allowed were £336,753.]
[Footnote 131: What remained for consideration, and which was afterwards
granted by Parliament, consisted of seven Articles, and was as follows:
"1. Additional claims liquidated since 1788, to the
amount of £224,406
"2. The proprietary claims of Messrs. Pennes £500,000
"3. Do. Do. Trustees under the will of
Lord Granville, North Carolina 60,000
"4. The proprietary claims of Robert Lord Fairfax, proprietor
of Virginia 60,000
"5. Claims of subjects, settled inhabitants of the United
States, many of which were cases of great merit and peculiar
hardship 32,462
"6. Claims of persons who appeared to have relief under
the Treaty of Peace 14,000
"7. Claims of creditors on ceded lands in Georgia 45,885"]
[Footnote 132: The case of such merchants was peculiarly distressing. In
the "Historical Review of the Commission," the Commissioners state:
"The claims for debts due from subjects of the United States, as well
from the magnitude of their amount as the peculiar hardship and
injustice under which the claimants labour respecting them, form a
subject which appears strongly to press for the attention and
interposition of Government. The Treaty of Peace having provided that
'Creditors on either side should meet with no lawful impediment to the
recovery of the full value of their debts in sterling money,' losses of
this nature have not been considered as within the inquiry directed by
the Act, because we cannot consider any right or property as lost to the
party where the Government of the country has expressly provided and
stipulated for a remedy by a public treaty. We think it, however,
incumbent upon us to represent that the claimants uniformly state to us
the insuperable difficulties they find themselves under, as individuals,
in seeking the recovery of their debts according to the provision of the
treaty, whilst themselves are the objects of prosecution in courts of
justice here for debts due to the subjects of the United States. Under
such circumstances, the situation of this class of sufferers appears to
be singularly distressing--disabled on the one hand by the laws or
practice of the several States from recovering the debts due them, yet
compellable on the other to pay all demands against them; and though the
stipulation in the treaty in their favour has proved of no avail to
procure them the redress it holds out in one country, yet they find
themselves excluded by it from all claims to relief in the other."]
[Footnote 133: It is certain that but a small proportion of the American
Loyalists presented claims before the Parliamentary Commissioners in
England for compensation for services or loss of property; and many of
those who presented claims did not prosecute them. The Commissioners
give the following explanation on this point:
"It may, perhaps, appear singular that so many claims presented, viz.,
448, have been withdrawn; but it may be owing, in the first place, to
the circumstance of many of these claimants having recovered possession
of their estates, and, in the next place, to the uncertainty, at the
commencement of the inquiry, as to the nature of the Commission, and the
species of loss which was the object of it, and perhaps to the
consciousness of others that they were not able to establish the claims
they had presented."]
CHAPTER XXXIX.
THE LOYALISTS DRIVEN FROM THE UNITED STATES TO THE BRITISH PROVINCES.
The Loyalists, after having been stripped of their rights and property
during the war, and driven from their homes, and hunted and killed at
pleasure, were exiled from all right of residence and citizenship at the
close of the war; and though the Treaty of Peace engaged that Congress
should recommend the several States to compensate them for the losses of
their property, the Legislatures of the several States (with one
exception) refused any compliance with this stipulation of the national
treaty; and the Legislature of New York actually ordered the punishment
of those Loyalists who applied for compensation. At the close of the
war, therefore, instead of witnessing, as in the case of all other
civilized nations at the termination of a civil war, however rancorous
and cruel, a general amnesty and the restoration of all parties to the
rights and property which they enjoyed at the commencement of the
strife, the Loyalists found themselves exiled and impoverished, and
their enemies in possession of their homes and domains. It is true about
3,000 of the Loyalists were able to employ agents, or appear personally,
to apply to the English Government and Parliament for compensation for
their losses; and the preceding chapter records the noble appreciation
of their character and services by British statesmen, and the liberality
of Parliament in making them compensation for their losses and
sufferings in maintaining their fidelity to the mother country. But
these 3,000 constituted not one-tenth of the Loyalists who had suffered
losses and hardships during the civil war; upwards of 30,000 of them
were driven from the homes of their birth, and of their forefathers, to
wildernesses of everlasting snow. It was a policy as inhuman and
impolitic as that of Spain in expelling upwards of 600,000 Moors, the
most skilful and profitable of their manufacturers and artizans; or of
France, in compelling the escape of above 500,000 of the best workers in
the finest manufactures to other countries where they laid the
foundation of industries which have proved a source of boundless wealth
to England at the expense of the commerce and manufactures of France.
The Democrats were then the ruling party in most of the States; the more
moderate voice and liberal policy of the Conservative Republicans were
hushed and fanned down by the Democratic leaders, who seemed unable to
look beyond the gratification of their resentment and avarice; they
seemed to fear the residence and presence of men of intelligence,
ability, and energy, who might in the future rival if not eclipse them.
The maxim of the Loyalists was, obedience to law; heretofore they looked
upon the enactments of the States and of Congress as usurpation; those
enactments were now recognized as law by England herself, in the
acknowledgment of American Independence; and the Loyalists would have
been among the most obedient and law-abiding citizens had they been
allowed to remain in the land of their nativity and forefathers, and
would have largely added to its social advancement, literature, and
wealth, and would undoubtedly, before now, have led to the unity of the
Anglo-Saxon race under one free and progressive government. Historians
and statesmen have long since condemned this resentful and narrow-minded
policy of the States against the Loyalists after the close of the
revolutionary war, as do now even American historians.[134]
The Americans inaugurated their Declaration of Independence by enacting
that all adherents to connection with the mother country were rebels and
traitors; they followed the recognition of Independence by England by
exiling such adherents from their territories. But while this wretched
policy depleted the United States of some of their best blood, it laid
the foundation of the settlement and institutions of the then almost
unknown and wilderness provinces which have since become the
wide-spread, free and prosperous Dominion of Canada.
Until very recently, the early history of the Loyalists of America has
never been written, except to blacken their character and misrepresent
their actions; they were represented as a set of idle office-seekers--an
imputation which has been amply refuted by their braving the forests of
northern countries, and converting them into fruitful fields, developing
trade and commerce, and establishing civil, religious, and educational
institutions that are an honour to America itself. Yet, when exiled from
their native land, they were bereft of the materials of their true
history. A living American writer truly observes:
"Of the reasons which influenced, of the hopes and fears which agitated,
and of the miseries and rewards which awaited the Loyalists--or, as they
were called in the politics of the time, the Tories--of the American
Revolution, but little is known. The most intelligent, the best informed
among us, confess the deficiency of their knowledge. The reason is
obvious. Men who, like the Loyalists, separate themselves from their
friends and kindred, who are driven from their homes, who surrender the
hopes and expectations of life, and who become outlaws, wanderers, and
exiles--such men leave few memorials behind them. Their papers are
scattered and lost, and their very names pass from human recollection.
* * Of several of the Loyalists who were high in office, of others who
were men of talents and acquirements, and of still others who were of
less consideration, I have been able, after long and extensive
researches, to learn scarcely more than their names, or the single fact
that for their political opinions or offences they were proscribed and
banished."[135]
The circumstances under which the Loyalists were banished from the
States and deprived of their property will largely account for the
alienation of feeling which long existed between the Americans and
Canadians, which gave intensity to the war of 1812-15, which exists to
some extent at this day, but which is gradually subsiding, and is being
gradually superseded by feelings of mutual respect and friendship,
strengthened by large commercial and social relations, including many
intermarriages.
To understand the sacrifices which the Loyalists made, and the courage
and energy they evinced, in leaving their old homes and associations in
the sunny parts of America, and in seeking a refuge and a home in the
wilds of the remaining British Provinces, it will be necessary to notice
what was then known, and the impression then existing, as to the
climate, productions, and conditions of these provinces.[136]
At that time New Brunswick formed a part of Nova Scotia, and was not
organized into a separate province until 1784. The impressions then
entertained as to the climate of Nova Scotia (including New Brunswick)
may be inferred from the following extracts from a pamphlet published in
England in 1784:
"It has a winter of almost insufferable length and coldness; * * there
are but a few inconsiderable spots fit to cultivate, and the land is
covered with a cold spongy moss in place of grass. * * Winter continues
at least seven months in the year; the country is wrapt in the gloom of
a perpetual fog; the mountains run down to the sea coast, and leave but
here and there a spot to inhabit." Some of the officers, embarking at
New York for Nova Scotia, are said to have remarked that they were
"bound for a country where there were nine months of winter and three
months of cold weather every year." Lower Canada was known as a region
of deep snow, intense cold, and little fertility; a colony of the
French; its capital, Quebec, the scene of decisive battles between the
English and French under Wolfe and Montcalm, and afterwards between
Murray and Montgomery, the latter the leader of the American revolters
and invaders. Montreal was regarded as the place of transit of the fur
trade from the Hudson's Bay Company to England.
Upper Canada was then unknown, or known only as a region of dense
wilderness and swamps, of venomous reptiles and beasts of prey, the
hunting grounds and encampments of numerous Indian tribes, intense cold
of winter, and with no other redeeming feature except abundance of game
and fish.[137]
The entire ignorance of the climate of Upper Canada which prevailed at
the close of the revolutionary war, may be inferred from the facts
stated in a succeeding chapter, when the British commander of New York,
being unable to transport any more Loyalists to Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick, sent for a Mr. Grass, who had been a prisoner during the
French war for two or three years at Kingston, then Frontenac, to
inquire of him what sort of a country Upper Canada was, and whether
people could live there. Grass replied that he thought Upper Canada was
a good country, and that people could live there. The British commander
expressed much joy at the reply, and asked Mr. Grass if he would
undertake to conduct a colony of Loyalists to Canada; the vessels,
provisions, etc., would be furnished for that purpose. Mr. Grass asked
three days to consider the proposal, and at length consented to
undertake the task. It appears that five vessels were procured and
furnished to convey this first colony of banished refugee Loyalists to
Upper Canada; they sailed around the coast of New Brunswick and Nova
Scotia, and up the St. Lawrence to Sorel, where they arrived in October,
1783, and where they built themselves huts or shanties and wintered; and
in May, 1784, they prosecuted their voyage in boats, and reached their
destination, Cataraqui, afterwards Kingston, in July. The manner of
their settlement and providing for their subsistence is described in a
succeeding chapter.
Other bands of Loyalists made their way to Canada by land; some by the
military highway to Lower Canada, Whitehall, Lake Champlain,
Ticonderoga, Plattsburg, and then turning northward proceeded to
Cornwall; then ascending the St. Lawrence, along the north side of which
many of them settled. This Champlain route was the common one to Lower
Canada, descending the River Richelieu from St. John's to Sorel.
But the most common land route from New York to Upper Canada, chosen by
the Loyalists at the close of the war, was to Albany 180 miles up the
Hudson river, which divides into two branches about ten miles north of
Albany. The western branch is called the Mohawk, leading to Rome,
formerly Fort Stanwix. A branch of the Mohawk, called Wood Creek, leads
towards the Oneida lake, which was reached by a portage. From Oneida
Lake, Lake Ontario was reached by the Oswego river. Flat-bottom boats,
specially built or purchased for the purpose by the Loyalists, were used
in this journey. The portages over which the boats had to be hauled, and
all their contents carried, are stated to be thirty miles. On reaching
Oswego, some of the Loyalists coasted along the eastern shore of Lake
Ontario to Kingston, and thence up the Bay of Quinté; others went
westward, along the south shore of the lake to Niagara and Queenston;
some pursued their course to the head of the lake at Burlington; others
made their way up the Niagara river to Queenston, conveyed their boats
over the portage of ten or twelve miles to Chippewa, thence up the river
and into Lake Erie, settling chiefly in what was called the "Long Point
Country," now the county of Norfolk. This journey of hardship,
privation, and exposure occupied from two to three months. The parents
and family of the writer of this history were from the middle of May to
the middle of July, 1799, in making this journey in an open boat.
Generally two or more families would unite in one company, and thus
assist each other in carrying their boats and goods over the portages.
A considerable number came to Canada from New Jersey and the
neighbourhood of Philadelphia on foot through the then wilderness of New
York, carrying their little effects and small children on pack horses,
and driving their cattle, which subsisted on herbage of the woods and
valleys. Some of the families of this class testified to the relief and
kindness they received in their extreme exigencies from the Indians.
The hardships, exposures, privations and sufferings which the first
Loyalists endured in making their way from their confiscated homes to
Canada, were longer and more severe than anything narrated of the
Pilgrim and Puritan Fathers of New England in their voyages from England
to Massachusetts Bay; and the persecutions to which the emigration of
the Puritans from England is attributed were trifling indeed in
comparison of the persecutions, imprisonments, confiscations, and often
death, inflicted on the loyal adherents to the Crown of England in the
United States, and which drove the survivors among them to the
wilderness of Canada. The privations and hardships experienced by many
of these Loyalist patriots for years after the first settlement in
Canada, as testified by the papers in the subsequent chapter, were much
more severe than anything experienced by the Pilgrim Fathers during the
first years of their settlement in Massachusetts. These latter could
keep a "Harvest Home" festival of a week, at the end of the first year
after their landing in the Bay of Massachusetts; but it was years after
their arrival in Canada before the Loyalists could command means to keep
any such festival. The stern adherence of the Puritans to their
principles was quite equalled by the stern adherence of the Loyalists to
their principles, and far excelled by their sacrifices and sufferings.
Canada has a noble parentage, the remembrance of which its inhabitants
may well cherish with respect, affection, and pride.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 134: "Had we pursued a wise course, people of our own stock
would not have become our rivals in ship-building, in the carriage of
our great staples, in the prosecution of the fisheries, and in the
production of wheat and other breadstuffs. Nor is this all: we should
not have had the hatred, the influence and the talents of persons of
Loyalist origin to contend against in the questions which have and may
yet come up between us and England.
"Thus, as it seems to me, humanity to the adherents of the Crown, and
prudent regard for our own interests, required a general amnesty; as it
was, we not only dealt harshly with many, and unjustly with some, but
doomed to misery others, whose hearts and hopes had been as true as
those of Washington himself. Thus in the divisions of families which
everywhere occurred, and which formed one of the most distressing
circumstances of the conflict, there were wives and daughters, who,
although bound to Loyalists by the holiest ties, had given their
sympathies to the right from the beginning, and who now, in the triumph
of the cause which had their prayers, went meekly--as woman ever meets a
sorrowful lot--into hopeless, interminable exile." (Introductory
Historical Essay to Sabine's Sketches of the Loyalists of the American
Revolution, pp. 90, 91.)]
[Footnote 135: Preface to Colonel Sabine's Biographical Sketches of the
American Loyalists, or Adherents to the British Crown, in the War of the
Revolution.]
[Footnote 136: The Loyalists who were attached to military corps raised
in the extreme South were principally of the Southern States, and a
large portion of them settled in the Bahamas, Florida, and the British
West Indies. "Some of the officers who belonged to the 'Maryland
Loyalists,' and some of the privates of that corps, embarked for Nova
Scotia, but were wrecked in the Bay of Fundy, and a part perished."
(Sabine.)]
[Footnote 137: "The western part of Canada, abandoned after the conquest
_as an Indian hunting ground_, or occupied at its western extremity on
Lake Erie by a few of the ancient French colonists, began now to assume
importance, and its capability of supporting a numerous population along
the Great River and the lakes became evident. Those excellent men, who,
preferring to sacrifice life and fortune rather than forego the enviable
distinction of being British subjects, saw that this vast field afforded
a sure and certain mode of safety and of honourable retreat, and
accordingly, in 1783, ten thousand (10,000) were enumerated in that
portion of Canada, who, under the proud title of United Empire
Loyalists, had turned their backs for ever upon the new-fangled
republicanism and treason of the country of their birth.
"The obstacles, privations, and miseries these people had to encounter
may readily be imagined in a country where the primeval forest covered
the earth, and where the only path was the river or the lake. They
ultimately were, however, blessed with success; and to this day the
original letters U.E., after the name of an applicant for land, ensure
its grant." (Sir Richard Bonnycastle's Canada Before 1837, Vol. I., pp.
24, 25.)]
CHAPTER XL.
BRIEF SKETCHES OF SOME INDIVIDUAL LOYALISTS--FIRST SETTLERS IN CANADA
AND OTHER BRITISH PROVINCES.
It is not possible to give biographical sketches of all the old
Loyalists, officers and soldiers. To do justice to their character and
merits would require a massive volume. Besides, the data for such a
volume are for the most part wanting. It is not the object of this
history to give a biography of the Loyalists; that must be done by
others, if attempted at all. The Loyalists were not writers, but
workers. Almost the only history of them has been written by their
enemies, whose object was to conceal the treatment they received, to
depreciate their merits and defame their character, for the vindication
of which it is only of late years that materials have been procured. It
is the object of this history to vindicate their character as a body, to
exhibit their principles and patriotism, and to illustrate their
treatment and sufferings.
The best, and indeed only biography of the Loyalists extant is Sabine's
"_American Loyalists, or Biographical Sketches of Adherents to the
British Crown in the War of the Revolution_,"--especially the first, not
the second edition. The author has more than once quoted the excellent
historical essay introductory to the sketches of this work, and from
which Dr. Canniff has enriched the pages of his valuable "_History of
the Settlement of Upper Canada, with special reference to the Bay of
Quinté_." From these sources we will condense brief notices of some of
the early Loyalists, preliminary to the information in regard to others
furnished us in the interesting letters and papers which follow. These
notices will further illustrate the character and sacrifices of the
Loyalist combatants--the treatment they received and the courage they
displayed.
1. _Samuel Anderson_, of New York, entered the service of the Crown, and
was a captain in the regiment of Sir John Johnson. In 1783 he settled
near Cornwall, Upper Canada, and received half-pay; held several civil
offices, such as those of Magistrate, Judge of the District Court,
Associate Justice of King's Bench, etc. He continued to reside on his
property near Cornwall until his decease in 1836, at the age of one
hundred and one. His property in New York was abandoned and lost.
2. _Rev. John Bethune_ (father of the late Bishop of Toronto), of North
Carolina, was chaplain to the Loyal Militia; was taken prisoner at the
battle of Cross Creek; was confined in jail, first at Halifax and
finally in Philadelphia. After his release, his continued loyalty
reduced him to great distress. He was appointed to the 84th Regiment and
restored to comfort. At the peace, he settled in Upper Canada, at
Williamston, near Cornwall, and died in 1815, at the age of sixty-five.
3. _Doane_, of Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Of this family there were
five brothers--Moses, Joseph, Israel, Abraham, and Mahlon. They were men
of fine figure and address, elegant horsemen, great runners and leapers,
and excellent at stratagems and escapes. Their father was respectable,
and possessed a good estate. The sons themselves, prior to the war, were
men of reputation and proposed to remain neutral; but harassed
personally, their property sold by the Whigs, because they would not
submit to the exactions of the time, they determined to avenge
themselves by a predatory warfare upon their persecutors, and to live in
the open air as best they could. They became the terror of the
surrounding country; they spared the weak, the poor, and the peaceful;
they aimed at public property and at public men. Generally their
expeditions were on horseback. Sometimes the five went together; at
other times separately, with accomplices. Whoever of them was
apprehended, broke jail; whoever of them was assailed, escaped. In a
word, such was their course, that a reward of £300 was offered for the
head of each. Ultimately, three were slain; Moses, after a desperate
fight, was shot by his captor; and Abraham and Mahlon were living at
Philadelphia. Joseph, before the revolution, taught school. During the
war, while on a marauding expedition, he was shot through the cheeks,
and was taken prisoner. He was committed to await his trial, but escaped
to New Jersey. A reward of $800 was offered for his apprehension, but
without success. He resumed his former employment in New Jersey and
lived there under an assumed name for nearly a year, but finally fled to
Canada. The only mention of Israel is that "in February, 1783, he
appealed to the Council of Pennsylvania to be released on account of his
own sufferings and the destitute condition of his family, and that his
petition was dismissed."
4. _Stephen Jarvis_, in 1782 was a lieutenant of cavalry in the South
Carolina Royalists; was in several battles; was in New Brunswick; after
the revolution came to Upper Canada, and died at Toronto in 1840, aged
eighty-four.
5. _William Jarvis_ was an officer of cavalry in the Queen's Rangers;
was wounded at the siege of Yorktown. At the Peace he settled in Upper
Canada, became Secretary of the Province, and died at York (Toronto) in
1817.
6. _David Jones_ was captain in the royal service, and the reputed
spouse or husband of the "beautiful and good Jane McCrea," whose cruel
death in 1777, by the Indians, on her way to join him, is so universally
known and lamented. He lived in Canada to an old age, but never married.
Jane McCrea was the daughter of the Rev. James McCrea, a Loyalist.
7. _Jonathan Jones_, of New York, was brother of Captain David Jones,
and assisted in the latter part of 1776 in raising a company in Lower
Canada, and joined the British garrison at Crown Point. Later in the war
he was captain under General Frazer.
8. _Captain Richard Lippincott_ was born in Shrewsbury, New Jersey, on
the 2nd of January, 1745. He was descended from an old colonial family,
and served during the revolution as a captain in the New Jersey
volunteers. He was married on the 4th of March, 1770, to Esther Borden,
daughter of Jeremiah and Esther Borden, of Bordentown, New Jersey. On
the outbreak of the revolution he warmly espoused the side of the Crown,
and was early in the war captured and confined in Burlington jail, from
which he escaped in the year 1776, and made his way to the British army
at Staten Island. During the remainder of the war he served with his
regiment. His connection with the execution of Captain Joshua Huddy, of
the rebel service, attracted a great deal of attention both in Europe
and America. Captain Huddy was a partisan officer of some repute in New
Jersey, and had been concerned in the murder of a Loyalist named Philip
White, who was a relative of Lippincott, and a resident of Shrewsbury.
One Edwards of the same neighbourhood had also been put to death about
the same time. Shortly after, Captain Huddy was captured and taken as
prisoner to New York. The "Board of Associated Loyalists of New York"
sent Captain Lippincott to Middleton Point, or Sandy Hook, with Captain
Huddy and two other prisoners, to exchange them for prisoners held by
the rebels. He was authorized to execute Huddy in retaliation for White,
who had already been put to death. Therefore, on the 12th of April,
1782, having exchanged the two other prisoners, Captain Lippincott hung
Huddy on a tree by the beach, under the Middleton Heights. In 1867 the
tree was still to be seen, and tradition keeps alive in the
neighbourhood the story connected with it. Captain Lippincott, who was
evidently only obeying orders, pinned a paper on Huddy's breast with the
following inscription:
"We, the Refugees, having long with grief beheld the cruel murders of
our brethren, and finding nothing but such measures carrying into
execution,--we therefore determine not to suffer without taking
vengeance for the numerous cruelties, and thus begin, having made use of
Captain Huddy as the first object to present to your view, and further
determine to hang man for man while there is a refugee existing.
"UP GOES HUDDY FOR PHILIP WHITE."
Washington, upon hearing of Huddy's death, demanded the surrender of
Captain Lippincott from the Royalist authorities, in order that he might
be put to death. This demand was refused, and Washington then ordered
the execution of one officer of equal rank to be chosen by lot from
among the prisoners in his hands. The lot fell upon Captain Asgill, of
the Guards, who was only nineteen years of age. The British authorities
secured a respite under promise of trying Captain Lippincott by
court-martial. After a full inquiry, Lippincott was honourably
acquitted. In the meantime, Lady Asgill, Captain Asgill's mother,
appealed to the Count de Vergennes, the French Minister, and, in
response to her most pathetic appeal, the Count was instructed by the
King and Queen of France, in their joint names, to ask of Washington the
release of Captain Asgill "as a tribute to humanity." Washington, after
a long delay, granted this request, but Asgill and Lippincott were not
set at liberty till the close of the war. Asgill lived to become a
general, and to succeed to his father's baronetcy.
After the war Captain Lippincott moved to New Brunswick, to a place
called Pennfield, where he lived till the fall of 1787, when he went to
England, where he remained till the end of 1788. He was granted half pay
as a captain of the British army, and in 1793 he moved from New
Brunswick to Canada, when he was granted for his U.E. Loyalist services
3,000 acres of land in the township of Vaughan, near Toronto.
He lived near Richmond Hill for many years. His only surviving child,
Esther Borden Lippincott, was married in 1806 to the late Colonel George
Taylor Denison, of Bellevue, Toronto, at whose house Captain Lippincott
died in 1826, aged eighty-one years. The family of Denisons of Toronto
are all descendants of Captain Lippincott through this marriage.
9. _McDonald._--There were many of this name who took part with the
loyal combatants, and of whom several settled in Canada.
Alexander McDonald was a major in a North Carolina regiment, and was the
husband of the celebrated Flora McDonald, who was so true and devoted to
Prince Charles Edward, the last of the Stuarts who sought the throne of
England. They had emigrated to North Carolina; and when the revolution
broke out, he, with two sons, took up arms for the Crown. Those who
settled in Canada were Donald McDonald, of New York, who served under
Sir John Johnson for seven years, and died at Wolfe Island, Upper
Canada, aged 97; and Allan McDonald, of Tryon (afterwards Montgomery),
New York, who was associated with Sir John Johnson in 1776, and died at
a great age, at Three Rivers, in Lower Canada, 1822.
10. _John McGill_ was, in 1782, an officer of infantry in the Queen's
Rangers, and at the close of the war went to New Brunswick; removed
thence to Upper Canada, became a man of note and member of the
Legislative Council, and died at Toronto, in 1834, at the age of
eighty-three.
11. _Donald McGillis_ resided at the beginning of the revolution on the
Mohawk river, New York. Embracing the royal side in the contest, he
formed one of a "determined band of young men," who attacked a Whig
post, and, in the face of a superior force, cut down the flag-staff and
tore in strips the stars and stripes attached to it. Subsequently he
joined a grenadier company called the Royal Yorkers, and performed
efficient service throughout the war. At the peace he settled in Canada;
and entering the British service again in 1812, was appointed captain in
the colonial corps by Sir Isaac Brock. He died at River Raisin, Canada,
in 1844, aged eighty years.
12. _Thomas Merrit_, of New York (father of the late Hon. W. Hamilton
Merrit), was in 1782 cornet of cavalry in the Queen's Rangers. He
settled in Upper Canada, and held the office of high sheriff of the
Niagara district. He died at St. Catharines, May, 1842, at the age of
eighty years.
_The Robinson family_ was one of the distinguished families in America
before, during, and after the revolution, and its members have filled
some of the most important offices in the provinces of Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, Lower and Upper Canada.
13. _Beverley Robinson_, of New York, was the son of the Honourable John
Robinson, of Virginia, who was President of that colony on the
retirement of Governor Gooch. He removed to New York, and married
Susanna, daughter of Frederick Phillipse, Esquire, who owned an immense
landed estate on the Hudson river. By this connection Mr. Robinson added
greatly to his wealth and became very rich. When the revolutionary
controversy commenced, he was living on that portion of the Phillipse
estate which had been given to his wife, and there he desired to remain
in the quiet enjoyment of country life, and in the enjoyment of his
large domains. That such was his inclination is asserted by the late
President Dwight, and is fully continued by circumstances and by his
descendants. He _was opposed to the measures of the British Ministry,
gave up the use of imported merchandize, and clothed himself and family
in fabrics of domestic manufacture_.
_But he was opposed to the separation of the colonies from the mother
country._ Still he wished to take no part in the conflict of arms. The
importunity of friends overruled his own judgment, and he entered the
military service of the Crown. Of the Loyal American Regiment, raised
principally in New York by himself, he was commissioned the colonel. He
also commanded the corps called Guides and Pioneers. Of the former, or
the Loyal Americans, his son Beverley was lieutenant-colonel, and Thomas
Barclay, major. He and Washington had been personal friends until
political events produced separation between them.
At the peace, Colonel Robinson, with a part of his family, went to
England. His name appears as a member of the first Council of New
Brunswick; but he never took his seat at the Board. His wife, with
himself, was attainted for high treason; in order to secure her property
to the Americans, she was included in the Confiscation Act of New York,
and the whole of the estate derived from her father passed from the
family. The value of her interest may be estimated from the fact that
the British Government granted her and her husband the sum of £17,000
sterling, which, though equal to $80,000, _was considered only a partial
compensation_.
Colonel Robinson has highly respectable descendants in New Brunswick as
well as in Canada. William Henry, who was afterwards King William the
Fourth, enjoyed Colonel Robinson's hospitality in New York at a later
date. The Robinsons were unquestionably immediate sufferers from the
events which drove them into exile. But though Colonel Robinson was not
amply compensated in money by the Government for which he sacrificed
fortune, home, and his native land, yet the distinction obtained by his
children and grand-children in the colonies, though deprived of their
inheritance, has not been without other and substantial recompense, as
no persons of the Loyalist descent have been more favoured in official
stations and powerful family alliances than the heirs of the daughters
of Frederick Phillipse, Susanna Robinson, and Mary Morris (see under the
names of Colonel Roger Morris and Colonel Thomas Barclay).
14. _Beverley Robinson (jun.)_ was son of Colonel Beverley Robinson, and
lieutenant-colonel in the Loyal American Regiment, commanded by his
father; was a graduate of Columbia College, New York, and at the
commencement of the revolutionary troubles was a student of law in the
office of James Duane. His wife, Nancy, whom he married during the war,
was daughter of the Reverend Henry Barclay, D.D., rector of Trinity
Church, New York, and sister of Colonel Thomas Barclay. At the
evacuation of New York, Lieutenant-Colonel Robinson was placed at the
head of a large number of Loyalists who embarked for Shelburne, Nova
Scotia, and who laid out that place in a very handsome manner, in the
hope of its becoming a town of business and importance. The harbour of
Shelburne is represented to be one of the best in North America; the
population rapidly increased to about 12,000 persons, but soon as
rapidly declined, being outrivalled by Halifax--and many abandoned
Shelburne for other parts of the British provinces. Lieutenant-Colonel
Robinson went to New Brunswick, and resided near the city of St. John.
His deprivations and sufferings for a considerable time after leaving
New York were great, but were finally relieved by the receipt of
half-pay as an officer in the service of the Crown. In New Brunswick he
was a member of his Majesty's Council; and at the period of the French
revolution, and on the occurrence of the Napoleonic war between England
and France, he was entrusted with the command of the regiment raised in
that colony, possessed great energy, and contributed much by his
exertions and influence to settle and advance the commercial emporium of
New Brunswick. In the Confiscation Act of New York, by which his estate
was taken from him, he was styled "Beverley Robinson the younger." He
died in 1816, at New York, while on a visit to two of his sons who were
residing in that city.
15. _Christopher Robinson_, of Virginia, was kinsman of Colonel Beverley
Robinson; entered William and Mary College with his cousin Robert,
escaped with him to New York, and received a commission in the Loyal
Canadian Regiment; served at the South, and was wounded. At the peace he
went first to New Brunswick, and then to Nova Scotia, receiving a grant
of land in each province. He soon removed to Upper Canada, where
Governor Simcoe gave him the appointment of Deputy-Surveyor-General of
Crown Lands. His salary, half pay, and an estate of 2,000 acres, placed
him in comfortable circumstances.
16. _Sir John Beverley Robinson_ was a son of Christopher Robinson, of
Virginia; received his early legal education in England, and was
admitted to the English bar. He returned to Upper Canada while yet
young; served with distinction in the war of 1812, and was in several
battles. He was early appointed Attorney-General, and held a seat in the
House of Assembly for ten years; after which he was appointed Member and
Speaker of the Legislative Council. During the insurrection of 1837, in
Upper Canada, he took his musket and went into the ranks, accompanied by
his two sons. He was born in 1791; was appointed Attorney-General of
Upper Canada in 1818; was raised to the Bench as Chief Justice in 1829;
was created Baronet in 1854; and died in 1863, aged seventy-two.
17. _Sir Charles Frederick Phillipse Robinson_, G.C.B., of New York, was
the son of Colonel Beverley Robinson; entered the King's service early
in the Revolution, and at the peace returned with his father to England,
where he was continued in the British army; became Lieutenant-General,
and received the honour of knighthood. He was with the Duke of
Wellington, and saw much hard service. At the storming of St. Sebastian
he was dangerously wounded. He was in the battle of Vittoria, Nive,
Orthes, and Toulouse. During the war of 1812 he came to America, and was
employed in Canada. He commanded the British force in the attack on
Plattsburg, under Prevost, and protested against the order of his
superior, when directed to retire, because from the position of his
troops he was of opinion that his loss of men would be greater in
retreat than in advance upon the American works. After the conclusion of
hostilities he embarked at New York for England.
18. _Morris Robinson_, of New York, was also son of Colonel Beverley
Robinson, and was captain of the Queen's Rangers. When that corps was
disbanded at the close of the war, most of the officers were dismissed
on half pay, and settled in New Brunswick; but Captain Robinson, by good
fortune, was continued in commission, and at the time of his decease he
was lieutenant-colonel, and assistant-barrackmaster-general in the
British army. He had three sons officers in the British army, and two
daughters, Susan and Joane; the former became the wife of Robert Parker,
judge of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick; and the latter the wife of
Robert T. Hagien, Esq., barrister-at-law, master in chancery, and
formerly mayor of the city of St. John.
19. _John Robinson_, of New York, likewise a son of Colonel Beverley
Robinson, was during the revolution a lieutenant of the Loyal American
Regiment, commanded by his father; and when the corps was disbanded at
the close of the war, he settled in New Brunswick, and received half
pay. He embarked, and successfully, in mercantile pursuits, and held
distinguished public stations, being deputy-paymaster-general of his
Majesty's forces in the Province, a member of the Council, treasurer of
New Brunswick, mayor of St. John, and president of the first bank
chartered in the colony. He died at St. John in 1828, aged sixty-seven.
Several other Robinsons were engaged on the royal side in the American
Revolution, but none of them so prominently connected with the British
provinces as those above mentioned.
20. _Roger Morris_, of New York, was a captain in the British army, in
the French war, and one of the aides of the ill-fated Braddock. He
married Mary, daughter of Frederick Phillipse, Esq., and settled in New
York. At the commencement of the revolution he was a member of the
Council of the colony, and continued in office until the peace, although
the Whigs organized a government, under a written Constitution, as early
as 1777. A part of the Phillipse estate was in possession of Colonel
Morris in right of his wife, and was confiscated. In order that the
whole property should pass from the family into the hands of the
Americans, Mrs. Morris was included with her husband in the New York
Confiscation Act of attainder. It is believed that this lady, her sister
Mrs. Robinson, and Mrs. Ingles, were the only ladies who were attainted
of treason during the revolution, and that merely to get possession of
their property. "Imagination," says Sabine, "dwells upon the attainting
of a lady whose beauty and attractions had won the admiration of
Washington.[138] Humanity is shocked that a woman was attainted of
treason for no crime but that of clinging to the fortunes of the husband
whom she had vowed on the altar of religion never to desert."
But it appeared in due time that the Confiscation Act did not affect the
rights of Mrs. Morris's children, who were not named in, and therefore
not disqualified by the Act of Confiscation. In 1787, the
Attorney-General of England examined the case and gave the opinion that
the reversionary interest (or property of the children at the decease of
the parents) was not included in their attainder, and was recoverable
under the principles of law and of right. In the year 1809, their son,
Captain Henry Gage Morris, of the Royal Navy, in behalf of himself and
his two sisters, sold his reversionary interest to John Jacob Astor,
Esquire, of New York, for the sum of £20,000 sterling. In 1828, Mr.
Astor made a compromise with the State of New York, by which he received
for the rights thus purchased by him (with or without associates) the
large amount of $500,000. The terms of the arrangement required that he
should execute a deed of conveyance in fee simple, with warranty against
the claims of the Morrises, husband and wife, their heirs, and all
persons claiming under them; and that he should obtain the judgment of
the Supreme Court of the United States, affirming the validity and
perfectibility of his title. These conditions were complied with, and
the purchasers of the confiscated lands were thus quieted in their
titles derived from the sales of the Commissioners of Confiscated
Property.
21. _Allan McNab_ was a lieutenant of cavalry in the Queen's Rangers,
under Colonel Simcoe. During the war he received thirteen wounds. He
accompanied his commander to Upper Canada, then a dense unpeopled
wilderness. He was appointed Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Assembly
of Upper Canada, and held the office for many years. He was father of
the late Sir Allan McNab, who was born at Niagara, in 1798, of Scotch
extraction, whose grandfather, Major Robert McNab, of the 42nd Regiment,
or Black Watch, was Royal Forester in Scotland, and resided on a small
property called Dundurn, at the head of Loch Earn. Sir Allan McNab,
though very young, distinguished himself in the war of 1812. In the
insurrection of 1837 he was appointed to the command of the militia,
dispersed the rebels, and cut out and burnt the rebel steamer
_Caroline_, at Black Rock, for which he was knighted. He was Speaker of
the House of Assembly of Upper Canada before the union of the two
Canadas, and was afterwards Speaker of the Legislative Council of United
Canada.
22. _Luke Carscallen_ (resident of Bay of Quinté) was an Irishman by
birth, and had served in the British army; he had retired and emigrated
to the American colonies prior to the revolution. He desired to remain
neutral and take no part in the contest. The rebels, however, said to
him, that inasmuch as he was acquainted with military tactics, he must
join them or be regarded as a King's man. His reply was that he had
fought for the King, and he would do it again, consequently an order was
issued to arrest him; but when they came to take him, he had secreted
himself. The escape was a hurried one, and all his possessions were at
the mercy of the rebels--land to the amount of 12,000 acres. They,
disappointed at not catching him, took his young and tender son, and
threatened to hang him if he would not reveal his father's place of
concealment. The brave little fellow replied, "Hang away!" and the cruel
men, under the name of liberty, carried out their threat, and three
times was he suspended until he was almost dead, yet he would not tell;
and then, when taken down, one of the monsters actually kicked him.
(Canniff.)
23. _John Diamond_ was born in Albany, with several brothers. An elder
brother was drafted, but he tried to escape a service so repugnant to
his feelings; was concealed for some time, and upon a sick bed. The
visits of the doctor led to suspicion, and the house was visited by
rebels. Although he had been placed in a bed so arranged that it was
thought his presence would not be detected, his breathing betrayed him.
They at once required his father to give a bond for $1,200 that his son
should not be removed while sick. He got well, and some time after again
sought to escape, but was caught, and handcuffed to another. Being
removed from one place to another, the two prisoners managed to knock
their guards on the head, and ran for life through the woods, chained
together. One would sometimes run on one side of a sapling, and the
other on the opposite side. At night they managed to rub their handcuffs
off, and finally escaped to Canada. Of the other brothers, two were
carried off by the rebels and were never more heard of; John was taken
to the rebel army when old enough to do service, but he also escaped to
Canada, and enlisted in Rogers' Battalion, in which he served until the
end of the war, when he settled with the company at Fredericksburg. He
married Miss Loyst, a native of Philadelphia, whose ancestors were
German. She acted no inferior part, for a woman, during the exciting
times of the revolution. They were married in Lower Canada. They spent
their first summer in Upper Canada in clearing a little spot of land,
and in the fall got a little grain in the ground. They slept during the
summer under a tree, but erected a small hut before winter set in.
24. _Ephraim Tisdale_, of Freetown, Massachusetts. In 1775, he fled from
home, and went to New York. During the war, while on a voyage to St.
Augustine, Florida, he abandoned his vessel at sea to avoid capture, and
gained the shore in safety. Though nearly destitute of money, he
accomplished an overland journey to New York, a distance, by the route
which he travelled, of fifteen hundred miles. In 1783 he embarked at New
York for New Brunswick, in the ship _Brothers_, Captain Walker; and on
the passage his wife gave birth to a son, who was named for the master
of the ship. Mr. Tisdale held civil and military offices in New
Brunswick. He removed to Upper Canada in 1808, settled in the Township
of Charlotteville, near Vittoria, and died in 1816. He left eight sons
and four daughters. Walker Tisdale, Esq., of St. John (the son above
referred to), was in Canada in 1845, when the descendants of his father
there were 169, of whom he saw 163. The Tisdales were active on the side
of the Crown in the insurrection of 1837. The whole family have always
been distinguished for loyalty.
25. _Lemuel Wilmot_, of Long Island, New York, entered the King's
service as an officer, and at the peace was captain in the Loyal
American Regiment. In 1783 he settled on the River St. John, New
Brunswick, near Fredericton, where he continued to reside until his
death, which took place in 1814. Five sons survived him. The Honourable
Lemuel A. Wilmot, the son of his younger son William, was a member of
the Legislative Assembly, and leader of the Liberal party; became
Attorney-General, and afterwards Chief Justice, and ultimately
Lieutenant-Governor of the province. He had for many years been
superintendent of the Sunday-school, and leader of the choir in the
(Methodist) Church to which he belonged, and continued to discharge the
duties of both offices during the five years that he was
Lieutenant-Governor, and until his death, which occurred suddenly in
May, 1878.
I have not space to extend these notices of individual combatants in the
American Revolution, though I might add scores to the number of those I
have already noticed, equally loyal and courageous, and equal in their
energy, sacrifices and sufferings in fleeing to Canada from American
Republican persecution, far beyond anything endured by the Pilgrim and
Puritan Fathers of New England, to whose enterprise, energy, and
privations I have done ample justice in the first volume of this
history.
The Loyalists fled to Canada, and settled chiefly in Lower Canada, on
the northern banks of the St. Lawrence, between Montreal and Kingston,
on the Bay of Quinté, Prince Edward, the frontiers of the Niagara
district, and the northern shores of Lake Erie. In the following chapter
I will present an epitome of the immigration of the first Loyalists to
the Bay of Quinté, to the Niagara frontier, and to the northern shores
of Lake Erie, especially of what was called the "Long Point" country,
their modes of struggling their way thither, the privations and labours
of their early settlement. I will here add a few passages from Dr.
Canniff's _Settlement of Upper Canada, with Special Reference to Bay
Quinté_, in regard to the Loyalists fleeing into Lower Canada, and
making their way up the St. Lawrence to Kingston and Bay Quinté.
"The batteaux," says the late Sheriff Sherwood, of Brockville, "by which
the refugees emigrated were principally built at Lachine, nine miles
from Montreal. They were calculated to carry four or five families, with
almost two tons weight. Twelve boats constituted a brigade, and each
brigade had a conductor, with five men in each, one of whom steered. The
duty of the conductor was to give directions for the safe management of
the boats, to keep them together, and when they came to a rapid they
left a portion of the boats in charge of one man. The boats ascending
were doubly manned, and drawn by a rope fastened at the bow of the boat,
having four men in the boat with setting poles; thus the men walked
along the side of the river, sometimes in the water or on the edge of
the bank, as circumstances occurred. Having reached the head of the
rapids the boats were left with a man, and the other men went back for
the other boats;" and so they continued until the rapids were mounted.
Lachine was the starting place--a place of some twenty dwellings.
It was by these batteaux that the Loyalist refugee officers and their
families, as well as the soldiers and their families, passed from the
shores of Lake Champlain, from Sorel and St. Lawrence, where they had
temporarily lived, to Upper Canada. It was also by these or the
Schenectady or Durham boat that the pioneer Loyalists made their way
from Oswego.
"Thus it is seen that to gain the northern shore of the St. Lawrence and
Lake Ontario was a task of no easy nature, and the steps by which the
Loyalists came were taken literally inch by inch, and were attended by
hard and venturesome labour. Records are not wanting of the severe
hardships endured by families on their way to their wooded lands.
Supplied with limited comforts, perhaps only the actual necessaries of
life, they advanced slowly by day along dangerous rapids, and at night
rested under the blue sky. But our Loyalist forefathers and mothers were
made of stern stuff, and all was borne with noble heroism.
"This toilsome mode of travelling continued for many a year. John
Ferguson, writing in 1788 from Fredericksburg, Bay Quinté, to a friend
in Lachine, Lower Canada, says of his journey: 'After a most tedious
and fatiguing journey I arrived here, nineteen days on the way,
sometimes for whole days up to the waist in water or mire.' But the
average time required to ascend the rapids was from ten to twelve days,
and three or four to descend.
"With the later coming loyal refugees was introduced another kind of
flat bottomed boat. It was generally small, rigged with an ungainly
sail; and usually built in the town of Schenectady; hence its name.
Schenectady is a German word, and means _pine barren_. Families about to
come to Canada would build one or more of these boats to meet their
requirements.
"The Loyalists not only came in summer, by batteaux or the Schenectady
boat, but likewise in winter. They generally followed, as near as
possible, some one of the routes taken in summer. To undertake to
traverse a wilderness with no road, and guided only by rivers and
creeks, or blazed trees, was no common thing. Several families would
sometimes join together to form a train of sleighs. They would carry
with them their bedding, clothes, and the necessary provisions. We have
received interesting accounts of winter journeyings from Albany along
the Hudson, across to the Black River country, and to the St. Lawrence.
Sometimes the train would follow the military road, along by Champlain,
St. George, as far as Plattsburg, and then turn north to the St.
Lawrence, by what was then called the Willsbury wilderness, and
'Chataquee' woods. At the beginning of the present century there was but
one tavern through all that vast forest, and that of the poorest
character. Indeed, it is said that while provision might be procured for
the horses, none could be had for man. Those who thus entered Canada in
winter found it necessary to stay at Cornwall until spring. Two or more
of the men would foot it along the St. Lawrence to the Bay Quinté, and
at the opening of navigation, having borrowed a batteau, descend to
Cornwall for the women, children, and articles brought with them. While
the families and sleighs were transported in the batteaux, the horses
were taken along the shore by the larger boys, if such there were among
them. The French train was occasionally employed in these winter
journeys. It consisted of a long rude sleigh, with several horses
driven tandem style; this allowed the passage among the trees to be made
more easily.
"Travellers from Montreal to the west would come by a batteau, or Durham
boat, to Kingston. Those who had business further west, says Finkle,
'were conveyed to Henry Finkle's, in Ernest Town, where they commonly
stopped a few days. Thence they made their journey on horseback. A white
man conducted them to the River Trent, where resided Colonel Bleecker,
who was at the head and had control of all Mississauga Indians, and
commanded the entire country to Toronto. At this place the traveller was
furnished with a fresh horse, and an Indian guide to conduct him through
an unsettled country, the road being little better than a common Indian
path, with all its windings. The road continued in this state until
about the year 1798. Sometimes the traveller continued his journey
around the head of Lake Ontario, on horseback, to Queenston, where
resided Judge Hamilton."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 138: An interesting incident occurred in the early life of
Mrs. Morris--no other than that Washington desired to become her
suitor--a fact which rests on the highest authority. In Sparks' Life of
Washington there is the following passage: "While in New York, in 1756,
Washington was lodged and kindly entertained at the house of Mr.
Beverley Robinson, between whom and himself an intimacy of friendship
subsisted, which indeed, continued without change till severed by their
opposite fortunes twenty years afterwards in the revolution. It happened
that Miss Mary Phillipse, a sister of Mrs. Robinson, and a young lady of
rare accomplishments, was an inmate of the family. The charms of the
lady made a deep impression upon the heart of the Virginia colonel. He
went to Boston, returned, and was again welcomed to the hospitality of
Mr. Robinson. He lingered there till duty called him away; but he was
careful to entrust his secret to a confidential friend, whose letters
kept him informed of every important event. In a few months intelligence
came that there was a rival in the field, and that consequences could
not be answered for if he delayed to renew his visits to New York.
Whether time, the bustle of the camp, or the scenes of war, had
moderated his admiration, or whether he despaired of success, is not
known. He never saw the lady again, till she was married to that same
rival, Captain Morris, his former associate in arms, and one of
Braddock's aide-de-camps."]
CHAPTER XLI.
FIRST SETTLEMENT OF LOYALISTS IN THE BRITISH PROVINCES, ESPECIALLY UPPER
CANADA--THEIR ADVENTURES AND HARDSHIPS, AS WRITTEN BY THEMSELVES OR
THEIR DESCENDANTS.
In 1861 I addressed a printed circular to the United Empire Loyalists
and their descendants in the British Provinces of North America, stating
the design and scope of the history I proposed to write respecting them,
in compliance with a call which had been made upon me by the press and
members of all parties, and requesting the surviving Loyalists and their
descendants to communicate to me, at my expense, any letters or papers
they might possess which would throw light upon the early history of the
fathers and founders of our country.
This chapter contains the letters and papers which I received in answer
to my circular. These letters and papers, with repetitions of some
incidents, contain, in a variety of style, statements and narratives of
a remarkable character, and of intense interest, and introduce the
reader to the inner life and privations of the bold, self-denying, and
energetic pioneers of Canada and of other British provinces.
_First Settlement of the First Company of Loyalists, after the close of
the Revolutionary War._
Letter from the Rev. Dr. Richardson, late Bishop of the Methodist
Episcopal Church in Canada:
"_To the Rev. Dr. Ryerson._
"DEAR SIR,--
"The following is the narrative of which I spoke to you, relative to the
early settlement of Upper Canada, as related to me by the late Mr. John
Grass, of the Township of Kingston, some years since, and which you
requested might be furnished for insertion in your forthcoming history
of _our_ country. I give it to you as near as may be in Mr. Grass's own
words. The old gentleman, his father, I knew well when I was a boy; his
residence was next to my father's for several years in Kingston. He was
a genuine sample of an honest, plain, loyal German. The narrator was
about eleven years old at the time he migrated with his father and the
company of Loyalists from New York to 'Frontenac,' and therefore had a
distinct recollection of all the incidents he relates. Being seated in
his parlour one evening, while partaking of his hospitality, the
conversation naturally turned on events connected with the first
settlement of the township of Kingston and its early inhabitants, most
of whom had descended to their graves; Mr. Grass was led to state as
follows:
"My father had been a prisoner among the French at Frontenac (now
Kingston), in the old French war, and at the commencement of the
American revolution he resided in a farm on the borders of the North
River, about thirty miles above New York. Being solicited by General
Herkimer to take a captain's commission in the American service, he
replied, sternly and promptly, that he had sworn allegiance to one King,
meaning George the Third, and could not violate his oath, or serve
against him.
"For this he was obliged to fly from his home and take refuge within New
York, under British protection. His family had soon to follow him, being
driven from their home, which by the enemy was dilapidated and broken
up. They continued in that city till the close of the war, living on
their own resources as best they could. On the return of peace, the
Americans having gained their independence, there was no longer any home
there for the fugitive Loyalists, of which the city was full; and the
British Governor was much at a loss for a place to settle them. Many had
retreated to Nova Scotia or New Brunswick; but this was a desperate
resort, and their immense numbers made it difficult to find a home for
them all, even there. In the meantime, the Governor, in his perplexity,
having heard that my father had been a prisoner among the French at
Frontenac, sent for him and said: 'Mr. Grass, I understand you have
been at Frontenac, in Canada. Pray tell me what sort of a country is it?
Can people live there? What think you?' My father replied: 'Yes, your
Excellency, I was there a prisoner of war, and from what I saw I think
it a fine country, and that people might live there very well.' 'Oh! Mr.
Grass,' exclaims the Governor, 'how glad I am to hear that, for the sake
of these poor Loyalists. As they cannot all go to Nova Scotia, and I am
at a loss how to provide for them, will you, Mr. Grass, undertake to
lead thither as many as may choose to accompany you? If so, I will
furnish a conveyance by Quebec, and rations for you all till such time
as you may be able to provide for yourselves.' My father requested his
Excellency to allow him three days to make up his mind. This was
granted, and accordingly, at the expiration of the three days, my father
went to the Governor and said he would undertake it. Notices were then
posted up through the city, calling for all that would go to Frontenac
to enrol their names with Mr. Grass; so in a short time the company of
men, women, and children was completed, a ship provided and furnished,
and off they started for the unknown and far distant region, leaving the
homes and friends of their youth, with all their endearing
recollections, behind them--the fruits of all their former toil and
suffering--a sacrifice to their loyalty. The first season they got no
further than Sorel, in Lower Canada, where they were obliged to erect
log huts for the winter. Next spring they took boats, and proceeding up
the St. Lawrence, at length reached _Frontenac_, and pitched their tents
on _Indian Point_, where the marine docks of Kingston now stand. Here
they awaited the surveying of the lands, which was not accomplished so
as to be ready for location before July. In the meantime several other
companies had arrived by different routes under their respective
leaders, who were all awaiting the completing of the surveys. The
Governor, also, who by this time had himself come to Quebec, paid them a
visit, and riding a few miles along the lake shore on a fine day,
exclaimed to my father: 'Why, Mr. Grass, you have indeed got a fine
country! I am really glad to find it so.' While the several companies
were together waiting for the survey, some would say to my father: 'The
Governor will not give you the first choice of the townships, but will
prefer Sir John Johnson and his company, because he is a great man.'
But my father replied that he did not believe that, for if the Governor
should do so he should feel himself injured and would leave the country,
as he was the first man to mention it to the Governor in New York, and
to proceed hither with his company for settlement.
"At length the time came, in July, for the townships to be given out.
The Governor came, and having assembled the companies before him, called
for Mr. Grass, and said: 'Now, you were the first person to mention this
fine country, and have been here formerly as a prisoner of war. You must
have the first choice. The townships are numbered first, second, third,
fourth, and fifth. Which do you choose?' My father says: 'The _first_
township (Kingston).' Then the Governor says to Sir John Johnson, 'Which
do you choose for your company?' He replies, 'The _second_ township
(Ernest Town).' To Colonel Rogers, 'Which do you choose?' He says, 'The
_third_ township (Fredericksburg).' To Major Vanalstine, 'Which do you
choose?' He replies, 'The _fourth_ township (Adolphustown).' Then
Colonel M'Donnell, with his company, got the fifth township
(Marysburgh). So after this manner the first settlement of Loyalists in
Canada was made.
"But before leaving, the Governor very considerately remarked to my
father, 'Now, Mr. Grass, it is too late in the season to put in any
crops.' What can you do for food? My father replied, 'If they were
furnished with turnip seed, they might raise some turnips.' 'Very well,'
said the Governor, 'that you shall have.' Accordingly from Montreal he
sent some seed, and each man taking a handful thereof, they cleared a
spot of ground in the centre of where the town of Kingston now stands,
and raised a fine crop of turnips, which served for food the ensuing
winter, with the Government rations.
"The above is at your service.
"With much respect,
"JAS. RICHARDSON.
"Clover Hill, Toronto, 1st December, 1859."
Transmitted to the Author by a gentleman in Nova Scotia, taken from the
"Political Magazine," published in London 1783:
"When the loyal refugees from the Northern provinces were informed of
the resolution of the House of Commons against offensive war with the
rebels, they instantly saw there were no hopes left them of regaining
their ancient settlements, or of settling down again in their native
country.
"Those of them, therefore, who had been forward in taking up arms, and
in fighting the battles of the mother country, finding themselves
deserted, began to look out for a place of refuge, and Nova Scotia being
the nearest place to their old plantations, they determined on settling
in that province. Accordingly, to the number of 500 embarked for
Annapolis Royal; they had arms and ammunition, and one year's
provisions, and were put under the care and convoy of his Majesty's ship
the _Amphitrite_, of 24 guns, Captain Robert Briggs. This officer
behaved to them with great attention, humanity, and generosity, and saw
them safely landed and settled in the barracks at Annapolis, which the
Loyalists soon repaired. There was plenty of wild fowl in the country,
and at that time, which was last fall, a goose sold for two shillings,
and a turkey for two shillings and sixpence. The captain was at £200
expense out of his own pocket in order to render the passage and arrival
of the unfortunate Loyalists in some degree comfortable to them. Before
Captain Briggs sailed from Annapolis, the grateful Loyalists waited on
him with the following address:
"_To Robert Briggs, Esquire, Commander of His Majesty's Ship
'Amphitrite.'_
"The loyal refugees who have emigrated from New York, to settle in Nova
Scotia, beg your acceptance of their warmest thanks for the kind and
unremitted attention you have paid to their preservation and safe
conduct at all times during their passage.
"Driven from their respective dwellings for their loyalty to our King,
after enduring innumerable hardships, and seeking a settlement in a land
unknown to us, our distresses were sensibly relieved during an
uncomfortable passage by your humanity, ever attentive to our
preservation.
"Be pleased to accept of our most grateful acknowledgments, so justly
due to you and the officers under your command, and be assured we shall
remember your kindness with the most grateful sensibility.
"We are, with the warmest wishes for your health, happiness,
and a prosperous voyage,
"With the greatest respect,
"Your most obedient humble servants,
"In behalf of the refugees,
"AMOS BOTSFORD,
"TH. WARD,
"FRED. HANSIR,
"SAM. CUMMINS,
"ELIJAH WILLIAMS.[139]
"Annapolis Royal, the 20th of October, 1782."
_Letter with Enclosure from the Hon. R. Hodgson, Chief Justice of Prince
Edward Island._
"CHARLOTTETOWN, Prince Edward Island, 12th June, 1861.
"SIR,--
"I recently perused, in a newspaper published in Halifax, Nova Scotia,
called the 'British Colonist,' a statement to the purport that you
contemplate publishing a history of 'The British United Empire Loyalists
of America,' and have issued a circular to the descendants of the
Loyalists, asking for information relating to the lives and adventures
of their forefathers.
"I have not seen your circular, and possibly the whole thing may be a
mere newspaper fabrication; but it is stated so circumstantially as to
carry with it an air of truth, and I have been induced to copy a brief
memoir of my maternal grandfather, Lieut.-Colonel Joseph Robinson, in
his own handwriting, now in my possession, and to enclose it to you
herewith, to be made use of as you think fit in your intended
publication. The memoir would appear, from a statement contained in it,
to be written in obedience to some order from the then Secretary at War,
possibly calling upon the Loyalists in receipt of half-pay from the
British Government for a record of their services, to meet parliamentary
enquiry; it is marked on the back of the draft, in Colonel Robinson's
handwriting, as 'transmitted.' He died in this Island (formerly St.
John's Island, now Prince Edward Island) in 1808 or 1809. Colonel
Robinson was a native of Virginia, and emigrated from somewhere about
James River, in that province, to South Carolina, where he resided at
the commencement of the revolution. After a reward had been offered for
his life, as stated in his memorial, and he had been compelled to
abscond, a party of rebels visited his plantation and burned to the
ground his dwelling-house and every building upon it, scarcely giving
time to my grandmother (as she has often told me) to drag out of the
house her two female children in time to save their lives. My
grandmother was a woman of heroic spirit, and she, accompanied by a
single faithful negro slave, made her way on horseback, in an overland
journey of several hundred miles, to East Florida, where she joined her
husband. In this journey she carried one of her children before her on
the same horse, and the negro man carried the other in the same way on
the horse he rode.
"At the termination of the contest, my grandfather's property, a large
and valuable one, was confiscated by the victors, and he embarked with
his family for the island of Jamaica, was unfortunately shipwrecked by
the way, and lost every particle of property he had left, he, his wife
and children, with difficulty escaping drowning. After a short residence
in that island he emigrated to St. John's, in the Province of New
Brunswick, and ultimately came to this island.
"He was a member of the House of Assembly of this colony, and its
Speaker afterward; an Assistant-Justice of the Supreme Court, and member
of the Executive Council, such Council at that time also exercising
legislative functions. These last-named offices of Judge and member of
Council he held up to his decease.
"I was much too young at his death to be enabled to say anything of my
personal knowledge of him; but from his papers which I have perused, I
am warranted in saying that he was a man of a refined mind, an excellent
classical scholar, with a great taste for astronomy, and possessing no
ordinary talent in that science, which seems to have amused and occupied
his mind in his latter years. The only reward he received was the
half-pay of a lieutenant-colonel (his Judgeship was an honorary one,
having no salary or emolument); this he enjoyed up to the period of his
decease.
"I have somewhat hurriedly put together these observations. You may rely
upon the truth of the facts stated, and they are at your service if
coming within the scope and meaning of your intended history. At the
same time, if the thing be a newspaper hoax, I must beg you to excuse
the liberty I have taken in addressing you, and please burn this and the
copy of the memoir.
"I have the honour to be, Sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"R. HODGSON,
"_Chief Justice of Prince Edward Island._"
_Report of Joseph Robinson, Lieutenant-Colonel of the late Regiment of
South Carolina Royalists, now residing in the Island of St. John, in the
Gulf of St. Lawrence._
"To the Right Honourable William Wyndham, Secretary at War.
"At the commencement of the American rebellion, I was an inhabitant of
the Province of South Carolina, and major of a regiment of the King's
Militia in Cambden District.
"The insurgents formed a camp in Ninety-six district, and were
recruiting men, declaring that as soon as they had forces sufficient for
their purpose they would burn and destroy the houses and property of all
persons who refused to join them in opposing the King and the authority
of Great Britain.
"I then waited upon Lord William Campbell, the Governor of the Province,
and received written orders from his lordship to levy forces and march
against the rebels, in consequence of which I advanced with about 2,000
men, and found them fortified at Ninety-six Court-house. We defeated
them and destroyed their fortifications.
"But in the meantime the violence of the insurgents obliged Lord William
Campbell to depart from his Province, and our small army of Royal
Volunteers was left without further orders, money, or military stores;
wherefore, with much reluctance, I was under the necessity of desiring
the men to return to their respective habitations, and by all means not
to suffer any false pretences of the rebel party to deceive them, or to
efface their principles of loyalty, until we should enjoy a more
favourable opportunity.
"A reward being then offered for my life, personal safety induced me to
retire to the Cherokee Indian nation, afterwards to the Creek Indians,
and, passing through many dangers and suffering various hardships, at
length arrived at Saint Augustine, in the Province of East Florida, in
the year 1777. Soon afterwards, a party of about 300 men, being some of
those I formerly commanded in South Carolina, joined me there.
"I formed the regiment, which was styled the South Carolina Royalists,
of which General Prevost appointed me lieutenant-colonel, and soon after
I received my commission from Sir Henry Clinton, the Commander-in-Chief.
"The said regiment acted in East Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina,
in the course of which service I was in several engagements against the
enemy--viz., at the Alligator Bridge, in East Florida; at Doctor
Brimstone's Plantation, in Georgia; at New Port Meeting-house, in
Georgia; at New Port Bridge, in Georgia; at Stone Ferry, in South
Carolina; and afterwards at the reduction of Sunbury Fort, in the
Province of Georgia, and the fortifications of Charlestown, in South
Carolina. The order from the office of the Secretary at War was not seen
or known by me until the 24th of April, 1797; and that I am now
fifty-five years of age.
(Signed) "JOSEPH ROBINSON,
"_Lieut.-Colonel of the late South Carolina Royalist Regiment._
"Charlottetown, Island of St. John,
"April 26th, 1797.
"Half-pay commenced 7th November, 1783."
_Letter from Colonel John C. Clark, respecting his Father's Sufferings
in the Revolutionary War, and Settlement in the Midland District._
"ERNEST TOWN, July 9th, 1861.
"Rev. Egerton Ryerson, D.D.
"REVEREND SIR,--
"Having seen your circular, I write to inform you of my late father's
connection with the war of the revolution in the then British colonies.
My father, Robert Clark, Esq., late of the township of Ernest Town, in
the county of Addington, deceased, was born March 16th, 1744, on Quaker
Hill, in Dutchess county, and Province of New York. He learned the trade
of carpenter and millwright, and was the owner of two farms. When the
war commenced, his loyal proclivities made it dangerous for him to
remain at home, and he joined the British standard as a volunteer in
1776. He had a few opportunities of visiting his family privately, who
consisted then of a wife and two children (boys); another son was born
during his absence, who was called Robert (after his father), on which
occasion the nurse--being a violent _Tory_--whispered the secret to some
of the rebels' wives in the vicinity, that Robert Clark was at home,
well knowing the secret would be divulged; and for several days and
nights after 'there were liers-in-wait' about the house to capture the
Tory when he made his exit. At length the said nurse told them they had
been hoaxed.
"I have a powder-horn now in my possession, which my father owned in the
time of the war, with his name cut on it, with the date 'Fort Edward,
November 4th, 1776.' His family were driven from their home and his
lands confiscated. Being with General Burgoyne's army on the 16th of
October, 1777, the day previous to the general's surrender of his army
to Generals Gates and Arnold, Burgoyne mustered the provincial
volunteers, and told them that he was obliged to surrender his army;
that they must leave the camp that night, and, if possible, avoid the
army, and try to find their way to Canada.
"They left accordingly, and after some weeks of great suffering and
privation, my father reached Canada. He subsequently served two years in
his Majesty's provincial regiment called 'Loyal Rangers,' commanded by
Major Edward Jessup, and was in Captain Jonathan Jones' company, and was
discharged the 24th of December, 1783.
"In 1782-83 he was employed by Government to erect the Kingston Mills
(then Cataraqui), preparatory to the settlement of the Loyalists in this
section of the Province of Quebec. While there employed, his wife and
three children arrived in Canada, in the autumn of 1783; they wintered
at Sorel, where they all were afflicted with the small-pox, and being
entirely among strangers, most of whom spoke a language not understood
by them, they were compelled to endure more than the usual amount of
suffering incident to that disease; the husband being at a distance, and
in the employ of Government, could not leave to administer to their
necessity.
"In 1784 his family joined him at the Mills, after immense suffering,
having been separated by the vicissitudes of war for the term of _seven
years_.
"In 1785 he removed with his family to lot No. 34, in the 1st concession
of Ernest Town (where he had three children born, and of the six I am
the only survivor), in which year he was again employed by Government to
build the Napanee Mills.
"He was appointed a Justice of the Peace for the (then) district of
Mecklenburg in July, 1788, and subsequently an officer in the militia;
he joined the first Methodist class formed in Ernest Town by the Rev.
William Losee, in 1791, and remained a consistent member during his
life. He died the 17th December, 1823.
"If you can glean anything from the above sketch to assist you in your
new work, I shall be much gratified.
"I have the honour to be, Rev. Sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"JOHN C. CLARK."
_Adventures and Sufferings of Captain William Hutchison, and his
Settlement in Walsingham, County of Norfolk; communicated by his
grandson, J.B. Hutchison, Esquire._
"In the beginning of the wars of 1776, William Hutchison (my
grandfather) was urged to join the rebel army (he living at that time in
New Jersey); but he boldly declared, _death_ before _dishonour_. After
being harassed about for some time, and leaving a wife and eight
children to the mercy of their enemies, he with a number of others tried
to make their way to the British army, and were followed by a large
force of the enemy; but when they found themselves so greatly
outnumbered (being about ten to one), they tried to make their escape to
an old barn; but every one of the unfortunate men was caught and hanged
but himself. They did not succeed in finding him, he hiding among the
bushes. While he lay hidden among some elder bushes, one of the enemy
pulled up the bush where he lay, saying 'this would be a d----d good
place for a----to hide,' but the shadow falling on him completely hid
him from sight. His captain, James J. Lett, was among the unhappy
victims, grandfather being lieutenant under him at the time. His
comrades being all killed, he tried to escape from his covert, but they
had stationed sentries all around; he could hear them swearing vengeance
on him if they could find him. It being bright moonlight, he could see
quite a long distance. He crawled along on his hands and knees across a
field, and got into the middle of the road; when the sentries, one on
either side of him, got into a quarrel and came close to him before they
settled their dispute; having done so, they turned to go away; he then
made his escape and got to the British army. After suffering all the
horrors of a war lasting seven years, losing his property--everything
but his loyalty--and that, having extended faithfully through the _whole
family_, is not likely to be lost. His wife and six of his children died
from the sufferings consequent upon such a war. Previous to this he had
received a captain's commission. After the war closed, he went to New
Brunswick, and remained there fourteen years, coming to Canada in 1801,
and settled in the township of Walsingham. My father, Alexander
Hutchison, was the only surviving son by his first wife. In the war of
1812, my grandfather went out against the enemy with his sons,
Alexander, David, and James, in which war my father lost his life.
"Hoping you may be able to find something in these fragments which will
be interesting to you,
"I remain, with the greatest respect,
"Yours most faithfully,
"J.B. HUTCHISON."
_Patriotic feelings--Early Settlement of Prince Edward County and
Neighbouring Townships._
Extracts of an address entitled "Scraps of Local History," delivered by
Canniff Haight, Esq., before the Mechanics' Institute of Picton, March
16th, 1859:
"If I feel a pride in one thing more than another, it is that I am a
Canadian. I rejoice more in being the descendant of these early pioneers
of Canada, than if noble blood coursed my veins. I point you back with
more unmitigated pleasure to that solitary log cabin in the wilderness
which once bordered your fine bay, as the home of my fathers, than I
would to some baronial castle in other lands.
"Is there for honest poverty,
That hangs his head, and a' that?
"The coward slave we pass him by--
We dare be poor for a' that.
For a' that, and a' that,
Our toils obscure and a' that;
The rank is but the guinea's stamp,
The man's the gowd for a' that!'
"We love our country. Thousands of sweet recollections cluster round our
childhood's homes, and as we think of them the words of Scott occur to
us:
"'Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native land;
Whose heart hath ne'er within him burned.
As home his footsteps he hath turned'----
"What part of the world can you point me to to show such rapid changes
as have occurred here? Where among the countries of the earth shall we
find a quicker and more vigorous growth? Seventy years ago this
beautiful and wealthy county of Prince Edward was one dense and untrod
forest. We can hardly realize the fact, that even one century has not
passed away since those strong-hearted men pushed their way into the
wilderness of Upper Canada. Were they not heroes?
"In the summer of the year 1795, or thereabouts, a company of six
persons, composed of two married men and their wives, with two small
children, pushed a rough-looking and somewhat unwieldy little boat away
from the shore in the neighbourhood of Poughkeepsie, and turned its prow
up the Hudson. A rude sail was hoisted, but it flapped lazily against
the slender mast. The two men betake themselves to the oars. The sun was
just showing his face above the eastern woods as they pulled out into
the river. The boat was crowded with sundry household matters--all
carefully packed up and stowed away; a very small place was left at the
stern, and was occupied by the two women and the children. The mother
was a small and delicate-looking creature, well and neatly dressed. Had
you been there, you would have observed tear after tear dropping from
the pale cheek, as she bent in silence over her youngest babe; and see,
the eyes of that young father, too, are suffused with tears. Why do they
weep? Whither are they bound? Not a word is spoken. They are too sad to
talk. Still the oar keeps its measured stroke, and they glide slowly
on, and thus may we follow them day after day. Now and then a gentle
breeze fills the sail, and wafts the small boat on. When the shades of
evening begin to fall around them, they push to shore, and rear a
temporary tent. Then the frugal supper is spread upon the green grass,
and they gather round it, and forget their toils in speculations upon
the future. But the morrow draws on, with its demands upon their
strength; so they lay them down to rest. In due course they reach
Albany, then a small Dutch town filled with Dutch people, Dutch comforts
and frugality, and Dutch cabbage. This in those days was one of the
outposts of civilization. Beyond was a wilderness-land but little known.
Some necessaries are purchased, and again our little company launch
away. They reach the place where the city of Troy now stands, and turn
away to the left into the Mohawk river, and proceed slowly, and often
with great difficulty, up the rapids and windings of the stream. The
rich and fertile valley of the Mohawk of to-day was then the home of the
Indian. There the celebrated Chief Brant had lived but a short time
before, but had now withdrawn into the wilds of Western Canada. The
voyagers, after several days of hard labour and difficulty, emerge into
the little lake Oneida, lying in the north-western part of the State of
New York, through which they pass with ease and pleasure. The most
difficult part of their journey had been passed. They reach the Onondago
river, and soon pass down it to Oswego, then an old fort which the
French had reared when they possessed the country as a barrier against
the encroachments of the wily Indian. Several bloody frays have occurred
here, but our friends did not pause to learn their history. Their small
craft now danced upon the wide bosom of Ontario, but they did not push
out into the lake, and away across it. No; they are careful sailors, and
they believed no doubt 'that small boats should not venture far from
shore,' and so they wind along it until they reach Gravely Point, now
known by the more dignified name of Cape Vincent. Here they strike
across the channel, and thence around the lower end of Wolf Island, and
into Kingston Bay, when they come to shore and transact some business.
There were not many streets or fine store-houses in Kingston at this
time. A few log-houses composed the town. An addition was made to their
diminished stock of eatables, and away they push again. They steer now
up the Bay of Quinté; and what a wild and beautiful scene that must have
been! Could those toil-worn voyagers have failed to mark it? Why do they
slacken their pace? Why do they so often rest upon their oars and look
around? Why do they push into this little cove and that? Why do they
laugh and talk more than usual? Perhaps their journey is drawing to an
end! We shall see. They go up the bay until they reach township number
five. This township, now known as Adolphustown, is composed of five
points or arms of land, which run out into the bay. They run round three
of these points, and turn down an arm of the bay called Hay-bay, and
after proceeding some two miles pull to shore. Their journey it would
seem had come to an end, for they begin at once to unload their boat and
build a tent. The sun sinks down behind the western woods, and they,
weary and worn, lay down to rest. Six weeks had passed since we saw them
launch away in quest of this wilderness home. Look at them, and tell me
what you think of the prospect. Is it far enough away from the busy
haunts of men to suit you? or would you not rather sing,
"'Oh, Solitude, where are the charms
Which sages have seen in thy face?
Better dwell in the midst of alarms,
Than reign in this horrible place.'
"With the first glimmer of the morning's light, all hands are up and at
work. A small spot is cleared away; trees are felled and a house is
built. I fancy that it was not large nor commodious; that the rooms were
not numerous nor spacious. The furniture, I suppose, did not amount to
much either in quality or quantity; an inventory thereof would probably
run somewhat after this fashion--a pot or two, perhaps a few quite
common plates, cups and saucers, knives and forks, a box or two of
linen, a small lot of bed-clothes, etc., with a
"'Chest contriv'd a double debt to pay--
A bed by night, a chest of drawers by day.'
"This, ladies and gentlemen, is no fancy sketch, but one drawn from the
shadows of the past. You may find hundreds of similar adventures in the
past history of our country. Such was the first home of the young wife
whom I have mentioned. She had once lived in comfort, but by the fate
of war the home of a father and husband had been confiscated, and hence
they had sought for a dwelling-place in Canada, when England offered
other homes to those who had fought her battles. A grandchild of that
couple now stands before you.
"We can form no correct idea of the difficulties which beset these early
inhabitants, nor of the hardships and privations they endured. They were
not unfrequently reduced to the very verge of starvation, yet they
struggled on. Tree after tree fell before the axe, and the small
clearing was turned to immediate account. A few necessaries of life were
produced, and even these, such as they were, were the beginnings of
comfort--comfort indeed, but far removed from the idea we associate with
the term.
"But time rolled on. The openings in the forest grew larger and wider.
The log cabins began to multiply, and the curling smoke told a silent
but cheerful tale. There dwelt a neighbour, miles perhaps away, but a
neighbour nevertheless. The term bears a wide difference now-a-days. If
you would like an idea of the proximity of humanity and the luxury of
society in those days, just place a few miles, say six or eight, of
dense woods between you and your neighbour, and you may get a faint
conception of the delights of a home in the woods.
"There are some here, I presume, who have heard their parents or their
grandparents tell of the dreadful sufferings they endured the second
year after the settlement of the Bay of Quinté country. The Government
was to provide food, etc., for two years. It could hardly be expected
that men could go into the woods with their families, and clear up and
raise enough for their support, the first or even the second year. The
second year's Government supply, through some bad management, was frozen
up in the lower part of the St. Lawrence, and in consequence the people
were reduced to a state of famine. Men willingly offered pretty much all
they possessed for food. I could show you one of the finest farms in
Hay-bay that was offered to my grandfather for a half hundred of flour,
and refused. A very respectable old lady, whom numbers of you knew, but
who some time since went away to her rest--whose offspring, some at
least, are luxuriating in comfort above the middle walks of life--was
wont in those days to wander away early in the spring to the woods and
gather and eat the buds of the basswood, and then bring an apron or
basketfull home to the children. Glad were they to pluck the rye and
barley heads, as soon as the kernel had formed, for food; and not many
miles from Picton a beef's bone passed from house to house, and was
boiled again and again in order to extract some nutriment. It seems
incredulous, but it is no fiction, and surely no homoeopathist would
desire to be placed on a lower regimen.
"I feel it unnecessary almost for me to tell you that the largest
proportion of the first settlers of this province were Americans who had
adhered to the cause of England. After the capture of General Burgoyne,
many of the Royalists with their families moved into Canada; and upon
the evacuation of New York, at the close of the war, a still greater
number followed. A large proportion of these were soldiers, disbanded
and left without employ. Some there were who had lost their estates by
confiscation; so that nearly all were destitute and dependent upon the
liberality of the country whose battles they had fought, and for whose
cause they had suffered. In order, therefore, to reward their loyalty
and relieve their present necessities, as well as to supply some means
of future subsistence, the British Government determined upon making
liberal grants of the land in Upper Canada and other provinces to the
American Loyalists. The measure was not only an act of justice and
humanity, but it was sound in policy and has been crowned with universal
success.
"The grants were made free of expense and upon the following scale: A
field-officer received 5,000 acres; a captain, 3,000; a subaltern,
2,000; and a private soldier, 200 acres. A survey was accordingly made,
commencing near Lake St. Francis, then the highest French settlement,
and extended along the shores of the St. Lawrence up to Lake Ontario,
and thence along the lake, and round the Bay of Quinté. Townships were
laid out, and then subdivided into concessions and lots of 200 acres.
These townships were numbered, but remained without names for many years
afterwards. Of these numbers there were two divisions--one including the
townships below Kingston on the river, east to the St. Francis
settlement; the others from Kingston, west to the head of the Bay of
Quinté. This will at once explain to you the reason why the old people
used to talk of first, second, third, fourth town, etc., as far back as
we can remember and up to the present. No names were given to the
townships by legal proclamation, as we said before, until long after
they were settled, and hence the habit was formed of designating them by
numbers.
"The settlement of the surveyed portion of the Midland district, so
named because of its then central position, commenced in the summer of
1784. The new settlers were supplied with farming utensils, building
materials, provisions, and some clothing, for the two first years, at
the expense of the nation; and in order that the love of country may
take deeper root in the hearts of these true men, the Government
determined to put a mark of honour, as the Orders of Council expressed
it, upon the families who had adhered to the unity of the empire, and
joined the Royal standard in America before the treaty of separation in
the year 1783. A list of such persons was directed in 1789 to be made
out and returned, to the end that their posterity might be discriminated
from the future settlers. From these two emphatic words, the Unity of
the Empire, it was styled the U.E. List, and they whose names were
entered upon it were distinguished as U.E. Loyalists. You are aware of
the fact that this was not a mere empty distinction, but was, in
reality, a title of some consequence; for it not only provided for the
U.E.'s themselves, but guaranteed unto all their children, upon arriving
at the age of twenty-one years, 200 acres of land free from all expense.
I always look back on these early acts of the English nation with the
fathers of this growing Canada with pleasure, and I venerate the memory
of those true and noble-hearted men, who loved their fatherland so well
that they even preferred to live under the protection of her flag in the
wild woods of Canada, and endure hunger and want, than enjoy the
comforts of home under the banner of a rebellious but now independent
people. And I hope, ladies and gentlemen, that we, the sons and
daughters of those whom our mother country was wont to honour, may never
love our country and its institutions less than they.
"Kingston is the oldest Upper Canadian town by many years. Here the
white man found his way over a century before any settlement was made or
thought of. The crafty and industrious French Governor, De Courcelles,
in order to check the encroachments of the Five Nations, despatched a
messenger from Quebec to their chiefs, stating that he had some business
of great importance to communicate, and desired them to proceed to
Cataraqui, where he would meet them. (I observe here that Cataraqui is
an Indian name, and means 'Rocks above water.') As soon as the deputies
of the Indians arrived, a Council was held. The Governor informed them
that he was going to build a fort there, simply to facilitate the trade
between them and to serve as a depot for merchandise. The chiefs,
ignorant of the real intent of the design, readily agreed to a
proposition which seemed to be intended for their advantage; but this,
so far from being the case, or what the Indians expected, was really to
be a barrier against them in future wars. While measures were being
completed to build the fort, Courcelles was recalled and Count de
Frontenac sent out in his place. Frontenac carried out the designs of
his predecessor and completed the fort in 1672, which received and
retained his name for many years. Kingston was subsequently substituted,
and the county received the name of Frontenac."
_Letters from the late Rev. George J. Ryerse, dated June 12th and June
23rd, 1861, give some particulars of his father's coming to Canada, and
of the earliest settlement of the London District._
His father, Colonel Samuel Ryerse, was appointed Lieutenant of the
county, and authorized to organize the militia and appoint the officers,
as also the local civil court, of which he was the first Judge. The
following letters indicate what he sacrificed and endured for his
allegiance to the unity of the empire, and for which allegiance he and
thousands of others were banished from the United States and their
property confiscated; but the writer has never heard a word from any one
of these veteran Loyalists regretting the part he had taken:
"PORT RYERSE, 12th June, 1861.
"MY DEAR COUSIN,--
"I received your circular some time since, but, through forgetfulness, I
did not at once give an answer. I am highly gratified with your noble
undertaking, and humbly trust that you may live to succeed and be amply
rewarded. I am sorry that I have no documents that would be of use to
you. You are aware of the staunch loyalty that was inherent in our
parents, that made them sacrifice everything out of regard for the
British Throne, and endure every privation in their early settlement in
this country. It was in 1794 my father came here, and gave orders to his
family that if he should decease while on his way through the United
States, to take his body to British soil for burying. At that time there
were but eight families residing within thirty miles of this place,
except Indians; no roads; the nearest mill 100 miles distant by water
(at Niagara Falls). My father purchased corn of the Indians at the Grand
River, thirty miles from home, and carried it home on his shoulders.
Afterwards he bought a yoke of oxen of the Indians, and on a toboggin
sled put his son, and with his axe and compass made his way through the
woods and streams to his beloved home. Two years afterwards he built a
saw mill, and afterwards a grist mill. These nearly proved his ruin, not
understanding the business, and very little to sustain them; they were
badly built, and proved a bother to him, but still a great help to the
settlement for a long time. Merchandise was so very expensive and
produce so very cheap that the early settlers could barely exist; but
they loved their country, and they have gone to their rest, and I feel
proud that so many of their children inherit their spirit.
"I am, yours truly,
"GEORGE J. RYERSE.
"Rev. E. Ryerson."
"PORT RYERSE, 23rd June, 1861.
"DEAR COUSIN,--
"Your kind letter I received, and in answer to your suggestions I have
to state that my father was a captain in the New Jersey Volunteers
during the American Revolution; and at its close in 1783, having his
property confiscated in the United States, he went to New Brunswick and
drew lands according to his rank as captain; but being disappointed both
in soil and climate, finding it to be sterile and uncongenial, he
determined to remove to Canada. In the spring of 1794 he started and
went to Long Island, the place where the city of Brooklyn now stands,
and there left his family. While on foot, he went to Canada (U.C.) to
better his condition by looking out a more congenial place. Having
accomplished his purpose, he started, at the opening of navigation, with
his family, in company with Captain Bonta's family, first on board a
sloop (as all was then done by sloops) to Albany, thence by land to
Schenectady, where they procured a flat-bottomed boat, in which families
and baggage were put; thence, with poles and oars, against a strong
current, they made their way up the Mohawk river a long distance, until
they came to a place called Wood Creek, which they again navigated for a
long-distance toward Lake Ontario, until they approached a stream called
the Oswego, which to enter they had to draw their boat by hand across a
portage (I think some two miles); thence down this stream to the lake to
Oswego; thence up the lake in this boat westward to the Niagara river;
thence up the Niagara as far as Queenston, where again they had to pass
over a portage of nine miles around the Falls to Chipawa; thence up the
river eighteen miles to Lake Erie; thence up the lake westward eighty
miles to the place my father had selected (and which is now my home),
arriving here 1st July, 1795. It was in this boat that they went to
mill, as before stated to you. A kind Providence furnished plenty of
fish and game at this early day, or the people could not have survived.
The total absence of roads, schools, and religious teachers for many
years were among the heavy privations that the early settlers had to
endure.
"I remain, yours truly,
"GEORGE J. RYERSE.
"Rev. E. Ryerson."
_Historical Memoranda by Mrs. Amelia Harris, of Eldon House, London,
Ontario, only daughter of the late Colonel Samuel Ryerse, and sister of
the late Rev. Geo. J. Ryerse, writer of the foregoing short letters._
The husband of Mrs. Harris was an active and scientific officer in the
Royal Navy, having been employed with the late Admirals Bayfield and
Owen in the survey of the Canadian lakes and rivers, by the Admiralty,
during the years 1815 to 1817. It was during the progress of this survey
that Miss Ryerse married. After a few years' residence at Kingston, Mr.
and Mrs. Harris returned to a beautiful homestead on Long Point Bay,
intending to reside there permanently. In the days of the early
settlement, a more refined and cultivated society was to be found in the
country than usually in the towns and villages. Mr. Harris was at once
selected by the various Governments of the day to be the recipient of
various Government offices. During the years 1837-38 he took an active
part in quelling the rebellion, and is believed by many to have been the
head and front and organizer of the expedition which sent the steamer
_Caroline_ over the Falls. He was the first man on her deck, and the
last to leave, having set her on fire.
The late Edward Ermatinger, in his Life of Colonel Talbot, refers to the
Harris family as follows:
A.D. 1834. "By degrees the officers of the Court removed to London, and
Mr. Harris was the first to build a house of considerable dimensions on
a handsome piece of ground highly elevated above the banks of the River
Thames. This house was long the resort of the first men in Canada, and
in this house the venerable founder of the Talbot settlement lay during
his first serious illness, while on his way to England. Every man of
rank or distinction who visited this part of Canada became the guest of
Mr. Harris--the late Lord Sydenham, the various lieutenant-governors and
governor-generals, and the present Lord Derby, were among the number."
In the following memoranda, which Mrs. Harris wrote more than twenty
years since, at the wish of her children, but not for publication, she
gives a graphic and highly interesting account of her father's early
settlement in Canada, and the circumstances of the first settlers, and
the state of society of that time:
"Captain Samuel Ryerse, one of the early settlers in Canada, was the
descendant of an old Dutch family in New Jersey, and both his father and
grandfather held judicial appointments under Kings George II. and III.
When the rebellion commenced in 1776, and the British Government was
anxious to raise provincial troops, they offered commissions to any
young gentlemen who could enlist a certain number of young men; sixty, I
think, entitled them to a captaincy. My father, Captain Ryerse, being
popular in his neighbourhood, found no difficulty in enlisting double
the number required, and on presenting himself and men at headquarters,
New York, was gazetted captain in the 4th Battalion New Jersey
Volunteers, in which regiment he served with distinction during the
seven years' war.
"After the acknowledgment of American Independence by England, and the
British troops were about to be disbanded, the British Government
offered them a free transport to New Brunswick, and a grant of land.
When there, little choice was left to those who had sacrificed all for
connection with the mother country. On my father's arrival in New
Brunswick he obtained a lot of land in or near Fredericton, the present
seat of government; and there he met my mother, who was a refugee also,
and they were married.
"After remaining there several years, his friends entreated him to
return to New York, holding out great inducements if he would consent to
do so. He accepted the offer of his friends and returned, but he soon
discovered that the rancorous, bitter feelings which had arisen during
the war were not extinct, and that it was too soon for a British subject
to seek a home in the United States. My mother loved her native city,
and might not have been induced again to leave it had it not been for
domestic affliction. She brought from the healthy climate of New
Brunswick four fine children, all of whom she buried in New York in
eight weeks. She gave birth to four more; three of those had died also,
and she felt sure if she stayed there she would lose the only remaining
one. Therefore she readily consented to my father's proposal to come to
Canada, where his old friend, General Simcoe, was at that time governor.
In the summer of 1794 my father and a friend started for Canada. The
journey was then a most formidable one, and before commencing it wills
were made and farewells given, as if a return was more than doubtful.
"On his arrival at Niagara he was warmly greeted by his old friend,
General Simcoe, who advised him by all means to settle in Canada,
holding out many inducements for him to do so. He promised my father a
grant of 3,000 acres of land as a captain in the army, 1,200 as a
settler, and that my mother and each of her sons should have a grant of
1,200, and each of her daughters a grant of 600 acres.
"My father was pleased with what he saw of the country, and heard a
favourable account of the climate, and decided at once to return as
early the ensuing year as possible. On his return to New York he
commenced making arrangements for his move the ensuing spring.
"It would be much easier for a family to go from Canada to China now,
than it was to come from New York to Canada then. He had to purchase a
boat large enough to hold his family and goods, with supplies of
groceries for two or three years, with farming utensils, tools, pots,
boilers, etc., and yet the boat must not be too large to get over the
portage from the Hudson to the Mohawk. As there were no waggon roads
from Albany to the Niagara frontier, families coming to Canada had to
come down the Mohawk to Lake Ontario, and enter Canada in that way. My
father found it a weary journey, and was months in accomplishing it.
"On my father's arrival at Niagara, at that time the seat of government,
he called on his Excellency General Simcoe, who had just returned from a
tour through the Province of Canada West, then one vast wilderness. He
asked General Simcoe's advice as to where he should choose his
resting-place. He recommended the county of Norfolk (better known for
many years as Long Point), which had been recently surveyed.
"As it was now drawing towards the close of summer, it would require all
their time to get up a shanty and prepare for the winter. Consequently,
arrangements were made immediately for continuing their journey. The
heavy batteau was transported from Queenston to Chippawa, around the
Falls, a distance of twelve miles. Supplies were added to those brought
from New York, and they once more started on their journey, bidding
goodbye to the last vestige of civilization. They were twelve days
making 100 miles--not bad travelling in those days, taking the current
of the river and lake, adverse winds, and an unknown coast into
consideration.
"When my father came within the bay formed by Long Point, he watched the
coast for a favourable impression, and, after a scrutiny of many miles,
the boat was run into a small creek, the high banks sloping gradually on
each side.
"Directions were given to the men to erect the tent for my mother. My
father had not been long on shore before he decided that that should be
his home. In wandering about, he came to an eminence which would, when
the trees were felled, command a view of the harbour. He gazed around
him for a few moments and said, 'Here I will be buried,' and there,
after fourteen years' toil, he sleeps in peace.
"The men my father hired in New York all wished to settle in Canada, and
were glad to avail themselves of an opportunity of coming free of
expense, and promised to remain with him until he had a log-house built,
and had made himself comfortable. He had paid them a great portion of
their wages in advance, to enable them to get necessaries in New York.
Immediately on his arrival at Niagara they left him, with one exception,
and went in search of localities for themselves, very little regard at
that time being paid to engagements, and there being no means to enforce
them; consequently, he had to hire fresh hands at Niagara, who were men,
like the former, on the look-out for land. After one day's rest at
Ryerse Creek, they re-embarked, and went fourteen miles further up the
bay, to the house of a German settler who had been there two years, and
had a garden well stocked with vegetables.
"The appearance of the boat was hailed with delight by those solitary
beings, and my mother and child were soon made welcome, and the best
that a miserable log-house, or rather hut, could afford was at her
service. This kind, good family consisted of father, mother, one son and
one daughter. Mr. Troyer, the father, was a fine-looking old man with a
flowing beard, and was known for many years throughout the Long Point
settlement as 'Doctor Troyer.' He possessed a thorough knowledge of
witches, their ways and doings, and the art of expelling them, and also
the use of the divining rod, with which he could not only find water,
but could also tell how far below the surface of the earth precious
metals were concealed, but was never fortunate enough to discover any in
the neighbourhood of Long Point. Here my father got his goods under
shelter and left my mother, and returned to Ryerse Creek, intending to
build a log-house as soon as possible. Half a dozen active men will
build a very comfortable primitive log-house in ten or twelve days; that
is, cut and lay up the logs and chink them, put on a bark roof, cut
holes for the windows and door, and build a chimney of mud and sticks.
Sawing boards by hand for floor and doors, making sash and shingles, is
an after and longer process.
"But soon after my father returned he fell ill with Lake fever; his men
erected a shanty, open in front like an Indian camp, placed my father in
it, and left him with his son, a lad of fifteen years of age, the son of
a former wife, as his only attendant. When my father began to recover,
my half brother was taken ill, and there they remained almost helpless,
alone for three weeks.
"My mother hearing nothing of or from them, became almost frantic, as
some of the party were to have returned in a few days. She prevailed
upon Mike Troyer, the son, to launch his bark canoe, and to take her and
my brother, then a year and a half old, in search of my father. On
approaching Ryerse Creek, after a many days' paddle along the coast,
they saw a blue smoke curling above the trees, and very soon my mother
stood in front of the shanty, where my father sat with a stick, turning
an immense turkey, which hung, suspended by a string, before a bright
fire. The day previous, a large flock of wild turkeys had come very near
his camp, and commenced fighting. Without moving from his shanty, he
killed six at one shot. He afterwards, at single shots, killed eight
more, and the united strength of him and my brother was scarcely
sufficient to bring them into camp. My mother used to look back upon
that evening as one of the happiest of her life. She had found her loved
ones, after torturing her mind with all sorts of horrors--Indians, wild
beasts, snakes, illness, and death had all been imagined. The next day,
Mike Troyer's canoe was laden with wild turkeys, and he returned alone,
as my mother refused to separate herself again from my father. A few
days after, a party of pedestrians arrived, on the look-out for land,
and they at once set to work and put up the wished-for log-house or
houses, for there were two attached, which gave them a parlour, two
bedrooms, and a kitchen and garret. On removing from the shanty to this
house, my mother felt as if in a palace. They bought a cow from Mr.
Troyer and collected their goods, and when cold weather set in they were
comfortable.
"My father found it necessary to return to Niagara to secure the patent
for the lands he had selected, and also to provide for wants not
previously known or understood. The journey was long and tedious,
travelling on foot on the lake shore, and by Indian paths through the
woods, fording the creeks as he best could. At the Grand River, or River
Ouse, there was an Indian reservation of six miles on each side of the
river from its mouth to its source, owned by two tribes of Indians,
Mohawks and Cayugas, whose wants were well supplied with very little
exertion of their own, as the river and lake abounded with fish, the
woods with deer and smaller game, and the rich flats along the river
yielded abundance of maize with very little cultivation. They were kind
and inoffensive in their manner, and would take the traveller across the
river, or part with their products for a very small reward.
"On my father's application for the lots he had chosen, he was told by
the Council that the two at Ryerse Creek could only be granted
conditionally, as they possessed very valuable water privileges, and
that whoever took them must build both a flour and a saw-mill. My father
accepted the conditions, secured the grant for his own lands, but left
my mother's for a future day, and at once made arrangements for
purchasing the necessary material for his mills--bolting cloths,
mill-stones, iron, and screws, etc.--and then with a back load of twine,
provisions for his journey, and his light fusee, he commenced his return
home, where he arrived in good health, after an absence of twelve days.
It is only the settlers in a new country that know what pleasure a safe
return can give.
"Long Point now boasted four inhabitants in twenty miles, all settled on
the lake shore. Their nearest neighbour, Peter Walker, at the mouth of
Patterson's Creek [now Port Dover], was three miles distant by water and
six by land. But from this time, 1795, for several years to come, there
was a constant influx of settlers.
"Few days passed without some foot traveller asking a night's rest. The
most of the travellers would set to work cheerfully for a few days, and
assist in cutting roads, making sheds, sawing boards, or felling timber.
The winter was now fast approaching, and much was to be done in
preparation for the coming spring. My father succeeded in hiring five or
six men for as many months. The great object was to get some land
cleared, so that they could plant maize, potatoes, and garden vegetables
for the next year's consumption. They had also to make preparations for
sugar-making, by hollowing out troughs, one to each tree that was
tapped, sufficiently large to hold the sap that would run in one day.
"Their evenings were devoted to netting the twine, which my father had
purchased at Niagara for that purpose. My mother hired Barbara Proyer as
a help, and time passed less heavily than she had imagined. My father
had brought with him a sufficient quantity of flour and salt pork to
last them a year; for fresh meat and fish he depended upon his gun and
spear, and for many years they had always a good supply of both. My
father had a couple of deer-hounds, and he used to go to the woods for
his deer as a farmer would go to his fold for a sheep. Wild turkey and
partridge were bagged with very little skill or exertion, and when the
creek and lake were not frozen he need scarcely leave his own door to
shoot ducks; but the great sporting ground--and it is still famous, and
the resort of sporting gentlemen from Toronto, London, and indeed all
parts of Canada West--is at the head of Long Point Bay. I have known
him, several years later, return from there with twenty wild geese and
one hundred ducks, the result of a few days' shooting. Pigeons were so
plentiful, so late as 1810 and 1812, that they could be knocked down
with poles. Great would have been the sufferings of the early settlers
had not a kind and heavenly Father made this provision for them. But
deer were not the only animals that abounded in the woods; bears and
wolves were plentiful, and the latter used to keep up a most melancholy
howl about the house at night, so near that my mother could scarcely be
persuaded that they were not under the window. The cow, for security,
was tied to the kitchen door every night; during the day she accompanied
the men to the field they were chopping, and fed upon browse, which kept
her fat and in good heart--the men making a point of felling a maple
tree each morning for her special benefit. Their first sugar-making was
not very beautiful, but they made sufficient of a very bad quality for
the year's consumption. The potatoes gave a great yield; the maize was
eaten and destroyed by the racoons; the apple and pear pips grew nicely,
as did the peach, cherry, and plum stones, and my mother's balsams and
few flowers from the new rich soil were beautiful.
"The summer of 1796 passed away with few incidents at Ryerse Creek,
except the arrival of settlers.
"This year there was a total failure of the grain crops, not only in the
new settlements, but throughout the United States. The Indians alone had
preserved the maize from destruction by the racoons, squirrels and
bears, which had invaded the settlements by thousands in search of food,
as there were no nuts in the woods. The settlers had now to depend upon
the Indians at the Grand River for their bread, and they continued to
sell their maize at the same price as formerly, and during the year of
scarcity never raised it. My father procured his year's supply, but
there were no mills; the nearest ones were south of the Short Hills,
seventy miles distant. Lucky was the family that owned a coffee mill in
the winter of 1797. My father had a number of hands getting out timber
for his mills and clearing land, and when they returned from their work
in the evenings they used to grind in the coffee-mill maize for the next
day's consumption. They soon learned the exact quantity required, and
each man ground his own allowance, dividing that of the rest of the
household amongst them. The meal was made into johnny-cakes, eaten hot
for breakfast, cold for dinner, and the remainder in mush with milk for
supper; and upon this fare they enjoyed perfect good health, were always
cheerful, and apparently happy.
"The greatest good-feeling existed amongst the settlers, although they
were of all nations and creeds and no creeds. Many of those families who
had remained neutral during the revolution to save their property, and
still retained their preference for the British Government, now sought
homes in Canada, or assisted their sons to do so. The Quakers and
Yunkers were amongst the best settlers, as they always brought some
property with them, and were generally peaceable and industrious.
"Lands were so easily obtained, and so much encouragement was given by
Government to settlers, that many of the half-pay officers and soldiers
who had gone to New Brunswick found their way here, as well as many of
the idle, discontented, dissipated, vicious and worthless of the United
States. But at the Settler's Home all were made welcome; the meals,
victuals and night's lodging were freely given to all, and for years
after, to my recollection, during the summer season our house was never
free from travellers; not that there was any particular merit due to our
hospitality, for the man that would have closed his door against a
traveller would have been looked upon as worse than a savage. My mother,
this summer, had a dreadful alarm, which she used to describe to me with
great feeling many years after. My little brother (George), for whose
sake she had encountered all the privations and hardships of an early
settler, gave rise to numerous fears and anxieties if he was out of her
sight a few minutes. Endless misfortunes might befall him; he might be
eaten up by wild beasts; or, he might be stolen by the Indians (their
stealing children not being a very uncommon occurrence in those days,
and during the summer season there used to be hundreds encamped on the
beach); or, he might be drowned; or, he might wander away and be lost in
the woods; and he would steal away and follow the men to the field when
not closely watched. One day George was missing, and great was the
commotion. Search was made everywhere, and George's name sounded through
the forest in every direction. At last his hat was found in the creek.
My mother sat perfectly quiet on the bank, with feelings not easily
described, while my father probed the deep holes, and thrust his spear
under the driftwood, expecting every time he drew it out to see George's
red frock rise to the surface, when she heard with delight a little
voice say 'Mamma,' from the opposite side of the creek. And there was
George, with his little bare head peeping through the bushes, with his
pet cat by his side. The reaction was too much for my mother; she fell
fainting to the ground. George had lost his hat walking over a log which
the men used as a bridge.
"The settlement was now considered in a most prosperous state; in a
half-circle of twenty miles, probably there was a population of a
hundred. People had ceased to count the families on their fingers, but
no census was taken. The mills were fast advancing towards completion.
Some few of the settlers grew wheat sufficient for their own
consumption, and a little to sell; but the squirrels, racoons, and
pigeons were very destructive to the grain of the early settlers. A dog
that was trained for hunting the racoons, or a 'coon dog,' as they were
called, was of great value, and the young lads, for many years after,
used to make coon parties on fine moonlight nights, and go from farm to
farm, killing those animals; and, although the necessity has long passed
away, these parties still continue; and, though a virtue and kindness in
the commencement, have ended in vice, and the coon parties now meet
together to rob orchards and gardens of their best fruit and melons. One
bitter cold night in February, 1798, the household was alarmed by the
announcement of my mother's illness. No assistance was to be had nearer
than three miles; no horses and no roads--only a track through the
woods. Mr. Powel, who had just secured a lot near us, volunteered to go
in search of Granny McCall, with the ox-team. After some weary hours'
watching, the 'gee haw!' was heard on the return in the woods, and Mrs.
McCall soon stood beside my mother, and very soon after the birth of a
daughter was announced. That daughter is now making this record of the
past. The settlement was now increasing so fast that the general voice
was for a town, and my father was petitioned to lay one out at the mouth
of Ryerse Creek, and was at last prevailed upon to do so, and called it
Clarence. The first applicant for a lot was a Mr. Corklin, a very good
blacksmith, a mechanic that was very much wanted in the settlement. He
was a very intelligent young man for his class, and a great favourite
with everyone, although he had one fault, that of indulging in strong
drinks occasionally. He bargained for a lot, and put up a frame for a
house. My father bought him a set of blacksmith's tools to commence
with, and built him a shop. The next thing was a wife. My mother soon
saw that a tender feeling was growing up between the young blacksmith
and her nurse, a pretty girl, to whom she was much attached. My mother's
advice was against the marriage, on account of his one bad habit; but of
course she was not listened to, and they were married.
"A few months after the marriage, Mr. Corklin went in a log canoe to the
head of the bay, on business, and was to return the next day; but day
after day passed, and no Mr. Corklin appeared. At last the poor wife's
anxiety became so great that a messenger was sent in search of him. He
had been at Dr. Proyer's, but left the day he was expected home. The
alarm was given, and search commenced along the lake shore. They found
his canoe drifted on shore, laden with game, vegetables and a few
apples, his hat, and an empty bottle that smelt of rum; but he was gone.
They supposed that he had fallen overboard without upsetting the canoe.
His body they could not find for days after, and his wife used to wander
along the lake shore, from early dawn until dark, with the hope that she
might find his body. One day she saw a number of birds on a drift log
that was half out of the water. By the side of this log lay the remains
of her husband. The eagles had picked his eyes out, but had only
commenced their feast. This was the first death in the settlement. My
father took back the lot, paid for the frame house, kept his smith's
tools, and so ended his town.
"Upon more mature reflection, he decided that the neighbourhood of a
small town would be the reverse of agreeable, as the first inhabitants
would be those that were too idle to improve a farm for themselves, and
bad habits are generally the attendants of idleness, and that he, in
place of being the owner of all, would only be proprietor in common with
all the idle and dissipated of a new country.
"On my father's arrival in the country he had been sworn in a justice of
the peace for the London and Western districts--a very extensive
jurisdiction over wild lands with few inhabitants; for those districts
embraced all the lands between Lake Erie and Lake Huron, the Grand
River, and Rivers Detroit and St. Clair. Courts were held at Sandwich, a
distance of nearly two hundred miles, without roads, so that magistrates
had to settle all disputes as they best could, perform all marriages,
bury the dead, and prescribe for the sick. In addition to the medicine
chest, my father purchased a pair of tooth-drawers, and learned to draw
teeth, to the great relief of the suffering. So popular did he become in
that way, that in after years they used to entreat him to draw their
teeth in preference to a medical man--the one did it gratuitously, the
other, of course, charged. My father put up two or three small
log-houses which were tenanted by very poor people whose labour he
required. From one of these houses my mother hired a nurse, Poll
Spragge, who was a merry, laughing, 'who-cares' sort of girl. Upon my
mother remarking the scantiness of her wardrobe, which was limited to
one garment, a woollen slip that reached from the throat to the feet,
Poll related a misfortune which had befallen her a short time before.
She then, as now, had but the one article of dress, and it was made of
buckskin, a leather something like chamois; and when it became greasy
and dirty, her mother said she must wash it that afternoon, as she was
going visiting, and that Poll must have her slip dry to put on before
her father and brother returned from the field. During the interval, she
must, of necessity, represent Eve before her fall. Poll had seen her
mother, in the absence of soap, make a pot of strong ley from wood
ashes, and boil her father's and brother's coarse linen shirts in it.
She subjected her leather slip to the same process. We all know the
effect of great heat upon leather. When Poll took her slip from the pot
it was a shrivelled-up mass, partly decomposed by the strong ley. Poor
Poll was in despair. She watched for the return of her family with no
enviable feelings, and when she heard them coming she lifted a board and
concealed herself in the potato hole, under the floor. Her mother soon
discovered what had befallen Poll, and search was made for her. After a
time, a feeble voice was heard from under the floor, and Poll was
induced to come forth, by the promise of her mother's second petticoat,
which was converted into the slip she then wore. She ended her recital
with a merry laugh, and said now she had got service she would soon get
herself clothes. But clothing was one of the things most difficult to
obtain then. There were very few sheep in the settlement, and if a
settler owned two or three, they had to be protected with the greatest
care, watched by the children during the day that they might not stray
into the woods, and at night penned near the house in a fold, built very
high, to secure them from the bears and wolves, which could not always
be done.
"There were instances of wolves climbing into pens that they could not
get out of. On these occasions they did not hurt the sheep, but were
found lying down in a corner like a dog. It is said that the first
thought of a wolf on entering a fold is how he is to get out again; and
if he finds that difficult, his heart fails him and he makes little
effort.
"Wolves were the pests of the country for many years, and, even after
they were partially expelled by the settlers, they used to make
occasional descents upon the settlements, and many a farmer that counted
his sheep by twenties at night, would be thankful if he could muster
half a score in the morning. It was flax, the pedlar's pack, and
buckskins that the early settlers had to depend upon for clothing when
their first supply was run out. Deerskins were carefully preserved and
dressed, and the men had trowsers and coats made of them. Though not
very becoming, they were said to be very comfortable and strong, and
suitable to the work they had to do. Chopping, logging, and clearing
wild lands required strong clothing.
"One part of the early clearing was always appropriated to flax, and
after the seed was in the ground the culture was given up to the women.
They had to weed, pull and thrash out the seeds, and then spread it out
to rot. When it was in a proper state for the brake, it was handed over
to the men, who crackled and dressed it. It was again returned to the
women, who spun and wove it, making a strong linen for shirts and plaid
for their own dresses. Almost every thrifty farmhouse had a loom, and
both wife and daughters learnt to weave. The pedlar's pack supplied
their little finery, the pack generally containing a few pieces of very
indifferently printed calicoes at eight and ten shillings, New York
currency, a yard; a piece of book-muslin at sixteen and eighteen
shillings a yard, and a piece of check for aprons at a corresponding
price; some very common shawls and handkerchiefs, white cotton stockings
to match, with two or three pieces of ribbon, tape, needles, pins and
horn combs; these, with very little variety, used to be the contents of
the pedlar's pack. Opening the pack caused much more excitement in a
family then than the opening of a fashionable shopkeeper's show-room
does at the present day.
"About this time, 1799, a great number of old soldiers, who had served
under and with my father, found their way to the Long Point Settlement.
One of these soldiers had been taken prisoner with my father at
Charleston, and when they were plundered of everything he managed to
conceal a doubloon in his hair. With this he supplied my father's wants,
who was wounded and suffering. My father now exchanged with him one of
his choice lots, that he might be in the settlement and near a mill; and
took his location, which was far back in the woods. My uncle [Joseph
Ryerson], and several other half-pay officers, came from New Brunswick
to visit my father. The pleasure of seeing those loved and familiar
faces, and again meeting those who had fought the same battles, shared
the same dangers, and endured the same hardships, fatigues, and
privations for seven long years, and had the same hopes and fears, and
the bitter mortification of losing their cause, was indeed great. How
many slumbering feelings such a reunion awakened! how many long tales of
the past they used to tell, of both love and war! Those officers that
came from New Brunswick to visit the country all returned, after a few
years, as settlers. The climate of Canada was much preferable, and as an
agricultural country was very superior. The population was now becoming
so great that the Government thought it necessary to have all the male
population, between the ages of sixteen and sixty, enrolled in the
Militia. My father was requested to organize a regiment, and to
recommend those whom he thought, from their intelligence, good conduct,
and former service, most entitled to commissions. He was appointed
Lieutenant-Colonel of Militia and Lieutenant of the County, a situation
that was afterwards done away with. This duty of selecting officers gave
rise to the first ill-natured feelings that had been exhibited towards
him in the settlement. Every man thought he ought to be a captain at the
least, and was indignant that my father did not appreciate his merits.
Some threatened to stone him; others, to shoot him. The more moderate
declared they would not come to his mill, although there was no other
within seventy miles. John McCall did not care for my father; he would
be a captain without his assistance. He built a large open boat and
navigated her for several years, and gloried in the designation of
Captain McCall. But, notwithstanding all opposition, the regiment of
militia was formed. They used to meet one day in the year for company
exercise, and there was a general muster on the 4th of June, the King's
birthday, for a general training. These early trainings presented a
strange mixture. There were a few old officers, with their fine military
bearing, with their guns and remains of old uniforms; and the old
soldier, from his upright walk and the way he handled his gun, could
easily be distinguished, though clothed in home-spun and buckskin, with
the coarse straw hat. The early settlers all had guns of some
description, except the very juvenile members, who used to carry canes
to represent guns. Those trainings used to be looked forward to with
intense interest by all the boys of the neighbourhood, and afforded
subjects of conversation for the ensuing year. It was no easy thing in
that day to find a level piece of ground that was tolerably clear from
stumps sufficiently large to serve for their general trainings.
"Amongst the early settlers there were very few who could afford to hire
assistance of any kind. Those that could pay found it easy to get men as
labourers; but women servants, unless by mere chance, were not to be
had. The native American women would not and will not, even at the
present day, go out to service, although almost any of the other
neighbours' daughters would be glad to go as helps, doing the same work
and eating at the table with their mistress. My father, for many years,
used occasionally to take the head of the table with his labourers, to
show them he was not too proud to eat with them. My mother was exempt
from this, but the help ate at her table, which was considered a
sufficient proof of her humility. Many of those helps of early days have
since become the wives of squires, captains, majors and colonels of
Militia, and are owners of large properties, and they and their
descendants drive in their own carriages.
"In the summer of 1800 my mother had a very nice help as nurse. Jenny
Decow had been apprenticed to a relative, and, at the age of eighteen,
she received her bed, her cow, and two or three suits of clothing (those
articles it was customary to give to a bound girl), and was considered
legally of age, with the right to earn her own living as she best could.
"My mother soon discovered that Jenny had a wooer. On Sunday afternoon,
young Daniel McCall made his appearance, with that peculiar, happy,
awkward look that young lads have when they are 'keeping company,' as it
is called. At that time, when a young man wanted a wife, he looked out
for some young girl whom he thought would be a good help-mate, and,
watching his opportunity, with an awkward bow and blush he would ask her
to give him her company the ensuing Sunday evening. Her refusal was
called 'giving the mitten,' and great was the laugh against any young
man if it was known that he had 'got the mitten,' as all hopes in that
quarter would be at an end. But young McCall had not got 'the mitten;'
and it was customary on those occasions, when the family retired to
bed, for the young man to get up and quietly put out the candles, and
cover the fire, if any; then take a seat by the side of his lady-love,
and talk as other lovers do, I suppose, until twelve o'clock, when he
would either take his leave and a walk of miles to his home, that he
might be early at work, or he would lie down for an hour or two with
some of the boys, and then be away before daylight. Those weekly visits
would sometimes continue for months, until all was ready for marriage.
But they did not always end in matrimony. Sometimes those children of
the woods were gay Lotharios in their way, as well as in more refined
society, and it would be discovered that a favourite Adonis was keeping
company with two or three young girls at the same time, and _vice versa_
with some young coquettes. But such unprincipled conduct would furnish
gossip for a whole neighbourhood, and be discountenanced by all. Nor
must you for a moment imagine that there was anything wrong in this
system of wooing. It was the custom of the country in an early day, and
I think it is still continued in settlements remote from towns. But the
lives of hundreds of estimable wives and mothers have borne testimony to
the purity of their conduct. When Jenny had been with my mother about
six months, young McCall made his appearance in the middle of the week,
and my father and some visitors commenced bantering him why he did not
marry at once. Why did he spend his time and wear out his shoes in the
way he was doing? He said he would go and talk to Jenny, and hear what
she said. He returned in a few minutes and said they would be married.
In an hour afterwards they were man and wife. They married in their
working dresses--he in his buckskin trowsers, and she in her home-spun.
She tied up her bundle of clothes, received her wages, and away they
walked to their log-house in the woods. Thirty years afterwards they
used to show me some little articles that had been purchased with
Jenny's wages; and they appeared to look back upon that time with
pleasure. They became rich; he was colonel of militia, and some of their
descendants are worth thousands. During their early struggles, Mrs.
McCall was in the field with her husband, pulling flax, when she felt
what she thought was a severe blow on her foot. A rattlesnake had bitten
her. Her husband killed the snake; vulgar prejudice thought that, by
killing the snake, the poison would be less severe. He then put his lips
to the wound, sucked it, and, taking her in his arms, carried her to the
house. Before he reached it, her foot had swollen and burst. They
applied an Indian remedy, a peculiar kind of plantain, which relieved
her, but she was years before she perfectly recovered from the effects
of the poison. Two children that were born during that time turned
spotted, became sore and died; but her third child was strong and
healthy, and is still living. These reptiles, that are now almost
unknown in the country, were then plentiful. They had a den at the mouth
of the Grand River, and there was another at the Falls. For many years
the boatmen going up and down Lake Erie used to stop at the mouth of the
Grand River for an hour or two's sport, killing rattlesnakes. My father
and boat's crew, on one of these occasions, killed seventy. The oil of
the rattlesnake was thought to possess great medicinal virtues.
"There was a sad want of religious instruction amongst the early
settlers. For many years there was no clergyman nearer than Niagara, a
distance of 100 miles, without roads. My father used to read the Church
Service every Sunday to his household, and any of the laborers who would
attend. As the country became more settled, the neighbours used to meet
at Mr. Barton's, and Mr. Bostwick, who was the son of a clergyman, used
to read the service, and sometimes a sermon. But there were so few
copies of sermons to be obtained, that after reading them over some
half-a-dozen times they appeared to lose their interest. But it was for
the children that were growing up that this want was most severely felt.
When the weekday afforded no amusements, they would seek them on Sunday;
fishing, shooting, bathing, gathering nuts and berries, and playing
ball, occupied, with few exceptions, the summer Sundays. In winter they
spent them in skating, gliding down the hills on hand sleighs. And yet
crime was unknown in those days, as were locks and bolts. Theft was
never heard of, and a kindly, brotherly feeling existed amongst all. If
a deer was killed, a piece was sent to each neighbour, and they, in
turn, used to draw the seine, giving my father a share of the fish. If
anyone was ill, they were cared for by the neighbours and their wants
attended to. But the emigrant coming to the country in the present day
can only form a very poor idea of the hardships endured by the early
pioneers of the forest, or the feelings which their isolated situation
drew forth. Education and station seemed to be lost sight of in the one
general wish to be useful to each other, to make roads and improve the
country.
"I think it was in 1802 that I first saw Colonel Talbot, a distinguished
settler, who had a grant of lands seventy miles further up the lake, at
a place afterwards called Port Talbot, where he had commenced building
mills. People were full of conjecture as to the cause that could induce
a young gentleman of his family (the Talbots of Malahide) and rank in
the army to bury himself in Canada.
"He and Sir Arthur Wellesley had been at the same time on the staff of
the Duke of Buckingham, when Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and it was said
the field of glory was equally open to both. Colonel Talbot afterwards
came to this country, and was on the staff of General Simcoe when he
made a tour through the Upper Province. At that time he selected his
future home. Some said that he left the army in disgust at not getting
an appointment that he felt himself entitled to; others, again, said
that neither Mars nor Venus presided at his birth. But one thing was
certain: he had chosen a life of privation and toil, and right manfully
he bore the lot he had chosen. When in the army, he was looked upon as a
dandy; but my first impressions would place him in a very different
light. He had come to Port Ryerse with a boat-load of grain to be ground
at my father's mill. The men slept in the boat, with an awning over it,
and had a fire on shore. In front of this fire, Colonel Talbot was
mixing bread in a pail, to be baked in the ashes for the men. I had
never seen a man so employed, and it made a lasting impression upon my
childish memory. My next recollection of him was his picking a wild
goose, which my father had shot, for my mother to dress for dinner. Thus
commenced an acquaintance which lasted until his death in 1853.
"My father, on his arrival at Long Point, promised my mother that if she
would remain contented for six years at Port Ryerse, and give the
country a fair trial, if she then disliked it, and wished to return to
New York, he would go back with her--that party feeling would by that
time have greatly subsided. My mother now claimed my father's promise.
He at once acquiesced, and left it to her to decide when they should go,
my father well knowing that however much my mother might wish to return,
when left to her to decide, her better judgment would say 'Not yet,' as
his improvements must all be a sacrifice. To sell his property was
impossible. My mother postponed the return for a few years, but could
not relinquish the hope of emerging from the woods, and being once more
within the sound of the church-going bell. My father's property was fast
improving. He had planted an orchard of apple, peach, and cherry trees,
which he procured from Dr. Proyer, whose young trees were a year or two
in advance of his own, and he had procured a few sheep which were
pastured in a field immediately in front of the house. But all their
watching could not preserve them from the wolves. If they escaped by the
greatest care for a year or two, and the flock increased to twenty or
thirty, some unlucky day they would find them reduced to ten or a dozen.
"A tree sometimes unobserved would fall across the fence, and the sheep
would stray into the woods, which was fatal to them; or, the fastening
to their pen would be left just one unlucky night not secured, and the
morning would show a melancholy remainder of the fine flock that had
been folded the night before. All of these mishaps were serious
vexations to the early settlers. The mill was a constant draw upon my
father's purse. A part of his lands had been sold at a very low price
(but not low at that time)--one dollar the acre--to assist in building
it, and now it had to be kept in repair. The dam breaking, machinery
getting out of order, improvements to be made, bolting cloths wanted,
and a miller to be paid--to meet all this was the toll, every twelfth
bushel that was ground. During the summer season the mill would be for
days without a bushel to grind, as farmers got their milling done when
they could take their grists to the mill on ox-sleds upon the snow. Few
grew more than sufficient for their own consumption and that of the
new-coming settler; but had they grown more, there was no market, and
the price of wheat, until the war of 1812, was never more than half a
dollar a bushel; maize, buckwheat, and rye, two shillings (York) a
bushel. The flour mill, pecuniarily speaking, was a great loss to my
father. The saw-mill was remunerative; the expense attending it was
trifling, its machinery was simple, and any commonly intelligent man
with a day or two's instruction could attend to it. People brought logs
of pine, oak, and walnut from their own farms, and my father had half
the lumber for sawing; and this, when seasoned, found a ready sale, not
for cash (cash dealings were almost unknown), but for labour, produce,
maple sugar or anything they had to part with which my father might
want, or with which he could pay some of his needy labourers. There were
some wants which were almost unattainable with poor people, such as
nails, glass, tea, and salt. They could only be procured in Niagara, and
cash must be paid for them. There was not yet a store at Long Point.
Great were the advantages of the half-pay officers and those who had a
little money at their command, and yet their descendants appear not to
have profited by it. It is a common remark in the country that very many
of the sons of half-pay officers were both idle and dissolute; but I am
happy to say there are many honourable exceptions. At the head of the
list of these stand our present Chief Justice (Sir John Robinson), and
Dr. Ryerson, the Superintendent of Education, and many others who deem
it an honour to be descended from an United Empire Loyalist. From a
multiplicity of care, my father had postponed, from time to time, going
to Toronto, or Little York, as it was then called (where the seat of
government had been removed), to secure the grant of land which had been
promised to his family, until after the departure of his friend General
Simcoe, who was succeeded as Governor by General Hunter.
"When my father made application to General Hunter, he was told that an
order from the Home Government had limited the grants to the wives and
children of the U.E. Loyalists to 200 acres each; but said that if the
Order in Council had passed for the larger grants, of course my father
should have the lands he had selected; but he, not foreseeing the
change, had not secured the order, and General Simcoe's verbal promise
could not be acted upon.
"The autumn of 1804 found us still in the original log-house. It had
been added to and improved, but the stick chimney had not been replaced
by brick, as my father looked forward from year to year to building a
better house in a better situation; but he found so many improvements
actually necessary, and so much to be done each spring and summer, that
although a great deal of material had been prepared, the house was not
yet commenced. One fine bright morning, as some visitors were taking
their departure, there was an alarm of fire, and, sure enough, the stick
chimney had caught and communicated to the garret, and in a few minutes
the whole of the upper part of the house was in flames. Our visitors,
who had not gone beyond the threshold, joined with the family and
labourers in getting out the furniture as fast as possible. Nearly
everything was saved from the lower part of the house, but all that was
in the garret was lost. The garret had been used as a store-room, and
contained cases which had not been unpacked since they came from New
York, but were left until a better house could be built. These
things--linen, bedding, and some nice little articles of furniture, and
various little nicknacks which were prized beyond their value--were a
great loss: but the greatest loss was a box or two of books. These were
not to be replaced this side of New York, and to a young family the loss
was irreparable. A part of Pope's works, a copy of Milton's Paradise
Lost, Buchan's Family Medicine, and a Testament with commentaries, were
all that were saved. A small quantity of plate also, which had not been
unpacked, was found in a very unsatisfactory state. The family took
shelter in a house built for and occupied by the miller and his family,
sending them to a smaller tenement. The situation was airy and
beautiful, and, with a few alterations and improvements, was more
comfortable than the first log-house. This my mother rather regretted,
as discomfort would have hastened the new house. Although allusions were
made to New York, no time had yet been named for their return. My father
used to assure my mother and friends that he would go as soon as she
said the word; yet these remarks were always accompanied by a
particularly humorous expression of countenance.
"About this time the London district was separated from the Western, and
composed what now forms the counties or districts of Middlesex, Elgin,
Huron, Bruce, Oxford, and Norfolk. The necessary appointments were made,
and the London district held its own courts and sessions at Turkey
Point, six miles above us on the lake shore. The people, in a most
patriotic manner, had put up a log-house, which served the double
purpose of court-house and jail. The courts were held in the upper
story, which was entered by a very rough stairway, going up on the
outside of the building. The jail consisted of one large room on the
ground floor, from which any prisoner could release himself in half an
hour unless guarded by a sentinel. The juries for some years held their
consultations under the shade of a tree. Doubtless it was pleasanter
than the close lock-up jury-room of the present day. My father, in
addition to his other commissions, was appointed Judge of the District
Court and Judge of the Surrogate Court. Turkey Point is a very pretty
place; the grounds are high, and from them there is a very fine view of
the bay and lake. General Simcoe had selected it for the county town,
and the site of a future city. Now it boasted of one house, an inn kept
by Silas Montross. There was also a reservation of land for military
purposes. But the town never prospered; it was not in a thoroughfare,
and did not possess water privileges. Twenty years afterwards it
contained but the one solitary house. The county town was changed to a
more favourable situation, Vittoria. My father's young family now gave
him great anxiety. How they were to be educated was a question not
easily solved. Schools there were none, nor was it possible to get a
tutor. A man of education would not go so far into the woods for the
small inducement which a private family could offer.
"Magistrates were not allowed to marry by license, nor could the parties
be called in church, for there were no churches in the country. The law
required that the parties should be advertised--that is, that the banns
should be written out and placed in some conspicuous place for three
Sundays. The mill door was the popular place, but the young lads would
endeavour to avoid publicity by putting the banns on the inside of the
door; others would take two or three witnesses and hold it on the door
for a few minutes for three successive Sundays, allowing no one but
their friends to see it. In many places marriages used to be solemnized
by persons not authorized, and in a manner that made their legality very
doubtful; but the Legislature have very wisely passed Acts legalizing
all marriages up to a certain date. The marriages that took place at my
father's used to afford a good deal of amusement. Some very odd couples
came to be united. The only fee my father asked was a kiss from the
bride, which he always insisted on being paid; and if the bride was at
all pretty, he used, with a mischievous look at my mother, to enlarge
upon the pleasure that this fee gave him, and would go into raptures
about the bride's youth, beauty, and freshness, and declare that it was
the only public duty he performed that he was properly remunerated for.
"Application had several times been made to the Rev. Mr. Addison, the
only clergyman in the country, who was living at Niagara, entreating him
to come to Long Point and baptize the children. All who had been born
there remained unbaptized. This summer his promised visit was to take
place, and was looked forward to with intense anxiety by both parents
and children. I used to discuss it with my elder brother, and wonder
what this wonderful ceremony of christening could mean. My mother had
explained it as well as she could, but the mystical washing away of sin
with water, to me was incomprehensible, as was also my being made member
of a Church which was to me unknown. I wondered what God's minister
could be like, and whether he was like my father, whom I looked up to as
the greatest and best of anyone in my little world. At last Parson
Addison arrived, and my curiosity was satisfied on one point, and in my
estimation my father stood higher than the clergyman.
"The neighbourhood was notified, and all the children, from one month to
eight or nine years old, were assembled to receive baptism. The house
was crowded with people anxious to hear the first sermon preached in the
Long Point Settlement by an ordained minister. Upon my own mind I must
confess that the surplice and gown made a much more lasting impression
than the sermon, and I thought Mr. Addison a vastly more important
person in them than out of them; but upon the elder part of the
community, how many sad and painful feelings did this first sermon
awaken, and recall times long past, friends departed, ties broken, homes
deserted, hardships endured! The cord touched produced many vibrations,
as Mr. Addison shook hands with every individual, and made some kind
inquiry about their present or future welfare. The same God-hopeful
smile passed over every face, and the same 'Thank you, sir, we find
ourselves every year a little better off, and the country is improving.'
'If we only had a church and a clergyman we should have but little to
complain of.' But it was a hope deferred for many long years. A Baptist
minister, the Rev. Mr. Finch, was the first clergyman who came to the
little settlement to reside. His meetings were held in different parts
of the settlement each Sunday, so that all might have the opportunity of
hearing him if they chose to attend. He preached in houses and barns
without any reward, labouring on his farm for his support. He, like all
the early Dissenting ministers who came to the province, was uneducated,
but possessed and sincerely believed a saving knowledge of the Gospel,
and in his humble sphere laboured to do all the good in his power. Many
of the young people joined his Church. He was soon followed by the
Methodists. Too much cannot be said in praise of the early ministers of
these denominations; they bore every privation and fatigue, praying and
preaching in every house where the doors were not closed against
them--receiving the smallest pittance for their labour. A married man
received $200 a year and a log-house for his family; an unmarried man
had half that sum, the greater portion of which was paid in home-made
cloth and produce. Their sermons and prayers were very loud, forcible
and energetic, and if they had been printed _verbatim_, would have
looked a sad jumble of words. They encouraged an open demonstration of
feeling amongst their hearers--the louder the more satisfactory. But
notwithstanding the criticisms cast upon these early preachers, were
they not the class of men who suited their hearers? They shared their
poverty and entered into all their feelings; and although unlearned,
they taught the one true doctrine--to serve God in spirit and in
truth--and their lives bore testimony to their sincerity. In this world
they looked forward to neither preferment nor reward; all they expected
or could hope for was a miserable subsistence. Nor was it surprising
that in twenty years afterwards, when the path was made smooth, the
church built, and the first clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Evans, came, that he
found a small congregation. Every township had one or two Methodist and
Baptist chapels. I do not recollect one Roman Catholic family in the
neighbourhood. Although the Long Point Settlement was in existence
thirty years before we had a resident clergyman of the Church of
England, yet I cannot recollect one member who had seceded from the
Church. Many had died, and many communed with the Methodists, who did
not belong to them."
POSTSCRIPT.--At the author's request, Mrs. Harris, in June, 1879,
brought down her recollections to the close of the war of 1812-1815. The
following pages are the result--written by Mrs. Harris, twenty years
after writing the previous memoranda, in the eighty-first year of her
age, containing some interesting particulars of the war, and stating the
cause of the loss of the British fleet on Lake Erie, and the disasters
which followed.
The author has not seen cause to alter a sentence or a word of Mrs.
Harris's manuscript, written by herself in a clear, bold hand,
notwithstanding her advanced age:
"In 1810 my father showed signs of failing health. A life of hardship
and great exertion was telling upon a naturally strong constitution. He
decided upon resigning all his offices, and his resignation was accepted
upon this assurance, that from ill-health he could no longer fulfil the
duties they involved. The Hon. Thomas Talbot was appointed his successor
as colonel commandant of the militia, and the late Judge Mitchell
succeeded him as Judge of the District and Surrogate Courts. At this
time there were strong rumours of war between America and England, and
the militia anticipated being called into active service. At the close
of 1811, a large body of the militia which my father had organized
waited upon him, and urged him to resume the command, as in him they had
confidence. Colonel Talbot was a stranger amongst them, and lived at a
distance. My father at that time was in the last stage of consumption,
and died in the June following, in 1812, aged sixty years. In six days
after his death war was declared, and then came troubles to my widowed
mother in various shapes. My father in seventeen years had seen a lonely
wilderness changed into a fruitful country. Most of the original
log-houses had given place to good frame buildings, and the inhabitants
generally seemed prosperous and content. Immediately after the
declaration of war, the militia had to do military duty and neglect
their farms. British troops passed through Port Ryerse, on their way to
Amherstburg and Sandwich, and every available building was used as
barracks. All merchant vessels were converted into ships of war, and
they, with one or two small ships belonging to the Provincial Navy, were
placed under the command of Captain Barclay, of the Royal Navy; Captain
Finnes, R.N., was second in command. His ships were all of light
tonnage; there were several transports, which were in constant use
conveying troops and army supplies to Sandwich and Amherstburg. The lake
was clear of enemies, as the Americans were blockaded within Erie
Harbour, where they had two or three large ships on the stocks. They
could not cross the bar at Erie without lightening their ships and
taking out part of their guns. This they could not do in the presence of
Barclay's fleet. When the weather was too rough for the blockading
squadron to remain outside the harbour, it was too rough for the
American fleet to get over the bar; consequently we felt very safe. This
was during the summer of 1813. During this summer General Brock called
out the militia of Norfolk, and asked for volunteers to go with him to
Detroit; every man volunteered. He made his selection of the strong and
active young men. Right gallantly the militia throughout the province
behaved during the three years' war, casting no discredit upon their
parentage--the brave old U.E. Loyalists. During the summer, Captain
Barclay used to have private information--not very reliable, as the
result proved--of what progress the ships were making on the stocks. He
used occasionally to leave the blockade and go to Amherstburg and come
to Ryerse. The Americans took note of this, and made their plans and
preparations for his doing so. There was a pretty widow of an officer of
some rank in Amherstburg, who was very anxious to go to Toronto. Captain
Barclay offered her a passage in his ship and brought her to Ryerse, and
then escorted her to Dr. Rolph's, where he and some of his officers
remained to dinner the following day. When they came in sight of Erie,
they saw all the American fleet riding safely at anchor outside the bar.
The Americans had everything in readiness; and as soon as the
watched-for opportunity came, and the British fleet left the station,
they got their own ships over the bar, their guns in, and all things
ready for defence or attack. They far outnumbered the British fleet, and
were of heavier tonnage. Captain Barclay consulted his senior officers
whether it would be best to come into Long Point Bay to winter, where
they could get supplies across the country from Burlington Bay of all
the munitions of war, and leave the ship on the stocks at Amherstburg
(the _Detroit_) to her fate, as neither the guns to arm nor the men to
man her had yet been forwarded, and now could not unless by land, which
for heavy guns and the munitions of war was the next thing to an
impossibility. It was with great difficulty that food and clothing could
be forwarded, where there was little more than an Indian path and no
bridges. The wisdom of the fleet decided upon going to Amherstburg and
trusting to arming the ships with the guns from the fort, and manning
them with sailors from the fleet, and with soldiers and volunteers. They
landed Captain O'Keefe, of the 41st Regiment, who was doing marine duty
at or near Otter Creek, to find his way to Ryerse, and to tell the
militia commandant that the whole frontier on Lake Erie was now open to
American invasion, the new ship was launched, imperfectly armed and
manned; and without a sufficient supply of ammunition for the fleet, and
with little more than a day's rations for his men, Commodore Barclay was
necessitated to risk an action. The result is too well known. Nearly all
the officers were killed or severely wounded. Captain Barclay, who had
already lost one arm, was disabled in the other arm; but they did not
strike their colours to Commodore Perry's superior force until their
ammunition in some ships was all exhausted, and in others nearly so. No
one could have fought more bravely than Captain Barclay. At the same
time, those who knew of his leaving the blockade could not help feeling
that all the disasters of the upper part of the province lay at his
door. In May of 1814 we had several days of heavy fog. On the morning of
the 13th, as the fog lifted, we saw seven or eight ships under the
American flag anchored off Ryerse, with a number of small boats floating
by the side of each ship. As the fog cleared away they hoisted sail and
dropped down three miles below us, opposite Port Dover. Of course an
invasion was anticipated. Colonel Talbot was then in Norfolk, and he
ordered all the militia to assemble the next day at Brantford, a
distance of thirty miles, which they did with great reluctance, as many
of both officers and men thought that an effort should have been made to
prevent the Americans landing; but no resistance was offered. On the
14th, the Americans burnt the village and mills of Dover; on the 15th,
as my mother and myself were sitting at breakfast, the dogs kept up a
very unusual barking. I went to the door to discover the cause; when I
looked up, I saw the hill-side and fields, as far as the eye could
reach, covered with American soldiers. They had marched from Port Dover
to Ryerse. Two men stepped from the ranks, selected some large chips,
and came into the room where we were standing, and took coals from the
hearth without speaking a word. My mother knew instinctively what they
were going to do. She went out and asked to see the commanding officer.
A gentleman rode up to her and said he was the person she asked for. She
entreated him to spare her property, and said she was a widow with a
young family. He answered her civilly and respectfully, and expressed
his regret that his orders were to burn, but that he would spare the
house, which he did; and he said, as a sort of justification of his
burning, that the buildings were used as a barrack, and the mill
furnished flour for British troops. Very soon we saw columns of dark
smoke arise from every building, and of what at early morn had been a
prosperous homestead, at noon there remained only smouldering ruins. The
following day Colonel Talbot and the militia under his command marched
to Port Norfolk (commonly known as Turkey Point), six miles above
Ryerse. The Americans were then on their way to their own shores. My
father had been dead less than two years. Little remained of all his
labours excepting the orchard and cultivated fields. It would not be
easy to describe my mother's feelings as she looked at the desolation
around her, and thought upon the past and the present; but there was no
longer a wish to return to New York. My father's grave was there, and
she looked to it as her resting-place. Not many years since a small
church was built on a plot of ground which my father had reserved for
that purpose; in the graveyard attached are buried two of the early
settlers--my father and my mother. A.H."
* * * * *
The writer of the following paper seems to have been perfectly
acquainted with the subject on which he writes, but is entirely unknown
to the author of this history. The paper appears to have been written
shortly after the decease of Colonel Ryerson, and was enclosed to the
author on a printed slip. It throws much light on the history and
character of the times of which it speaks:
"_Last of the Old U.E. Loyalists._
"Died, at his residence, near Vittoria, county of Norfolk, on Wednesday,
the 9th of August, 1854, after a short illness of three days, Colonel
Joseph Ryerson (father of the Rev. Messrs. George, William, John,
Egerton, and Edwy Ryerson), in the ninety-fourth year of his age.
"Colonel Ryerson was born near Paterson, New Jersey, about fourteen
miles from the city of New York, the 28th of February, 1761. His
ancestors were from Holland; he was the seventh son; he lost his father
in childhood. At the breaking out of the American revolution, two of the
brothers entered the British army. Samuel (father of Mrs. Harris, Eldon
House, London) was nine years older than Joseph, and was the first in
that part of the country to join the Royal standard. On arriving at New
York, he was informed by the British commander that if he would raise
sixty men he would receive a captain's commission. He returned to his
native place, and raised the complement of men in a few days. Joseph,
who was then only fifteen years of age, entered the army the 6th of May,
1776, as a cadet. He was too small and weak to handle a musket, and
received a light fowling-piece, with which he learned the military
exercise in a few days. In the course of a few months an order was
received to embody a portion of these New Jersey volunteers into a corps
of Light Infantry, to go to the South to besiege Charleston. Joseph
Ryerson was one of the 550 volunteers for this campaign. When Colonel
Ennis (the Inspector-General of the troops at New York) came to Joseph
Ryerson, he said, 'You are too young and too small to go.' The lad
replied, 'Oh! sir, I am growing older and stouter every day.' The
colonel laughed heartily, and said, 'Well, you shall go then.' These
Light Infantry volunteers were attached at different times to different
regiments; and Mr. Ryerson was successively attached to the 37th, 71st,
and 84th Regiments. Such was the hard service performed by these Light
Infantry volunteers, that out of 550 men, rank and file, exclusive of
officers, only eighty-six of them returned, three years afterwards,
after the evacuation of Charleston.
"The Light Infantry corps having been broken up, the few remains of the
men composing it returned to the regiments out of which they had
volunteered. About eighteen months after leaving New York, before he was
seventeen years of age, Mr. Ryerson received an ensign's commission, and
he was, in the course of a year, promoted to a lieutenancy in the Prince
of Wales' Regiment. His first commission was given him as the immediate
reward of the courage and skill he displayed as the bearer of special
despatches from Charleston, 196 miles into the interior, in the course
of which he experienced several hairbreadth escapes. He was promoted to
his lieutenancy for the manner in which he acquitted himself as the
bearer of special despatches by sea to the north, having eluded the
enemy in successive attacks and pursuits. He was in six battles, besides
several skirmishes, and was once wounded. At the close of the war in
1783, he, with his brother Samuel, and many other Loyalists and
discharged half-pay officers and soldiers, went to New Brunswick, where
he married in 1784, and settled and resided in Majorville, on the River
St. John, near Fredericton, in 1799, when he removed to Upper Canada and
settled in Charlotteville, near his brother--they both having drawn land
from the Government for their services.
"While in New Brunswick he was appointed captain of militia; on his
arrival in Canada he was appointed major, and a few years afterwards
colonel. On the organization of London district in 1800 (including the
recent districts of Talbot, London, Brock, and Huron), he was appointed
high sheriff--an office which he resigned, after a few years, in favour
of his son-in-law, the late Colonel Bostwick, of Port Stanley.
"During the late war with the United States, in 1812, Colonel Ryerson
and his three eldest sons took an active part in the defence of the
country. He was for many years a magistrate and Chairman of the Quarter
Sessions; but he would never accept of any fees as a magistrate.
"Some ten years since he resigned whatever offices he held. In 1850 he
lost his wife, aged eighty-four years--a woman of sound understanding
and rare excellence. He continued healthy and vigorous to the
last--having the Friday before his decease rode several miles, and
walked from Vittoria to his own house--a distance of nearly two
miles--after which he conversed with much animation and cheerfulness.
"Shortly after his attack on Sunday night, he expressed his belief that
he should not recover, and stated his entire trust in God, through the
merits of Jesus Christ, in whom he felt that he had good hope of eternal
life.
"His funeral was attended by a large concourse of people--especially of
the old inhabitants. Six of his old neighbours acted as
pall-bearers--namely, Colonel Potts, F. Walsh, Aquilla Walsh, Abner
Owen, Joseph Culver, and S. Ellis, Esquires--whose joint ages amounted
to almost 400 years. The Scripture lesson was read, and prayers offered
up at the house by the Rev. Mr. Clement, Wesleyan minister; and the
service was read at the grave by the Rev. George Salmon (an old friend
of the family), in the absence of the Rev. Mr. Evans, rector of
Woodhouse, to the erection of the church of which rectory Colonel
Ryerson had been the largest contributor.
"Colonel Ryerson is probably the last of the old United Empire Loyalists
in Canada who joined the British army in 1776--a race of men remarkable
for longevity and energy, and a noble enthusiasm for British
institutions."[140]
_Interesting piece of Local History by the Rev. Dr. Scadding._
"NIAGARA, Aug. 3rd, 1861.
"DEAR SIR,--
"I have deferred acknowledging the circular announcing your intended
work on the U.E. forefathers of the Canadian people, until now, from not
having had before a moment of leisure to prepare the contribution which
I intended to offer for your acceptance and use. I only hope that my
delay may not have rendered the communication too late.
"Such a work as that which you propose to bring out is a desideratum,
and cannot fail to be interesting, and increasingly so as years roll on.
I am glad that you have been moved to this undertaking, as I feel sure
that it will be executed with vigour and thoroughness, in a patriotic
spirit, and with a real affection. Our neighbours in the United States
have long since seen the propriety of collecting and permanently
recording the otherwise rapidly evanescent memorials of their past. The
volumes put forth by their Historical Societies and State Government and
by individuals amongst them, on this subject, possess extraordinary
interest not only for United States' citizens, but also for the general
reader, and particularly for the inhabitants of the existing British
North American Colonies. I have often wished that we could have for
Canada some such publication as Lossing's Field Book of the Revolution,
to preserve for the eye, by woodcuts worked into the text, sketches and
plans of historic places and buildings as they were in their primitive
state--objects which, in a country like this, from the perishing nature
of materials in many instances, from the levelling of streets,
straightening of roads, railway excavations, esplanades, building and
other processes and causes, are being so rapidly obliterated.
"As you invite information in regard to early settlers generally, I have
thought it simply a duty to send some memoranda--which I hope may be
deemed not unworthy of use--respecting my father, whom I have supposed
you might, perhaps, find an occasion of noticing in connection with a
mention of Whitby, in a note or otherwise.
"I am, dear Sir,
"Very truly yours,
"H. SCADDING."
"The Rev. Dr. Ryerson."
"This town was, at its commencement, about the year 1819, named Windsor,
by its projector, Mr. John Scadding, the original grantee of a thousand
acres in this locality. On a natural harbour of Lake Ontario, popularly
known as 'Big Bay,' Mr. S. laid out the town, built the first house, and
named the streets, three of them, after his three sons--John, Charles,
and Henry. The appellation 'Windsor' had no reference to the
world-renowned royal residence, but to a very humble property so
designated, once possessed by Mr. S. in the parish of Luppitt, in
Devonshire, from which neighbourhood, viz., Dunkeswell, he first
emigrated to Upper Canada in 1793. Before this transplantation, his
family, with numerous kith and kin, had had their home in these old
Wessex regions for many a generation. Local registries, tombstones, and
other records constantly exhibit the name, which will also be found in
the minute Ordnance maps of England, attached to a small hamlet in the
vicinity of Wellington, in the closely adjoining county of Somerset.
Through the instrumentality of Governor Simcoe, to whom he was
personally and in the most friendly manner known in Devonshire before
his emigration, Mr. S. was also the owner and first cultivator of a
section of land watered through its whole length by the River Don, from
the second concession to the lake's edge, in the township of York. It
was while putting off trespassers on a portion of this last-mentioned
property, which is now to a great extent included within the limits of
the city of Toronto, but which was at the time, for the most part, in
its primitive natural state, that he was, at the age of seventy,
unfortunately killed by the falling of a tree in 1824. His widow, Mrs.
Melicent Scadding, survived until 1860, attaining the age of
ninety-three years. In 1854, the town of Windsor was incorporated by the
Act of Parliament 18 Vic., c. 28, on which occasion its name was changed
to 'Whitby,' ambiguities and inconveniences having arisen from the
existence of another Windsor on the Detroit river."
_Loyalty and Sufferings of the Hon. John Munroe, of Fowlis._
"Born in Scotland, in 1731; came to America in 1756; married in Albany
Miss Brower, of Schenectady, in 1760; lived at Matilda, U.C., and died
at Dickenson's Landing in October, 1800, aged sixty-nine.
"During the revolutionary war he resided near Fort Bennington, where he
possessed considerable property, which was confiscated by the United
States' Government. He was captain in Sir John Johnston's regiment, and
his son Hugh was a lieutenant. The appended certificates state his
services, sufferings and merits."
The above summary statement, and the following certificates, were
enclosed to the writer of this history several years since by a son of
Captain Munroe, who held several situations in Upper Canada, such as
judge, sheriff, etc.
_Brigadier-General Allen Maclean's Certificate._
"I do hereby certify that the bearer hereof, Captain Munroe, was the
first man that joined me at New York, on the 3rd of June, 1775, to take
up arms in defence of his King and country, and that he was of infinite
service to me at that time. That during the time I was engaged at Boston
he remained in and about New York, till my return, when he gave me every
information in respect to the danger of my being taken prisoner; in
consequence of which I divested myself of every military appearance, and
secured my papers, etc., on board the _Asia_ man-of-war, and at the risk
of his life he conducted me upwards of 200 miles through the province of
New York to a gentleman's house near Schenectady, whose son conducted me
up the Mohawk river, on my journey to Canada by way of Oswego, the
communication on all other places being shut up. I do also certify that
Captain Munroe did engage a great number of men to serve his Majesty
against the rebels, and that an information was lodged against him on
that account, and was taken up and tried; that though many of the men
were never able to join the King's troops in Canada, yet numbers joined
Sir John Johnston's regiment, and others joined the 84th, under my
command; and that in defiance of all the hardships, difficulties, and
dangers he was exposed to, he has ever adhered to the same loyal
principles, notwithstanding he was eighteen months a close prisoner,
mostly in irons; that he made his escape from prison in Albany; was
unfortunately retaken and confined at Esopsus, on the Hudson river, and
would infallibly have been hanged (his sentence having been pronounced)
had he not made his escape; that I am acquainted with Mrs. Munroe and
her family of eight children, which has hitherto been brought up in a
genteel sphere of life; and that I always understood Captain Munroe to
be a gentleman of considerable property in the province of New York, and
as an officer always behaved with becoming spirit and resolution.
"ALLEN MACLEAN,
"Late Brigadier-General in Canada."
_Captain Duncan Campbell's Certificate, Late of the 84th Regiment._
"I do hereby certify, that I have been well acquainted with Captain John
Munroe, late of the King's Regiment, of New York, for many years, while
he followed the mercantile way of business in America's last war, and
ever since; that he always bore the character of an honest and
respectable gentleman amongst his numerous acquaintances. I also knew
him to be a zealous friend to the interest of his King and country, and
that he and his family have suffered the greatest cruelties by the
rebels, and the loss of all his property. I also know that he laid a
permanent foundation for his family in the province of New York by his
indefatigable industry; that I have been different times at his last
place of abode, where I have seen most part of the improvements he had
made, though at that time in a manner beginning, where he had an
excellent dwelling-house, a saw and grist mills, with other
improvements.
"That I know him to have a very large family, and a thriving and growing
property in the county of Albany, and province of New York.
"DUNCAN CAMPBELL,
"Late Captain of the 84th Regiment.
"No. 8 Fley Market, St. James."
_General Tryon's Certificate._
"I do certify that I know Captain Munroe, during the time that I was
Governor of the Province of New York, to be an active magistrate; that
in the year 1776, at the period I was on board the _Duchess of Gordon_,
he came from his place of abode, two hundred miles through the rebel
posts, on the Hudson river, and with difficulty got on board, when he
informed me of several particulars relative to the situation of the
rebel armies, and the preparations they were making for defence in the
highlands.
"He also communicated to me his distress for want of money to pay the
recruits he had engaged for General Maclean's regiment, on which I
advanced him such a sum as he thought he could carry with safety. About
that time a packet arrived from England, which brought dispatches for
the Bishop of Quebec. These I requested he would take charge of, and
forward them with diligence and secrecy. To facilitate this business, I
offered him fifty pounds to defray the expense thereof. He took charge
of the dispatches, which I heard were safely delivered, though he
declined accepting the fifty pounds. Such conduct, and his indefatigable
diligence to forward his Majesty's service, merits the attention of
Government, particularly as he has lost his property and suffered
imprisonment in the royal cause.
"WM. TRYON,
"Upper Grosvenor St., 14th February, 1785."
SUFFERINGS OF THE U.E. LOYALISTS DURING THE REVOLUTIONARY
WAR--VINDICATION OF THEIR CHARACTER--THEIR PRIVATIONS AND SETTLEMENT IN
CANADA.
_A Letter from the late Mrs. Elizabeth Bowman Spohn, of Ancaster, County
of Wentworth, dated July 3rd, 1861, together with an Introductory Letter
by the Writer of this History, dated February 15, 1875._
"_To the Editor of the Christian Guardian._
"MY DEAR SIR,--
"At the request of the family, I have prepared, and I send you herewith,
a brief obituary notice of Mrs. Elizabeth Bowman Spohn, only child of
the honoured and widely-known late Peter and Elizabeth Bowman, near the
village of Ancaster, in the county of Wentworth.
"I here subjoin for publication a remarkable letter which I received
from Mrs. Spohn in 1861, in answer to a circular which I sent out to the
United Empire Loyalists of Canada and their descendants, to procure
information and testimonies from themselves as to their early history
and settlement in this country.
"I had long been impressed with the injustice done to the character and
acts of our Canadian forefathers by the partial and often unfounded
statements of American historians and utter neglect of English
historians. I had, in accordance with my own strong convictions and in
compliance with many solicitations, determined to attempt an act of
justice and gratitude to that noble generation of men and women. I have
been favoured with a large number of letters similar to that which
follows, and which will form an interesting Appendix of information and
testimony to any history which may be written of them. I have not been
able to complete my task; but if my life and strength be spared, and if
I can be released from official labours which weigh so heavily upon my
time and strength, I shall be able to complete what I have undertaken
and long prosecuted, namely, contribute something to settle many
unsettled and disputed facts of American and Canadian history, and to
do, at least, a modicum of justice to a Canadian ancestry whose heroic
deeds and unswerving Christian patriotism form a patent of nobility more
to be valued by their descendants than the coronets of many modern
noblemen.
"The following letter is founded on the testimony of those who were
incapable of knowingly perverting the truth in any particular, and tends
to prove and illustrate, by its artless statements, the true
disinterested loyalty and Christian patriotism of those who adhered to
British connection in the American revolution; their cruel treatment
from the professed friends of liberty; their privations, sufferings,
courage, and industry in settling this country; or who, as it is
beautifully expressed in the following letter, 'with their hoes planted
the germ of its future greatness.'
"Yours very faithfully,
"E. RYERSON.
"Toronto, February 15, 1875."
"ANCASTER, July 23rd, 1861.
"REV. AND DEAR SIR,--
"I have long wished some person would give the world a true history of
that much-traduced and suffering people, the U.E. Loyalists; and I
assure you that when your circular came I was greatly rejoiced to learn
that they would at least get justice from such an able source as
yourself; and if the plain narrative of the sufferings of my forefathers
will assist you in the least in your arduous and praiseworthy
undertaking, I will be exceedingly gratified.
"My great-grandfather emigrated from Germany in the reign of Queen Anne.
He settled near the Mohawk river, at a creek that still bears his name
(Bowman's Creek). My grandfather, Jacob Bowman, joined the British army
in the French war; at the conclusion of peace he was awarded 1,500
acres of land on the Susquehanna river, where he made improvements until
the revolutionary war broke out. The delicate state of my grandmother
obliged him to remain at home, while nearly all that remained firm to
their allegiance left for the British army.
"He was surprised at night, while his wife was sick, by a party of
rebels, and with his eldest son, a lad of sixteen years of age, was
taken prisoner; his house pillaged of every article except the bed on
which his sick wife lay, and that they stripped of all but one blanket.
Half an hour after my grandfather was marched off, his youngest child
was born. This was in November. There my grandmother was, with an infant
babe and six children, at the commencement of winter, without any
provisions, and only one blanket in the house. Their cattle and grain
were all taken away.
"My father, Peter Bowman, the eldest son at home, was only eleven years
old. As the pillage was at night, he had neither coat nor shoes; he had
to cut and draw his firewood half a mile on a hand-sleigh to keep his
sick mother from freezing; this he did barefooted. The whole family
would have perished had it not been for some friendly Indians that
brought them provisions. One gave my father a blanket, coat and a pair
of mocassins. A kind squaw doctored my grandmother, but she suffered so
much through want and anxiety that it was not until spring that she was
able to do anything. She then took her children and went to the Mohawk
river, where they planted corn and potatoes; and in the fall the
commander of the British forces at Niagara, hearing of their destitute
situation, sent a party with some Indians to bring them in. They brought
in five families: the Nellises, Secords, Youngs, Bucks, and our own
family (Bowman), five women and thirty-one children, and only one pair
of shoes among them all. They arrived at Fort George on the 3rd of
November, 1776; from there they were sent first to Montreal, and then to
Quebec, where the Government took care of them--that is, gave them
_something to eat_ and barracks to sleep in. My grandmother was exposed
to cold and damp so much that she took the rheumatism, and never
recovered.
"In the spring of 1777 my father joined Butler's Rangers, and was with
Colonel Butler in all his campaigns. His brother, only nine years old,
went as a fifer.
"But to return to my grandfather, Jacob Bowman: his captors took him and
his son to Philadelphia, where he was confined in jail eighteen months.
An exchange of prisoners then took place, and they were sent to New
York; from there he, with his son and Philip Buck, started for their
homes, not knowing that these homes they never would see again, and that
their families were far away in the wilds of Canada. The third evening
after they started for their homes, they came to a pond, and shot some
ducks for their supper. The report of their guns was heard by some
American scouts, who concealed themselves until our poor fellows were
asleep, when they came stealthily up and fired. Six shots took effect on
my uncle, as he lay with his hat over his ear. Five balls went through
it, and one through his thigh. My grandfather and Buck lay on the
opposite side of the fire. They sprang into the bushes, but when they
heard the groans of my uncle, grandfather returned and gave himself up.
Buck made his escape. They then marched off, carrying the wounded boy
with them.
"They were taken to the nearest American station, where grandfather was
allowed the privilege of taking care of his wounded son. As he began to
recover, grandfather was again ordered to abjure the British Government,
which he steadfastly refused to do. He was then taken to Lancaster jail,
with Mr. Hoover. They were there fastened together by a band of iron
around their arms, and a chain with three links around their ankles, the
weight of which was ninety-six pounds; and then fastened by a ring and
staple to the floor. In that condition they remained either three years
and a half or four years and a half, until the flesh was worn away and
the bones laid bare four inches.
"Men, women, and children all went to work, clearing land. There were
none to make improvements in Canada then but the U.E. Loyalists, and
they, _with their hoes, planted the germ of its future greatness_. About
this time, my father with his brother returned from the army; they
helped their father two years, and then took up land for themselves near
Fort Erie.
"My father married the daughter of a Loyalist from Hudson, North River
(Mr. Frederick Lampman); he was too old to serve in the war, but his
four sons and two sons in-law did. They were greatly harassed, but they
hid in the cellars and bushes for three months, the rebels hunting them
night and day. At length an opportunity offered, and they made their
escape to Long Island, where they joined the British army. One of his
sons, Wilhelmus Lampman, returning home to see his family, was caught by
the rebels within a short distance of his father's house, and _hanged_,
because, as they said, he was a Tory.
"At the restoration of peace, the whole family came to Canada. They
brought their horses and cattle with them, which helped to supply the
new country. They settled in the township of Stamford, where their
descendants are yet.
"My father settled on his land near the fort; he drew an axe and a hoe
from Government. He bought a yoke of yearling steers; this was the
amount of his farming utensils. Mother had a cow, bed, six plates, three
knives, and a few other articles. It was the scarce year, on account of
the rush of Loyalists from the States, who had heard that Canada was a
good country, where they could live under their own loved institutions,
and enjoy the protection of England.
"The amount of grain that the U.E. Loyalists had raised was hardly
sufficient for themselves; still they divided with the new comers, as
all were alike destitute. After planting corn and potatoes, they had
nothing left. My father cleared two acres, on which he planted corn,
potatoes, oats, and flax; his calves were not able to work, and he had
to carry all the rails on his shoulders until the skin was worn off them
both. This was the way he made his first fence. In the beginning of May
[1789], their provisions failed; none to be had: Government promised
assistance, still none came. All eyes turned toward their harvest, which
was more than three months away; their only resource was the leaves of
trees. Some hunted ground nuts; many lived on herbs; those that were
near the river, on fish. My father used to work until near sun-down,
then walk three miles to the river, get light wood, fish all night, in
the morning divide the fish, carry his share home on his back, which
they ate without bread or salt. This he did twice a week, until the
middle of June, when the moss became so thick in the river that they
could not see a fish; still they worked on, and hoped on every day. My
father chopped the logs and they had milk for their breakfast, then
went to work until noon; took their dinner on milk; to work again till
night, and supped on milk. I have frequently heard my mother say she
never was discouraged or discontented; thankful they were that they
could eat their morsel in peace.
"Their only crime was loyalty to the Government which they had sworn
fealty to. The God of Heaven saw all this, and the sword of vengeance is
now, in 1861, drawn over the American people (now they know how to
appreciate loyalty), and will perhaps never be sheathed again until they
make some restitution for the unheard-of cruelties they inflicted upon
those most brave and loyal people.
"At the close of the war they were liberated. Grandfather was sent to
the hospital for nearly a year, but his leg never got entirely well. As
soon as he was able to walk, he sent for his family (it had been eight
years since he saw them): they had suffered everything but death. Coming
in the boats from Quebec, they got out of provisions and were near
starving. He never had his family all together again. He drew land near
the Falls of Niagara, where he went to work in the woods, broken down
with suffering, worn out with age; his property destroyed, his land
confiscated, and his family scattered; without money or means, and worse
than all, without provisions. Still, to work they went with willing
hands and cheerful hearts, and often did he say he never felt inclined
to murmur. He had done his duty to God and his country; his own and his
family's sufferings he could not help. Theirs was not a solitary case;
all the Loyalists suffered. The Government found seed to plant and sow
the first year; they gave them axes and hoes, and promised them
provisions. How far that promise was fulfilled, you well know; they got
very little; they soon found that they had to provide for themselves.
"As soon as the wheat was large enough to rub out, they boiled it, which
to them was a great treat. Providence favoured them with an early
harvest; their sufferings were over, and not one had starved to death.
They now had enough, and they were thankful. Heaven smiled, and in a few
years they had an abundance for themselves and others.
"I have no memorandum to refer to. I have just related the tale I have
often heard my parents tell, without any exaggeration, but with many
omissions. I have not told you about my father's sufferings in the army,
when, upon an expedition near Little Miamac, he and some others were
left to carry the wounded. They got out of provisions: went three days
without anything to eat, except one pigeon between nine. I will give you
his own words. He says: 'The first day we came to where an Indian's old
pack-horse had mired in the mud; it had lain there ten days in the heat
of summer; the smell was dreadful; still some of our men cut out slices,
roasted and ate it; I was not hungry enough. The next day I shot a
pigeon, which made a dinner for nine; after that we found the skin of a
deer, from the knee to the hoof. This we divided and ate. I would
willingly, had I possessed it, have given my hat full of gold for a
piece of bread as large as my hand. Often did I think of the milk and
swill I had seen left in my father's _hog-trough_, and thought if I only
had that I would be satisfied.'
"Such were some of the sufferings of my forefathers for supremacy. They
have gone to their reward. Peace to their ashes!
"Yours, respectfully,
"Dr. E. Ryerson." "ELIZABETH BOWMAN SPOHN."
"P.S.--One thing more I must add: My father always said there never was
any cruelty inflicted upon either man, woman or child by Butler's
Rangers, that he ever heard of, during the war. They did everything in
their power to get the Indians to bring their prisoners in for
redemption, and urged them to treat them kindly; the officers always
telling them that it was more brave to take a prisoner than to kill him,
and that none but a coward would kill a prisoner; that brave soldiers
were always kind to women and children. He said it was false that they
gave a bounty for scalps. True, the Indians did commit cruelties, but
they were not countenanced in the least by the whites. E.S."
"N.B.--To this last statement of Mrs. Spohn's it may be added that it is
also true that the Indians were first employed by the Revolutionists
against the Loyalists, before they were employed by the latter against
the former. The attempt to enlist the Indians in the contest was first
made by the Revolutionists. Of this the most conclusive evidence can be
adduced.
"E.R."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 139: This must be the grandfather of General W. Fenwick
Williams, of Kars.]
[Footnote 140: Dr. Canniff, in his excellent "History of the Settlement
of Upper Canada," with special reference to Bay Quinté, has the
following respecting Colonel Ryerson, who commanded a company and was
called captain, though not yet gazetted:
"One of Captain Joseph Ryerson's old comrades, Peter Redner, of the Bay
Quinté, says: 'He was a man of daring intrepidity, and a great favourite
in his company.' He represented Captain Ryerson as one of the most
determined men he ever knew. With the service of his country uppermost
in his mind, he often exposed himself to great danger to accomplish his
desires." (p. 119.)]
CHAPTER XLII.
GOVERNMENTS OF THE BRITISH PROVINCES--NOVA SCOTIA.
To the painful narrative given of the banishment of the Loyalists, and
confiscation of their property, at the close of the revolutionary war,
and their settlement in the British provinces of Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, Lower and Upper Canada, so fully detailed in the preceding
pages, it is proper to add some account of the Provincial Governments.
_Nova Scotia_ is the oldest of the present British American Provinces.
This territory had the general appellation of New France, or Acadia, and
comprehended, until 1784, New Brunswick and Cape Breton. It was
originally regarded as a part of Cabot's discovery of Terra Nova, and as
such claimed by the English Government, and was afterwards comprehended
within the boundary of a large portion of America, called North
Virginia. In the wars between France and England this country changed
masters several times; but in 1710 Nova Scotia was again re-conquered by
the forces of her Britannic Majesty Queen Anne, sent from New England,
under the command of General Nicholson; and by the Treaty of Utrecht, in
1712, it was finally ceded and secured to Great Britain, and has ever
since continued in her possession.[141]
"There were originally three sorts of government established by the
English on the continent of America: Charter Governments, such as those
of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut; Proprietary
Governments, as Pennsylvania and Maryland; and Royal Government, as
Nova Scotia. A Royal Government is immediately dependent upon the Crown,
and the King appoints the Governor and officers of State, and the people
only elect the representatives, as in England."[142]
"Peace was declared between France and England the 8th of November,
1762; and by the treaty which followed, all the French possessions in
Canada, with Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, and the islands in the Gulf of
the St. Lawrence, were ceded to Great Britain. In the year 1764, the
Island of St. John, named Prince Edward Island in 1799, in honour of the
Duke of Kent, was annexed to Nova Scotia.
"Of Acadia, and accordingly of Nova Scotia, during its early government
by the English, the province now known as New Brunswick formed a part,
and to the colony was added, in 1758, the Island of Cape Breton, then
finally taken from the French. In the same year the military rule which
had prevailed was exchanged for a regular Constitution, in which a
Governor, representing the British Crown, presided over a Legislative
Council and a House of Assembly modelled to some extent from the two
estates of the English Parliament."[143]
The first Assembly of Nova Scotia met on the 7th of October, 1758, at
Halifax, and elected Robert Sanderson as Speaker. A number of laws
passed by the Governor and Council were passed with slight alterations;
and the Assembly, on the question being put whether any money should be
paid them for their services, unanimously resolved that the members
should serve without any remuneration that session. (This was repealed
by the members of the next elected Assembly.) The usual Speech from the
Throne was made, and a complimentary address was moved in reply; and the
Governor and his new Assembly got on better together than he had
expected.[144]
"On October 19th, 1760, Governor Lawrence died from inflammation of the
lungs, brought on by a cold taken at a ball at the Government House. He
was deeply mourned by the colony, and his loss was severely felt. He was
accorded a public funeral, and the Legislature caused a monument to be
erected to his memory in St. Paul's Church, Halifax, as a mark of their
sense of the many important services he had rendered the province. He
was a wise and impartial administrator, and zealous and indefatigable in
his endeavours for the public good; even his opposition to calling a
General Assembly made him few enemies, and his strongest opponent in the
matter, Chief Justice Belcher, who succeeded him in the administration,
remained on good terms with him."[145]
In the same month that Governor Lawrence died, occurred the death of
George the Second, in consequence of which the first House of Assembly
of Nova Scotia was dissolved, and a new election, with some changes in
the electoral districts, took place. The first meeting of the new
Assembly was held the 1st of July, 1761, and the members of the House
again agreed to give their services gratuitously. From the death of
Governor Lawrence to the close of the American Revolution in 1783, there
were ten governors and lieutenant-governors of Nova Scotia, under whose
administration the colony was quiet and prosperous, though there was
little increase in the population (until the influx of the U.E.
Loyalists), and domestic manufactures were discouraged in the interests
of English manufacturers.[146]
Down to the year 1783, at the close of the American revolutionary war,
the population of Nova Scotia amounted to only a few thousand; but in
the following year, by the forced exodus of the Loyalists from the
United States, the population more than doubled. "Even before
hostilities began, a number of loyal families emigrated from Boston, and
settled on the River St. John, founding the town of Parrtown, now St
John, N.B. They found the climate and soil both much better than they
had expected; and the colony soon began to thrive apace. Settlements
were made at Oromocto, where a fort was built, and one bold explorer
penetrated as far as the present site of Fredericton, and cleared a farm
there for himself. These emigrants numbered about 500, and the district
they settled in was made the county of Sunbury. This, however, was only
the advance guard of the immense army of emigrants which was to be
attracted to the colony at the close of the war, and which was destined
to play so important a part in the history of the Maritime Province. The
exodus of the Loyalists from New England commenced immediately after the
opening of negotiations for peace in November, 1782; for so bitter was
the action of the different State Legislatures against them that Sir Guy
Carleton (afterwards Lord Dorchester) could not await the action of
Parliament, but took upon himself to commence their removal to Nova
Scotia. On the 18th of May, 1783, the ships bearing the first instalment
of Loyalist emigrants arrived at Navy Island, and during the summer they
continued to arrive, until about 5,000 had settled between Parrtown (St.
John) and St. Anne's. The peninsula now occupied by the city of St. John
was then almost a wilderness, covered with shrubs, scrubby spruce, and
marsh. Large numbers of emigrants also arrived at Annapolis, Port
Roseway, and other points; and Governor Parr, in a letter to Lord North
in September, 1783, estimates the whole number that had arrived in Nova
Scotia and the island of St. John (Prince Edward's Island) at 13,000.
"These emigrants included all classes--disbanded soldiers, lawyers,
clergymen, merchants, farmers, and mechanics; all in indigent
circumstances, but willing to build up their own fortunes, and those of
the land of their adoption, by honest labour and industry."[147]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 141: General Description of Nova Scotia. Printed at the Royal
Canadian School, 1825, p. 13.]
[Footnote 142: General Description of Nova Scotia, p. 17.]
[Footnote 143: Bourne's Our Colonies and Emigration, pp. 100, 101.
"The proclamation inviting emigrants to Nova Scotia _guaranteed them the
same form of government and rights as the other colonies_; but owing to
alleged difficulties in the way of electing an Assembly, no Assembly was
chosen, and laws were made and the affairs of the colony were
administered by the Governor and Council, until Chief Justice Belcher
raised the question in 1755, in a letter to the Lords of Trade, as to
the constitutionality of several laws passed by the Governor and Council
without the endorsement of a representative Assembly. The question was
referred to the Attorney and Solicitor-General of England, who decided
that the Governor and Council alone had not the right to make laws, and
that any laws so made were unconstitutional. The Lords of Trade
_advised_ the Governor (Lawrence) to convene an Assembly without delay,
but he objected to it as needless and impracticable; when the Lord of
Trade replied sharply, that he knew their desires on the subject; and as
he did not seem disposed to gratify them, they were obliged to _order
him to do so_; adding, that they knew that many had left the province
and gone to other colonies on account of the discontent at the delay of
calling an Assembly."
In obedience to these instructions, Governor Lawrence brought the
subject before his Council the 20th of May, 1758, and a resolution
(prepared by Chief Justice Belcher the year before) was passed, to the
effect "That a House of Representatives of the inhabitants of this
province be a civil Legislature thereof, in conjunction with the
Governor for the time being, and the Council; that the first House shall
be known as the General Assembly, and shall consist of sixteen members,
to be elected by the province at large--four by the township of Halifax,
and two by the township of Lunenburg; and that as soon as any other
township which might be erected had fifty electors (freeholders), it
should be entitled to elect two representatives to the Assembly, as well
as having the right of voting for representatives for the Province at
large. Eleven members besides the Speaker were to form a quorum."
(Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap, li., pp. 238, 239.)]
[Footnote 144: _Ib._, p. 239.
"Lawrence was an active and able officer, and paid great attention to
developing the resources of the province and promoting the welfare of
the people. He opposed the Government scheme of making the colony a
military settlement, and was permitted to invite a more desirable class
of emigrants, farmers, mechanics, etc. A proclamation was issued, and
inquiry soon followed as to the inducements offered to settlers. The
terms were liberal. The townships were laid out at twelve miles square,
or one hundred thousand acres each; and each settler was entitled to one
hundred acres for himself, and fifty acres for every member of his
family, on condition that he cultivated the land within thirty years;
and each township was to have the right to send two members to the
Legislature as soon as it contained fifty families. Agents from parties
in Connecticut and Rhode Island visited Halifax in 1759, with a view to
emigration, and selected Minas, Chignecto, and Cobequid, which had
formerly been settled by the Acadians, as sites for townships.
Emigration soon set in steadily towards the province; six vessels, with
two hundred settlers, arrived from Boston; four schooners, with one
hundred, came from Rhode Island; New London and Plymouth furnished two
hundred and eighty; and three hundred came from Ireland, under the
management of Alexander McNutt."--_Ib._]
[Footnote 145: Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap, li., p.
239.]
[Footnote 146: Governor Francklin wrote to the Earl of Shelburne, in
1766, that "The country, in general, work up for their own use, into
stockings and a stuff called home-spun, what little wool their few sheep
produce; and they also make part of their coarse linen from the flax
they produce."--"I cannot omit representing to your lordship on this
occasion, _that this Government has at no time given encouragement to
manufactures which could interfere with those of Great Britain_, nor has
there been the least appearance of any association of private persons
for that purpose."--"It may be also proper to observe to your lordship,
that all the inhabitants in this colony are employed either in
husbandry, fishing, or providing lumber; and that all the manufactures
for their clothing, and the utensils for farming and fishing, are made
in Great Britain." (Tuttle, Chap. lxvi, p. 325.)]
[Footnote 147: Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap. lxvi.,
p. 327.
"The Loyalists who settled at the St. John River did not agree very well
with the original settlers. They grew angry with the Governor because
their grants of land had not been surveyed. He in turn charged them with
refusing to assist in the surveys, by acting as chainmen, unless they
were well paid for it. Then they demanded additional representation in
the Assembly. Nova Scotia was then divided into eight counties, and
there were thirty-six representatives in the Assembly, the districts
where a number of Loyalists had settled being included in the county of
Halifax. Governor Parr opposed an increase of representation, as his
instructions forbade his increasing or diminishing the number of
representatives in the Assembly.
"The Loyalists then began to agitate for a division of the province--a
policy which was strongly opposed by the Governor, and which gave rise
to much excitement and ill-feeling. Parr went so far as to remove some
of the Loyalists to the other side of the Bay of Fundy, in the hope that
that would settle the agitation; but it only increased it, and the
Loyalists, who had many warm and influential friends at court, urged a
division so earnestly that the Ministry yielded to their wishes, and the
Province of New Brunswick was created (in 1784), so called out of
compliment to the reigning family of England. The River Missiquash was
constituted the boundary line between the two provinces, and the
separation took place in the fall of 1784, and the first Governor of New
Brunswick, Colonel Thomas Carleton (brother of Lord Dorchester), arrived
at St. John on the 21st of November. In the same year Cape Breton was
made a separate colony[148]; and as the Island of St. John (Prince
Edward Island) had been separated from Nova Scotia in 1770, there were
now four separate governments in what at present constitute the Maritime
Provinces." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap. lxvi.,
pp. 328, 329.)]
[Footnote 148: In 1829, Cape Breton was restored to Nova Scotia, of
which it now forms a part.]
CHAPTER XLIII.
NEW BRUNSWICK.
The population of New Brunswick at the time of its separation from Nova
Scotia, in 1784, was about 12,000. The governments of both provinces
were similarly constituted--a Governor, an Executive and Legislative
Council, members of the latter appointed by the Crown for life, and an
Assembly or House of Commons, elected periodically by the freeholders:
and both provinces were prosperous and contented for many years under
successive governors, who seemed to have ruled impartially, and for the
best interests of the people, though with narrower views of free
government than those which obtained at a later period. The Loyalists
not only obtained the establishment of New Brunswick as a province, but
constituted the principal members of its Legislature, the officers of
its government, and founders of its institutions; and the chief public
men of the province have been from that day to this either U.E.
Loyalists or their descendants.
Mr. Andrew Archer, in his excellent _History of Canada for the Use of
Schools_, prescribed by the Board of Education for New Brunswick, gives
the following account of the formation of the government of that
province, and its founders:
"On Sunday, the 21st of November, 1784, Colonel _Thomas Carleton_
(brother to Sir _Guy Carleton_), the first Governor of New Brunswick,
arrived in St. John harbour and landed at Reed's Point. He had commanded
a regiment during the revolutionary war, and was much esteemed by his
Majesty's exiled Loyalists. The province was formally proclaimed the
next day.
"The government of New Brunswick consisted of a Governor and a Council
that united both executive and legislative functions, and a House of
Assembly of twenty-six representatives. The Council was composed of
twelve members. They were men of great talent, and had occupied before
the war positions of influence in their native States. Chief Justice
_Ludlow_ had been a judge of the Supreme Court of New York; _James
Putman_ was considered one of the ablest lawyers in all America; the
Rev. and Hon. _Jonathan Odell_, first Provincial Secretary, had acted as
chaplain in the Royal army, practised physic and written political
poetry; Judge _Joshua Upham_, a graduate of Harvard, abandoned the Bar
during the war, and became a colonel of dragoons; Judge _Israel Allen_
had been colonel of a New Jersey Volunteer corps, and lost an estate in
Pennsylvania through his devotion to the Loyalist cause; Judge _Edward
Winslow_, nephew of Colonel _John Winslow_, who executed the decree that
expelled the Acadians from Nova Scotia, had attained the rank of colonel
in the Royal army; _Beverley Robinson_ had raised and commanded the
Loyal American Regiment, and had lost great estates on Hudson river;
_Gabriel G. Ludlow_ had commanded a battalion of Maryland Volunteers;
_Daniel Bliss_ had been a commissary of the Royal army; _Elijah Willard_
had taken no active part in the war; _William Hagen_ and _Guildford
Studholme_ were settled in the province before the landing of the
Loyalists; Judge _John Saunders_, of a cavalier family in Virginia, had
been captain in the Queen's Rangers, under Colonel Simcoe, and had
afterwards entered the Temple and studied law in London. He was
appointed to the Council after the death of Judge Putman. The government
of the young province was governed with very few changes for several
years.
"The town and district of Parr was incorporated in 1785, and became the
city of _St. John_. It was the first, and long continued to be the only
incorporated town in British America. It was governed by a mayor and a
board of six aldermen and six assistants. The first two sessions of the
General Assembly (1786-87) met in St. John. On meeting the Legislature
at its first session, Governor Carleton expressed his satisfaction at
seeing the endeavours of his Majesty to procure for the inhabitants the
protection of a free government in so fair a way of being finally
successful. He spoke of the peculiar munificence which had been
extended to New Brunswick--the asylum of loyalty--and all the
neighbouring States; and expressed his conviction that the people could
not show their gratitude in a more becoming manner than by promoting
sobriety, industry, and religion; by discouraging all factious and party
distinctions, and by inculcating the utmost harmony between the
newly-arrived Loyalists and the subjects formerly settled in the
province.
"Two years afterwards (1788), the seat of government was removed to St.
Anne's Point, Fredericton, which was considered the most central
position in the province. It is said that Fredericton was chosen to be
the seat of government because Albany, the seat of the Legislature of
New York (from which State the great body of the Loyalists came), is
situated many miles up the River Hudson, and is thus removed from the
distracting bustle, the factious and corrupting influences of the great
commercial metropolis at its mouth."[149]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 149: Chap. xxvi., pp. 260-262.]
CHAPTER XLIV.
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.
_Prince Edward Island_ was first called by the French St. John's Island,
on account of the day on which the French landed on it; but in 1799 its
name was changed, and it was called Prince Edward's Island in honour of
the Duke of Kent, (William Edward) afterward William IV. After the close
of the American Revolution in 1783, a considerable number of the exiled
Loyalists went to Prince Edward's Island and became merchants and
cultivators of the soil.
"In 1763 the island was incorporated with Nova Scotia; but in 1770 it
was made a separate province, in fulfilment of a curious plan of
civilization. It was parcelled out in sixty-seven townships, and these
were distributed by lottery among the creditors of the English
Government, each of whom was bound to lodge a settler on every lot of
two hundred acres that fell to him. The experiment was not at first very
successful, but gradually the shares passed from the original
speculators to men who knew how to use the rich soil and usually healthy
climate of the island."[150]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 150: Bourne's "Our Colonies and Emigration," Chap. viii., p.
105.]
CHAPTER XLV.
LOWER CANADA.
_Lower Canada_ was first possessed by the French, and under the rule of
France the government was purely despotic, though not cruel or harsh. On
the conquest of Lower Canada in 1759, and its final ceding to England by
the Treaty of Paris, 1763, a military government was instituted, which
continued until 1774, when the famous "Quebec Act" was passed by the
Imperial Parliament, known as the 14th George the Third, Chapter 83; or
as "the Quebec Act"--it was introduced into the House of Lords on the
2nd of May, 1774--"for Making more Efficient Provision for the Province
of Quebec." By the provisions of this famous Act, the boundaries of the
province of Quebec were extended from Labrador to the Mississippi,
embracing in one province the territory of Canada, together with all the
country north-west of the Ohio to the head of Lake Superior and the
Mississippi, and consolidating all authority over this boundless region
in the hands of a Governor and Council of not less than seventeen or
more than twenty-three members, with power to pass ordinances for the
peace, welfare, and good government of the province. At the close of the
war between England and France by the Peace of Paris, 1763, English
emigration was invited to Lower Canada, with the promise, by Royal
Proclamation, of _representative government_, as in the other colonies.
That promise, however, was not fulfilled by the Act of 1774; but the
Catholics were not displeased that the promise of a Representative
Assembly was not kept, as a Representative Assembly, to which none but
Protestants could at that time be chosen, was less acceptable to them
than the despotic rule of a Governor and Council nominated by the Crown.
The Quebec Act authorized the Crown to confer places of honour and
business upon Catholics. The owners of estates were further gratified by
the restoration of the French system of law. The English emigrants might
complain of the want of jury trials in civil processes, but the French
Canadians were grateful for relief from statutes which they did not
comprehend. The nobility of New France, who were accustomed to arms,
were still further conciliated by the proposal to enrol Canadian
battalions, in which they could hold commissions on equal terms with
English officers. The great dependence of the Crown, however, was on the
clergy. The capitulation of New France had guaranteed to them freedom of
public worship, but the laws for their support were held to be no longer
valid. By the Quebec Act they were confirmed in the possession of their
ancient churches and their revenues; so that the Roman Catholic worship
was as effectually established in Canada as the Presbyterian Church in
Scotland.[151]
This Act encountered very strong opposition both in England and America.
The Mayor, Aldermen, and Council of the city of London presented a
petition to the King against the Bill, praying his Majesty not to sign
it. In that long and ably drawn up petition, occur the following words:
"We beg leave to observe that the English law, and that wonderful effort
of human wisdom, the trial by jury, are not admitted by this Bill in any
civil cases, and the French law of Canada is imposed on all the
inhabitants of that extensive province, by which both the persons and
properties of very many of your Majesty's subjects are rendered insecure
and precarious. We humbly conceive that this Bill, if passed into a law,
will be contrary not only with the compact entered into with the various
settlers of the Reformed religion, who were invited into the said
province under the sacred promise of enjoying the benefit of the laws of
your realm of England, but likewise repugnant to your Royal Proclamation
of the 7th of October, 1763, for the speedy settlement of the said new
government. * * That the whole legislative power of the province is
vested in persons to be wholly appointed by your Majesty, and removable
at your pleasure, which we apprehend to be repugnant to the leading
principles of this free Constitution, by which alone your Majesty now
holds, or legally can hold, the Imperial Crown of these realms."
In the House of Commons the Bill was strongly opposed by Messrs. Fox,
Burke, Townsend and others, chiefly on the ground of its
unconstitutionality, and every effort was made to amend it, but without
success. The Bill was finally passed by a vote of 56 to 20.
In the House of Lords, the Bill was vehemently opposed by the Earl of
Chatham, who protested against it "as a most cruel, oppressive, and
odious measure, tearing up justice and every good principle by the
roots," and "destructive of that liberty which ought to be the
groundwork of every constitution." The Bill, however, passed the Lords
by a vote of 26 to 7, and received the royal assent on the prorogation
of Parliament, the 22nd of June, the King stating in regard to it that
"it was founded on the clearest principles of justice and humanity, and
would, he doubted not, have the best effect in quieting the minds and
promoting the happiness of his Canadian subjects."
The feeling against the Act was intense both in England and the
colonies, regarding it as a type of Imperial legislation for the
colonies. "The strongest excitement prevailed in England for some months
after the passing of the Act; and the papers were filled with little
else than letters and remarks upon it." The British Loyalist settlers in
Canada were indignant, and meetings were held in Quebec and Montreal, at
which strong resolutions were passed, and petitions unanimously signed
to the King, Lords and Commons, praying for the repeal of the Act, and
forwarded to England.
"On the 17th of May, 1775, Lord Camden moved in the House of Lords for
the repeal of the Act, but the motion was defeated by a vote of 88 to
28." A similar motion by Sir George Saville, in the Commons, was
likewise defeated by a vote of 174 to 86.[152] The feeling of the
Loyalists throughout Canada was very strong against this Act; and its
operations gave no satisfaction to any party.[153]
From the prevalent dissatisfaction among all parties in Canada with the
Quebec Act of 1774, the Imperial Government having, in 1788, sanctioned
ordinances to restore the _Habeas Corpus_ Act, and the _trial by jury_
in civil cases, and obtained full and minute information as to the
internal state of Canada, a Bill was prepared and introduced into the
House of Commons by Mr. Pitt, pursuant to a message from the King, on
the 4th of March, 1791, establishing a representative government for
Canada, after the model as far as possible of the British Constitution.
This Act is sometimes called the "Grenville Act," having been chiefly
prepared by Grenville, and conducted by him through the House of Lords;
it is sometimes called the "Pitt Act," having been introduced and
carried through the House of Commons by Pitt; but it is generally known
in Canada as the Constitutional Act, 31 George III., Chapter 31--the Act
which gave to Canada its first constitutional government, and under the
provisions of which Canada was governed for fifty years, until the union
of the two Canadas in 1841.
Mr. Pitt in introducing his Bill stated "that the division of the
province into Upper and Lower Canada, he hoped would put an end to the
competition between the old French inhabitants and the new settlers from
Britain and the British colonies. This division he trusted would be made
in such a manner as to give each a majority in their own particular
part; although it could not be expected to draw a complete line of
separation. Any inconvenience, however, to be apprehended from ancient
Canadians being included in the one or British settlers in the other,
would be averted by a local Legislature to be established in each.
"In imitation of the Constitution of the mother country, he would
propose a Legislative Council and House of Assembly for each; the
Assembly to be constituted in the usual manner, and the members of the
Council to be for life; reserving to his Majesty to annex to certain
honours an hereditary right of sitting in Council (a power never
exercised). All laws and ordinances of the province to remain in force
till altered by the new Legislature. The _Habeas Corpus_ Act was already
law by an ordinance of the province, and was to be continued as a
fundamental principle of the Constitution.
"It was further meant to make a provision for a Protestant clergy in
both divisions, by an allotment of lands in proportion to those already
granted.
"The tenures were to be settled in Lower Canada by the local
Legislature. In Upper Canada, the settlers being chiefly British, the
tenures were to be soccage tenures.
"To prevent any such dispute as that which separated the thirteen
colonies from the mother country, it was provided that the British
Parliament should impose no taxes but such as might be necessary for the
regulation of trade and commerce; and to guard against the abuse of this
power, such taxes were to be levied and disposed of by the Legislature
of each division."
The Bill was opposed in the House of Commons by Mr. Fox and others, upon
the grounds that it created two provinces and two Legislatures, and made
the members of the Legislative Councils nominees of the Crown for life,
instead of leaving their election to the people; but the Bill was
supported by Edmund Burke, who, with Fox, had voted side by side against
the Quebec Act of 1774, but who opposed each other on the Canada Bill of
1791.[154]
Mr. Pitt, in reply to the objection of Mr. Fox and others, stated among
other things, "That the population of _Upper Canada_ amounted to only
10,000 inhabitants, and that of _Lower Canada_ to not more than
100,000."[155]
With such preparation and explanations the Bill passed both Houses of
Parliament and received the royal assent, conferring on Canada a new
Constitution.
This Act separated the province of Quebec into two provinces, _Upper_
and _Lower Canada_, the division line between which was the River
Ottawa.
For each province a Legislature was established consisting of a
_Governor_, a _Legislative Council_ and _House of Assembly_--in
imitation of the Constitution of England; for the Governor was to
represent the Sovereign, the Legislative Council the House of Lords, and
the Assembly the House of Commons.
The members of the Legislative Council were to be discreet persons,
appointed by Royal authority for life; the members of the Assemblies
were to be chosen by the people, once in four years, unless oftener
called upon, by dissolution, to elect new members.
The Act was to come in force not later than the 31st of December, 1791;
and the date of meeting of the new Legislature was not to be later than
the 31st December, 1792.
Thus in fulfilment of a promise made in a Royal Proclamation in 1763,
Canada obtained a _representative_ form of government in 1791.
It has been seen that _the representative_ form of government was
obtained both for _Nova Scotia_ and _New Brunswick_ by the
representation and influence of the _United Empire Loyalists_; it was so
in Canada. Thus are we indebted to the _United Empire Loyalists_ not
only for our unity with the British empire, but for the original
constitution of representative government which, with enlarged
application, is the basis of that free government which now prevails
throughout all the provinces of the Dominion of Canada.
GOVERNMENT OF LOWER CANADA.
In 1786, Lord Dorchester had been appointed Governor of Canada and
Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America.[156] But he
left for England in August, 1791, on a year's leave, and in his absence
the administration of the Government was entrusted to the
Lieutenant-Governor, General Alured Clarke, a retired British officer.
The elections took place in June, 1792, and were in some instances
warmly contested. Lower Canada had been divided into twenty-one
counties, eighteen of which elected two members each, and three--the
counties of Gaspé, Bedford, and Orleans--returned one member each; the
cities of Quebec and Montreal were each represented by four members, and
Three Rivers by two. Of the fifty members elected to the first House of
Assembly, fifteen were of British origin, and thirty-five were of French
origin.[157]
The Legislative Council consisted of fifteen members.
On the 30th of October, the Provincial Parliament was commanded to meet
at Quebec the 17th of December, 1792, for the actual despatch of
business. On the meeting of the Legislative Council that day, the Hon.
Chief Justice William Smith was appointed Speaker. The House of Assembly
did not agree upon the election of Speaker on the first day--the French
and English-speaking members advocating respectively the election of a
Speaker of their own language; but at length Mr. J.A. Panet was elected
by a large majority--he speaking both languages with equal
fluency.[158]
The Lieutenant-Governor made a speech expressing the solicitude and
consideration of the King for his Canadian subjects, in recommending to
his Parliament such a change in their colonial government as
circumstances might require and admit. "On a day like this," said his
Excellency, "signalized by the commencement in this country of that form
of government which has raised the kingdom to which it is subordinate to
the highest elevation, it is impossible not to feel emotions difficult
to be expressed.
"To give an opportunity for your loyal and grateful acknowledgments to
his Majesty is one of my motives for calling you together, and that debt
discharged, your Council will doubtless be next employed for enacting
the laws necessary to confirm and augment the property of your country."
The Lieutenant-Governor concluded in the following words:
"Great Britain being happily at peace with all the world, and I hope
without apprehension of its interruption, the present moment must be
most fit and urgent for all those arrangements best made at a season of
tranquillity, and falling within the sphere of our trust. The conviction
I feel of your disposition to cultivate that harmony amongst yourselves
and each branch of the Legislature, which is always essential to the
public good and private satisfaction, makes it unnecessary for me to
enlarge upon this subject.
"Such objects as it may become my duty to recommend to your
consideration, shall be occasionally communicated to you by message."
The address of the Assembly in answer to his Excellency's speech
breathed a spirit of grateful affection and loyalty. After expressing
their warmest gratitude to the King and Parliament of Great Britain, "in
granting to his Majesty's subjects in this province a new and liberal
Constitution for their colonial government," the Assembly proceeds:
"We cannot express the emotions which arose in our breasts, on that
ever-memorable day when we entered on the enjoyment of a Constitution
assimilated to that form of government which has carried the glory of
our mother country to the highest elevation. * *
"It is an unparalleled happiness for us to have an opportunity of
presenting to his Majesty our loyal thanks, and of expressing to him our
gratitude; such homage is the language of our hearts, and it is due from
us, for all the favours with which we have been loaded. That duty
fulfilled, we will turn our attention with most ardent zeal to framing
such laws as may tend to the prosperity and advantage of our country.
"We hear with pleasure that Great Britain is at peace with all the
world, and we consider this as the most favourable time for the
consideration of the objects that fall within the sphere of our charge,
to cultivate harmony among ourselves and each branch of the Legislature;
that it is a condition essentially necessary to the public good and our
own private satisfaction.
"We will at all times give the most speedy and deliberate consideration
to such messages as we may receive from your Excellency."
Throughout this address of the Assembly there is the true ring of manly
sincerity, and heartfelt loyalty to the Throne and to the unity of the
empire. The Governor soon sent several messages to the Assembly,
submitting, by command of the King, various subjects for their
consideration, for which he received their cordial thanks, and
assurances that the subjects submitted would receive their best
consideration.
There was one subject of discussion which created much feeling and
protracted debate--namely, the language in which the proceedings of the
Assembly should be conducted, recorded, and published; but the rising
storm was allayed and unity restored by the decision to leave each
member at liberty to address the House in French or English at his
pleasure--to have all motions, before being put to the House, read in
both languages, and the record of the proceedings kept and published in
both languages--a happy arrangement, which has been continued to this
day.
The House of Assembly, in their reply to the opening speech of the
Lieutenant-Governor, expressed their intention of presenting their
heartfelt thanks to his Majesty for the new and liberal Constitution
conferred upon them. That truly loyal address was as follows, and does
lasting honour to its authors and the Imperial Government:
"We, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the representatives
of Lower Canada, met in Assembly for the first time under our new
Constitution, humbly approach the Throne, to express to your most
gracious Majesty our sentiments of gratitude and joy on the happy change
which has taken place in the forms of our government.
"The Constitution which it hath pleased your Majesty and Parliament to
give us, modelled upon that of Great Britain--a Constitution which has
carried the empire to the highest pitch of glory and prosperity--assures
to this colony the most solid advantages, and will for ever attach it to
the parent State.
"Now, partaking without distinction the benefits of a government which
protects all equally, we offer our thanks to Divine Providence for the
happiness prepared for us. Our prayers are for the general prosperity of
the nation of which we make a part, and for the preservation and
felicity of our august and virtuous Sovereign.
"May it please your Majesty to receive favourably our respectful homage,
and permit us anew to express our loyalty and attachment.
"May it please your Majesty and Parliament to receive our most humble
thanks for the favour conferred upon this colony.
"Such are the heartfelt wishes of the representatives of the people of
Lower Canada."
Such were the auspicious circumstances and cordiality of feeling
attendant upon the inauguration of constitutional government in Lower
Canada. The session continued upwards of four months--from December
until May--during which time a great many subjects were introduced
respecting expenses and revenues, salaries of officers, affairs
appertaining to legislation, to the militia, to the administration of
justice, and the welfare of the country; but only eight _Bills_ were
passed, and which were assented to in the King's name by the
Lieutenant-Governor, who prorogued the Legislature on the 9th of May,
1793, with a short and complimentary speech.
It is not my object to narrate in detail the legislation or proceedings
of any of the colonies, except in so far as may be necessary to
illustrate the history of _the Loyalists of America_. A most impressive
illustration of true loyalty was given by the Assembly of Lower Canada
before the close of its first session. In the Lieutenant-Governor's
speech at the opening of the session, he informed the Legislature that
Great Britain was at peace with all the world, and that there was no
apprehension of its interruption. But before the close of the session
intelligence was received at Quebec that the revolutionary authorities
of France had declared war against Great Britain.
On the 25th of April, 1793, the Lieutenant-Governor sent a message to
the Assembly, informing them that he had received a letter from the
Secretary of State, of the 9th of February previous, stating that "the
persons exercising the supreme authority in France had declared war
against his Majesty."[159]
The answer to the message breathes the _Loyalists'_ spirit. They thanked
his Excellency for his message, and assured him that "it was with horror
they had heard that the most atrocious act which ever disgraced society
had been perpetrated in France (alluding to the recent decapitation of
the unfortunate Louis XVI.), and that it was with concern and
indignation they now learned that the persons exercising the supreme
authority there had declared war against his Majesty.
"His Majesty's faithful subjects earnestly pray that his arms may be
crowned with such signal success over his enemies as shall speedily
bring about a peace honourable, safe, and advantageous to his Majesty
and the empire."
In conclusion, the Assembly assured his Excellency that "the House would
immediately proceed to a revision of the Militia laws, and if
alterations and amendments were necessary they would make such
amendments as should be deemed the most fit and proper to secure and
protect the province from every insult and injury of his Majesty's
enemies."
At the close of the session, after assenting, on behalf of the King, to
the eight Bills which had been passed, the Lieutenant-Governor delivered
the proroguing speech, in which he thanked the Assembly for the diligent
and practical consideration which they had given to the various subjects
which had been submitted to them, and the "further regulations necessary
for the better organizing and more effectually calling forth the militia
for the defence of this extensive and valuable country, when our enemies
of any description shall make it necessary." His Excellency alluded to
the war of the rulers of France against England in the following words:
"Gentlemen, at the first meeting of the Legislature, I congratulated you
upon the flattering prospects which opened to your view and upon the
flourishing and tranquil state of the British empire, then at peace with
all the world. Since that period, I am sorry to find its tranquillity
has been disturbed by the unjustifiable and unprecedented conduct of the
persons exercising the supreme power in France, who, after deluging
their own country with the blood of their fellow-citizens, and imbruing
their hands in that of their Sovereign, have forced his Majesty and the
surrounding nations of Europe into a contest which involves the first
interests of society. In this situation of public affairs, I reflect
with peculiar pleasure upon the loyal and faithful attachment of his
Majesty's subjects of this province to his royal person, and to that
form of government we have the happiness to enjoy."[160]
The second session of the Parliament was summoned by Lord Dorchester
himself, the 11th of November, 1793.[161] This session lasted seven
months and a half, though only six Bills were passed. In his speech at
the opening of the session, Lord Dorchester recommended the due
administration of justice, together with the arrangements necessary for
the defence and safety of the province, as matters of the first
importance. His Excellency also informed the Assembly that he would
order to be laid before them an account of all the receipts of the
provincial revenues of the Crown since the division of Upper and Lower
Canada.
The purport of his Excellency's speech, and the spirit of the Assembly,
and the relations between the colony and the parent state, may be
inferred from the following cordial and complimentary address of the
Assembly in answer to the Governor's opening speech:
"Fully convinced of the happy effects to be derived from a solid and
invariable administration of justice, and of the indispensable necessity
for an establishment for assuring the defence and safety of the
province, we will lose no time in resuming the consideration of these
important subjects, and in making such amendments in the existing laws
as may best protect the persons and property of its inhabitants.
"By receiving from your Excellency an account of the receipts of the
provincial revenues of the Crown, we shall be enabled to deliberate on
the means by which they may be rendered more productive; and penetrated
with gratitude to the parent state for having hitherto defrayed the
surplus expenditure of the province, we flatter ourselves that, in
consideration of our situation, we shall continue to receive her
generous assistance--a hope further strengthened by your Excellency's
intention of not requiring from us any subsidy at present, which
confirms the benevolence of the mother country.
"In the infancy of our Constitution, we perceive the necessity of
greater circumspection in the formation of laws that may tend to support
and establish it; and also to cultivate amongst the different branches
of the Legislature that cordial harmony and concord so necessary to
promote the measures essential to the happiness and well-being of our
country."
The Assembly bestowed much attention upon the Judicature Bill of the
previous session, and on the Militia Bill, and brought them to maturity;
also an Alien Bill was introduced and passed, establishing "regulations
respecting aliens and certain subjects of his Majesty, who have resided
in France, coming into this province and residing therein, and for
empowering his Majesty to receive and detain persons charged with or
suspected of high treason, and for the arrest and commitment of all
persons who may individually, by seditious practices, attempt to disturb
the government of this province."[162]
It happened at the commencement of this session that Edward, Duke of
Kent, the father of our beloved Queen Victoria, was in Canada, and held
military command of the troops. The day after the assembling of the
Legislature, the Assembly presented him with a most cordial and
affectionate address, as did subsequently the Legislative Council,
clergy, and citizens of Quebec, Montreal, and Three Rivers, styling the
prince "the son of the best of sovereigns." The prince delighted all by
his answers, his amiable manners and exemplary conduct. All were
especially delighted with his declared disapprobation of the terms _the
King's old and new subjects; French and English inhabitants_. He said
all were "the King's Canadian subjects."[163]
Lord Dorchester transmitted to the Assembly, on the 29th of April, 1794,
a message peculiarly interesting from its being the first financial
statement laid before the Legislature of Lower Canada. The message
commences: "The Governor has given directions for laying before the
House of Assembly an account of the provincial revenue of the Crown from
the commencement of a new Constitution to the 10th of January,
1794."[164]
The House, by an address, thanked his Excellency for the message and
papers accompanying it; they observed that they saw in it an additional
proof of the paternal solicitude of his Majesty to ease the burdens of
his subjects, and of his Excellency's anxiety to promote the interests
of this province; and that the magnitude and utility of the objects
recommended to their consideration could not fail engaging their serious
attention as soon as the important matters now before them, and in a
state of progression, were accomplished.[165]
In closing the session, the 31st of May, 1794, Lord Dorchester assented,
in the King's name, to five Bills, reserving the Judicature Bill for the
royal pleasure (which was approved and became law the following
December), and one for appointing Commissioners to treat with
Commissioners on behalf of Upper Canada, relating to duties and
drawbacks to be allowed to that province on importations through the
lower province. The closing speech of his Excellency, among other
things, contained the following words:
"I have no doubt that, on returning to your respective homes, you will
zealously diffuse among all ranks of people those principles of justice,
patriotism, and loyalty which have distinguished your public labours
during this session, and that you will use your best exertions to find
out and bring to justice those evil-disposed persons who, by
inflammatory discourses, or the spreading of seditious writings,
endeavour to deceive the unwary and disturb the peace and good order of
society; and that you will avail yourselves of every opportunity to
convince your fellow-subjects that the blessings they enjoy under a
truly free and happy Constitution can be preserved only by a due
obedience to the laws, all breaches of which are the more inexcusable as
the Constitution itself has provided for the safe and easy repeal or
modification of such as may not answer the good intentions of the
Legislature."
The interval between the close of the second and the opening of the
third session of the Legislature, from the 31st of May, 1794, to 5th of
January, 1795, quiet and contentment prevailed in the province; and the
short speech of Lord Dorchester (for his speeches were always short and
to the point) at the opening of this third Session was chiefly one of
congratulation, commendation and suggestion. Among other things he
said:
"Gentlemen, I shall order to be laid before you a statement of the
provincial revenues of the Crown for the last year, together with such
part of the expenditure as may enable you to estimate the ways and means
for the most necessary supplies, in bringing forward which you will keep
in view the advantages of providing for the public exigencies by a
prudent restraint on luxuries, and by regulations which may, at the same
time, encourage and extend commerce.
"Gentlemen, the judges and law officers of the Crown have been directed
to draw up and report their opinion on the subject of your address to me
on the 28th of May last" (this related to the establishment of forms of
proceeding in the courts of justice, and a table of fees to which the
different civil officers, advocates, notaries, and land surveyors should
be entitled in their respective offices); "and I have much satisfaction
in perceiving this early disposition on your part to prevent and guard
against abuses which might impede the course of justice, or give rise to
customs that would establish oppressive demands, and gradually efface
from our minds a due sense of their unwarrantable origin.
"Your own disinterested conduct in your legislative capacity; your
zealous endeavours to promote a general obedience to the laws, connected
with a benevolent attention to the interests of the subject, form a
solid foundation for government, and afford me great hopes that our new
Constitution will be firmly established, and ensure, for ages to come,
the happiness of the people."
Referring to this speech of Lord Dorchester, Mr. Christie well remarks:
"The foresight, the rectitude, the wisdom of this most upright man and
virtuous governor, cannot fail to strike the reader, and command his
respect and admiration."
As might be expected, the address of the House of Assembly in answer to
the Governor's speech was equally cordial and assuring, concluding with
the following words:
"It is highly flattering to us that our conduct in our legislative
capacity has met with your Excellency's approbation. Being thoroughly
sensible of the happiness we enjoy under the free and liberal
Constitution which has been granted to us by the parent state, under
your Excellency's prudent and wise administration, we will continue to
exert our most zealous endeavours to promote a general obedience to the
laws, and to establish that Constitution in such a manner as may ensure
for ages to come the happiness of the people."
On the 16th of February, 1795, the Governor sent a message to the
Assembly, transmitting "the accounts of the provincial scheme of the
Crown from the 6th of January, 1794, to the 5th of January, 1795, also
of the civil expenditure for the same period."[166]
The Commissioners appointed under the Act of the previous session, to
treat with Commissioners on behalf of Upper Canada concerning duties and
drawbacks to be allowed in favour of that province, reported that they
had met and finally adjusted with them the sum to be reimbursed to Upper
Canada for 1793 and 1794.[167]
Several important Acts were passed this session relating to revenue,
defraying the charges for the administration, the support of the civil
government, and for other purposes. On the 7th of May, his Excellency
prorogued the Legislature with a speech which contained the following
paragraphs:
"Gentlemen, I cannot put an end to this session of our Provincial
Parliament without expressing my approbation and thanks for that zeal
for the public welfare which has distinguished all your proceedings.
"Gentlemen of the House of Assembly, the cheerfulness with which you
have granted a supply towards defraying the civil expenditure of the
province gives me great satisfaction; the judicious choice you have made
of the means for this purpose, evinces a tender regard for the interests
and condition of this country; and the unanimity in this tribute of
gratitude and attachment to the King's government cannot but be highly
pleasing to his Majesty."
The fourth and last session of this Parliament was summoned for the 20th
of November, 1795, and continued until the 7th of May, 1796, during
which twelve Bills were passed that received the royal assent. In his
opening speech, his Excellency expressed his "great satisfaction to
observe, during the present session, a continuance of the same zealous
attention to their legislative duties, and to the general interests of
the province, which he had occasion to notice in their former
proceedings." His concluding words were:
"Gentlemen of the Legislative Council, and Gentlemen of the House of
Assembly, in expressing my approbation of your proceedings, I must
further observe that the unanimity, loyalty, and disinterestedness
manifested by this first Provincial Parliament of Lower Canada, have
never been surpassed in any of his Majesty's provincial dominions; and I
feel convinced that the prosperity and happiness of this country will
continue to increase in proportion as succeeding Parliaments shall
follow your laudable example."
Thus ended the first Parliament of Lower Canada; thus was inaugurated
and consolidated its government, which, without the strife of
partizanship or the machinery of party, was pure, just, mild,
economical, patriotic, and progressive.
Thus also ended, in the course of a few weeks, Lord Dorchester's
connection with Canada; for having obtained his Majesty's leave of
absence, he embarked with his family for England the 9th of July, 1796.
He was far advanced in life; he had been, with few interruptions,
connected with Canada, as officer, military commander, and governor,
more than thirty-six years. He was with General Wolfe at the siege and
taking of Quebec in 1759, where he was wounded; he was colonel of the
Grenadiers, and quartermaster-general of Wolfe's army. In the various
capacities in which he served, whether as governor or commander-in-chief
or diplomatist, he was equally distinguished for his courage and
prudence, his justice and humanity, as well as for his many social and
private virtues.[168]
His departure from Canada was a matter of universal regret. Farewell
addresses were presented to him by the citizens of Quebec, Montreal, and
other places--all expressing to him the highest respect and warmest
gratitude for his long and valuable services to Canada. The general
spirit of these addresses may be inferred from the following
expressions:
"Having experienced for many years your lordship's mild and auspicious
administration of his Majesty's Government, and being aware that during
that period the resources, prosperity, and happiness of this province
have increased in a degree almost unequalled, we, the inhabitants of the
city of Quebec, respectfully request your lordship to accept our sincere
and most grateful thanks and acknowledgments.
"The length of your residence in the province; the advantages derived to
our society from the example of private virtues shown by yourself and
your family; your lordship's uniform prudent and paternal attention,
under every change of time and circumstance, to the true interests of
his Majesty's subjects entrusted to your immediate care, and that
gratitude which we feel (and must be permitted to repeat), excite in our
minds the warmest sentiments of personal attachment, of which allow us
to tender you the strongest assurance.
"Under these impressions, we view your lordship's intended departure
with the deepest regret; and submitting to your determination to leave
us with unfeigned reluctance, we entreat you to accept our most sincere
wishes for the future prosperity of yourself and all your family."
In the Montreal address we have the following expressions of sentiment
and feelings:
"The inhabitants of Montreal, penetrated with gratitude for the
happiness enjoyed by them under your lordship's administration of the
government of this province during a great number of years, embrace the
present opportunity of your intended departure for Great Britain to
entreat you to receive their humble acknowledgments and accept their
most sincere wishes for your health and prosperity, and for that of all
your family.
"The prudence and moderation which distinguished your conduct in the
province assured internal peace and tranquillity, and in reflecting
infinite honour on your lordship, have fully justified the confidence
reposed in you by our august Sovereign, and assured to you the
affections of the inhabitants."
The grateful and affectionate answers of Lord Dorchester to both
addresses may be easily conceived. The comparatively happy state of
things indicated by these addresses continued, with interruptions, for
about ten years after Lord Dorchester's departure.
Lord Dorchester was succeeded by General Prescott, who became
lieutenant-governor, until he was relieved the 31st of July, 1799, by
the appointment of Sir Robert S. Milnes, who acted as lieutenant-governor
of the province during the ensuing six years, when the senior Executive
Councillor, Thomas Dunn, succeeded to the administration of the government
for two years, until the appointment, in 1807, of Sir James Craig as
lieutenant-governor and commander-in-chief, under whose administration
the reign of discord and strife of race became predominant, with the
natural results which in long years afterwards ensued. These matters,
however, do not come within the province of my history of the Loyalists
of America.
But it is to be observed that though the French had much to complain of,
having scarcely any representation in the Legislative Council, none in
the Executive, and none in the Provincial Board of Education, called the
"Royal Institution," which had the care of education in the
province,[169] and therefore had to depend alone upon their own elected
representatives in the House of Assembly for the protection of their
rights and feelings; yet they evinced a loyalty through all these years,
and through the war of 1812-1815, not excelled by the British
inhabitants of Lower Canada, or of any other colony, notwithstanding the
efforts of French and American emissaries to create disaffection in the
province. A remarkable illustration of the loyalty of the French in
Lower Canada occurred in 1805: "The horrors of the French revolution had
passed by, but Great Britain and France were still engaged in a
desperate war. By land, on the continent of Europe, the French, under
Napoleon I., were everywhere victorious against the countries in
alliance with Great Britain. But England by sea was more than a match
for France; and on October 21st, 1805, won the battle of _Trafalgar_, by
which the French naval power was destroyed. The news of this victory
reached Canada early in January, 1806. The Canadians of French origin
immediately showed that they felt less sympathy for their own race, and
less pride in its military prowess, than gratification at the naval
success of the empire of which they formed a part. They indulged in
patriotic songs, and testified their interest by illuminations and other
modes of rejoicing."[170]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 151: Bancroft, Vol. VII., Chap. xiv., pp. 157, 158.]
[Footnote 152: "The excitement in England and Canada on the passage of
the Act was, however, only a breeze compared to the storm of indignation
which it raised in the thirteen other provinces when the news reached
them; and there is no doubt but that the passage of this Act was 'the
last drop' which overflowed the cup of colonial patience, and led
directly to the Declaration of Independence." (Tuttle's History of the
Dominion of Canada, Chap, lix., pp. 295, 296.)]
[Footnote 153: "The provisions of the Quebec Act dissatisfied all
parties when they came to be executed. The French majority, being
represented by less than one-fourth of the number of members in the
Council, thought themselves but little better off than when a purely
military government. The English party considered themselves injured
because the trial by jury, in civil cases, had been taken away. The
absence of a representative form of government, and of the privileges of
the _Habeas Corpus_ Act, made them feel that they were denied the rights
of British subjects.
"Nobody being satisfied, and the Governor (Sir Frederick Haldimand,
whose governorship lasted from 1778 to 1785) being very arbitrary,
discontent reigned in the provinces. There were loud complaints, not
only of the Governor's tyranny, but also that justice was not fairly
administered by the judges in the course of law.
"Many persons, on slight grounds, were thrown into prisons, were sent to
England, and at length, 1785, the unpopular Governor demanded his own
recall.
"The English Government saw that steps must be taken to put an end to
the general discontent. But this could not be done without making such
changes as might satisfy the increasing English and Protestant
population as well as the French and Roman Catholics. Nor could such
changes be made on the instant, or without due preparation. Accordingly,
in the first instance, _trial by jury_ in civil cases, and the law of
_habeas corpus_, was introduced into the province (in 1788). Next it was
determined to procure further and more perfectly reliable information
about all its internal affairs, and find out, it possible, the best
modes of removing the causes of complaint.
"Lastly, as a proof of the desire to deal impartially with the King's
Canadian subjects, it was decided to send out, as governor, one who had
rendered himself acceptable to all classes. This was no other than the
popular Sir Guy Carleton, who had been made a peer with the title of
_Lord Dorchester_, who reached Quebec in October, 1786. During the
succeeding five years, until 1791, when he again departed (for a short
time) to England, the Governor did all in his power to mitigate the bad
feelings growing out of the differences of race, creed and language. In
order to procure for the English Ministers the information they needed
about the internal affairs of the province, he appointed Committees of
Inquiry to inquire into all particulars relating to _commerce,
education, justice_, the _militia_, and the _tenure_ of _lands_; to make
full reports upon these; to suggest changes and improvements by which
existing evils might be remedied." (Dr. Miles' School History of Canada,
Chap. v., pp. 181, 182.)
See also Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap. v., p. 322.]
[Footnote 154: It was the discussion on this Bill which produced the
first separation between Fox and Burke. The mind of Burke was excited to
the highest degree by the principles and horrors of the French
revolution, and he had frequently denounced it with the full force of
his lofty eloquence; while Fox had repeatedly expressed his admiration
of the French revolution. When the Canada Bill was discussed in the
House of Commons, Burke commenced his speech by a philippic against the
republican principles of the revolutionary Government of France; and
concluded by declaring that if by adhering to the British Constitution
would cause his friends to desert him, he would risk all, and, as his
public duty taught him, exclaim in his last words, "Fly from the French
Constitution!" Fox said in a low voice, "There is no loss of friendship,
I hope." "Yes," retorted Burke, "there is a loss of friendship. I know
the price of my conduct. Our friendship is at an end." Such a scene
followed as had seldom, if ever, been witnessed in the House of Commons.
Members were veritably affected by such an open rupture between those
two celebrated statesmen and orators. Fox shed tears; and it was some
time before he could sufficiently command his emotions to reply.]
[Footnote 155: This was an under-estimate of the population of both
provinces. Later and reliable authorities estimate the population of
Lower Canada in 1791 at 150,000, of whom about 15,000 were British; in
1763 the population of Lower Canada was estimated at 65,000; the
population had therefore more than doubled during the twenty-seven years
of English rule. Before 1782, the English-speaking Protestant
inhabitants were very insignificant in number; but after 1782 they
increased rapidly, and are estimated at upwards of 15,000, and by some
writers as high as 30,000 in the year 1791. The great majority of them,
besides, were of classes of people accustomed to think for themselves,
also officers and disbanded soldiers belonging to the army, and
emigrants from the British Isles, who came to make homes for their
families in Canada. (Miles' School History of Canada, Part II., Chap.
v., pp. 183, 184.)
It is stated on the best authorities that 10,000 Loyalist emigrants
arrived in what was afterwards designated Upper Canada, during the year
1783; in 1791 the population of Upper Canada is stated to have been
12,000.]
[Footnote 156: "In June, 1786, Sir Guy Carleton, now raised to the
peerage as Lord Dorchester, was appointed Governor-General of all the
provinces, and Commander-in-Chief of all the forces in British America.
He arrived at Quebec on the 23rd of October, and was joyfully received
by all classes, but especially by the Canadians, with whom he was a
great favourite on account of the mildness and justice with which he had
treated them during his former administrations. At the same time there
also arrived a new Chief Justice for Quebec, Mr. Smith, who had been
Attorney-General for New York, but had been forced to leave on account
of his loyalty to the British Crown." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion
of Canada, Chap. lxv., p. 321.)]
[Footnote 157: "The elections came off during June, and the people
exercised their new privilege with prudence and judgment, returning good
men; and although the elections were warmly contested in some places,
everything passed off quietly. There were fifteen English-speaking
members elected, amongst whom were some of the leading merchants, such
as James McGill, Joseph Frobisher, John Richardson and others, whose
descendants are still amongst our leading citizens. Amongst the French
elected were many of the most prominent seignors, such as Louis De
Salaberry, M.H. De Rouville, Philip Rocheblave, M.E.G.C. De Lotbiniere,
M. La Vatrice and others. Altogether, it is generally claimed that the
first Assembly of Lower Canada was the best the province ever had."
(Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap. lxviii., p. 330.)]
[Footnote 158: The French-speaking members nominated Mr. J.A. Parret
(Panet), a leading advocate of Quebec; and the English party nominated
successively Mr. James McGill, one of the most prominent merchants of
Montreal, and William Grant, of Quebec. The feeling was strong on each
side to have in the Speaker a gentleman of their own language; but Mr.
Parret (Panet) was ultimately chosen by a large majority, to some extent
because _he understood and spoke both languages fluently_. This
gentleman occupied the position of Speaker for upwards of twenty years,
and fully justified the wisdom of the first Assembly in electing
him.--_Ib._, p. 330.
It is singular that in some histories of Canada it should have been
stated that the Speaker elected by the first House of Assembly could
speak no other tongue than the French language. Mr. Archer, in his
History of Canada for the Use of Schools, says: "By a vote of twenty
eight to eighteen, M. Panet, _who could speak no language but his native
French_, was chosen" (p. 269). Mr. Withrow, in his excellent History of
Canada, says: "Mr. Panet, a distinguished advocate, _who spoke no
language but his native French_, was elected Speaker of the Assembly"
(p. 291). The very discussion which took place on the election of
Speaker turned chiefly on the point whether a Speaker should be elected
who could speak one or both languages. Mr. P.L. Panet, brother to Mr.
J.A. Panet, who was elected Speaker, in reply to some of his own
countrymen who advocated the exclusive use of the French language, while
he advocated the ultimate use of the English language alone in the
Legislature and in the courts of law, commenced and concluded his speech
in the following words: "I will explain my mind on the necessity that
the Speaker we are about to choose _should possess and speak equally
well the two languages_."--"I think it is but decent that the Speaker on
whom we may fix our choice be one who can express himself in English
when he addresses himself to the representative of our Sovereign."
(Christie's History of Canada, Vol. I., Chap. iv., pp. 127, 128, in a
note.) Mr. Christie, after stating in the text about "J.A. Panet, Esq.,
an old and eminent advocate of the Quebec bar, returned a member for the
Upper Town of Quebec, was chosen by the Assembly for its Speaker,"
remarks, in a note, before giving the speech of Mr. P.L. Panet quoted
above, that "this excellent man and good citizen (J.A. Panet) served, as
we shall see in proceeding, many years as Speaker, and without other
remuneration or reward than the approbation of his fellow-citizens and
subjects." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion of Canada, Chap. lxvii., p.
127.)]
[Footnote 159: The transmission of this letter occupied _ten weeks_, it
being dated the 9th of February, and reaching Quebec the 25th of April.
In the _Quebec Gazette_ of the 10th of November, 1792, it is stated that
the latest news from Philadelphia and New York was to the 8th of
October, giving accounts of a battle on the Wabash and Arguille rivers,
between an expedition of American forces under General Wilkinson and a
body of Indians, in which the latter were routed. In a notice from the
"General Post Office, Quebec, 17th of November, 1791," information is
given that "a mail for England will be closed at this office on Monday,
the 5th of December next, at four o'clock p.m., to be forwarded by way
of New York, in H.M. packet-boat which will sail from thence in
January." (Christie's History of Canada, Vol. I., Chap. iv., p. 142.)]
[Footnote 160: "Thus ended the first session of the first Parliament of
Lower Canada, and as a whole we may say that the session was a
satisfactory one. The demons of party spirit and of national prejudice
had indeed shown themselves; but only enough to show that they were in
existence, and would become potent agents of discord as the heat of
political contest warmed them into life. The war of races, which had
been going on between the French and English on this continent for over
a century and a half, was not ended by the capitulation and cession of
Canada; only the scene of action was changed from the battle field to
the council chamber, and words and ballots took the place of swords and
bullets. The French Canadians showed at the very commencement of
constitutional government that they considered the French language, the
French people, the French laws, and the French religion, the language,
people, laws, and religion of Canada, and that the English were only
interlopers who had no business there, and with whom they were to
affiliate as little as possible." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion of
Canada, Chap. lxviii., p. 332.)
With the exception of the first sentence, we have no sympathy with the
spirit or sentiment of the above quoted passage. The addresses to the
Governor and the King show that the French did not regard the British as
intruders, but as the legitimate rulers of the country, to whom they
expressed all possible respect and loyalty. All that they asked on the
question of language was, that in legislative and judicial proceedings
the French language might be equally used with the English language; and
was this unreasonable on the part of those who then comprised
nine-tenths of the population, and whose laws and exercise of worship
had been guaranteed by the articles of capitulation and the Quebec Act
of 1774?]
[Footnote 161: "The Provincial Parliament met again at Quebec on the
11th of November, 1793, and was opened by Lord Dorchester, who had
arrived at Quebec from England on the 24th of September, and re-assumed
the government; his Excellency Major-General Clarke returning to
England, bearing with him the best wishes of those whose Constitution he
had fairly started, and put in operation to their satisfaction. His
government had been popular, and he received several flattering
addresses at departing.
"Lord Dorchester's return was cordially welcomed, a general illumination
taking place at Quebec the evening of his arrival." (Christie's History
of Canada, Chap. v., p. 145.)
"The great French revolution, causing France such awful scenes of
distress and bloodshed as the world had never seen before, was in
progress. It made the Canadians feel that their transfer to the Crown of
England now saved them from innumerable evils which would have been
their lot had Canada been again restored to France.
"Lord Dorchester's popularity and personal influence were made useful in
preventing the people of the provinces from being misled by seditious
persons who came from France on purpose to tamper with them." (Miles'
School History of Canada, Part Third, Chap. i., p. 190.)
"All Europe was engaged in war, and the emissaries of the French
republic were busily at work trying to gain sympathy in the United
States, and stir up that country to war with England--an effort which
would probably have succeeded had it not been for the firmness of
Washington. The consul for France in the United States was also
endeavouring to spread republican ideas in Canada, to incite the people
to revolt against British authority, and to declare themselves in favour
of the republic. It was no wonder then that the great bulk of the
law-abiding and peace-loving citizens of Canada welcomed Lord Dorchester
with delight--one who had for so many years been associated in their
recollections with peace and prosperity, and who had successfully
resisted the attack of the only foe who had assailed Quebec during his
many administrations." (Tuttle, Chap. lxviii., p. 333.)]
[Footnote 162: It appears by a proclamation of Lord Dorchester, dated
the 26th of November, a fortnight after the commencement of the session
of the Legislature, that there were emissaries of France and others in
the province, who were busy in propagating among the inhabitants the
revolutionary principles of the infidel and bloody rulers of France. He
says: "Whereas divers evil-disposed persons had lately manifested
seditious and wicked attempts to alienate the affections of his
Majesty's loyal subjects by false representations of the cause and
conduct of the persons at present exercising supreme authority in
France, and particularly certain foreigners, being alien enemies, who
are lurking and lie concealed in various parts of this province, _acting
in concert with persons in foreign dominions_ (evidently alluding to
parties in the United States), with a view to forward the criminal
purposes of such persons, enemies of the peace and happiness of the
inhabitants of this province, and of all religion, government, and
order." His Excellency therefore called upon all magistrates, captains
of militia, peace-officers, and others of his Majesty's good subjects
throughout the province, to be vigilant, and to do their utmost to
discover and secure all and every person who might hold seditious
discourses, or utter treasonable words, spread false news, publish or
distribute libellous papers, written or printed, tending to excite
discontent or lessen the affections of his Majesty's subjects, or in any
manner to disturb the peace and happiness under his Majesty's government
in this colony, etc.]
[Footnote 163: "The prince, shortly after this, receiving notice of his
promotion to the rank of major-general, and appointment to a command in
the West Indies, was presented, previous to his departure from Quebec,
with several congratulatory letters of a most gratifying character. The
Legislative Council, the Roman Catholic clergy, the citizens of Quebec,
and the burgesses of William Henry paid his Royal Highness spontaneous
respects in this manner, to whom he responded feelingly and
affectionately, for the spontaneous proofs of esteem which in parting
they gave him; and which in truth were not the effusions of adulation,
but an homage of a grateful people to the intrinsic virtues and the
social and manly character of a son of, as he was truly called, 'the
best of sovereigns.'" (Christie's History of Canada, Vol I., Chap. v.,
p. 140.)]
[Footnote 164: The account transmitted was under six heads:
1. "The casual and territorial revenue established prior to the
conquest, which his Majesty has been most graciously pleased to order to
be applied towards defraying the civil expenses of the province."
2. "The duties payable to his Majesty under the Act of the 14th of his
reign, chap. 88 (the 'Quebec Act'), on articles imported into the
province of Quebec, and on licenses to persons for retailing spirituous
liquors."
3. "The duties imposed by the Provincial Legislature, with the
appropriation and balance."
4. "Amount of cash received from fines and forfeitures imposed by the
courts of justice."
5. "The naval officers' returns inwards since the division of the
province, which were originally intended as a check on the customs, but
seem not to answer the end imposed."
6. "A statement of the monies taken out of the pocket of the subject on
this account; its progress and diminution before it lodges in the public
coffers, with the after diminution on account of the collection, that
every circumstance of this important business may be constantly before
their eyes; that in the outset of the Constitution, and its progress,
they may guard this important branch from those corruptions and abuses
which have brought so many miseries on other nations."]
[Footnote 165: Christie's History of Canada, Vol. I., Chap. v., where
the accounts referred to are given in detail.]
[Footnote 166: This return contained all the accounts transmitted the
year before, under the six heads mentioned in a previous note, page 298,
(Footnote 164: above) and other accounts under fourteen additional heads,
the eighth of which is as follows:
"No. 8. Estimate of such part of the civil expenditure for the ensuing
year as may enable the House of Assembly to calculate the ways and means
for the most necessary supplies; all the pensions, amounting to £1,782
6s. 6d. sterling, though chiefly granted for services rendered in
Canada, are deducted, these services being considered as rendered to the
empire at large; it is from thence, therefore, their rewards, with other
acts of benevolence, may be expected to flow. The salaries of sundry
officers, to the amount of £782 10s., appearing to belong to the
military rather than the civil expenditure, are also deducted."]
[Footnote 167: The following extract from their report illustrates the
amicable spirit in which the Commissioners of the two provinces entered
upon their work and arranged the matters committed to their trust:
"The Commissioners, as well as those for Upper Canada, being authorized
to enter into an agreement for a further period, and being equally
desirous to treat on the subject, which if unprovided for might give
rise to difficulties hereafter; being at the same time most solicitous
on both sides to preserve the harmony and cordiality which prevail
between the two provinces, the article of the provisional agreement for
two years was cheerfully assented to. By that article the province of
Upper Canada is entitled to one-eighth part of the revenue already
payable on goods, wares, or merchandise coming into Lower Canada, under
an Act of the Legislature thereof; and to assure the most perfect
freedom of trade with the sister province, it is provided that no
imposts or duties shall be imposed or shall be laid by Upper Canada,
which renders unnecessary the establishing of Custom-houses on the line
which divides the two provinces, but saves to both an expense which, in
all probability, would far exceed any trifle of revenue that this
agreement may take from one or the other of the provinces more than
their legitimate proportion."]
[Footnote 168: The conduct and character of Lord Dorchester as governor
and commander-in-chief of the army may be inferred from the following
among many other notices in the Index to Bancroft's History of the
United States, Vol. X., p. 616:
"Carleton, Guy, afterwards Lord Dorchester, colonel of Grenadiers in
Wolfe's army; is wounded; is at Havana (one of the commanders in taking
it); Governor of Canada; has full authority to arm and employ the
Canadians and Indians against the Americans; abhors the scheme; takes
measures for the defence of the province; the command of Canada assigned
to him, he will not turn the savages loose on the frontier; returns no
answer to Montgomery's summons; repels the assault made by that general;
is lenient to his prisoners; his humanity to sick Americans left behind;
blamed for restraining the Indians; restrains the ravages of the
Indians; the King and Ministers are displeased at this; Carleton
prepares to invade the United States; is displeased at being superseded
by Burgoyne; refuses to assist Burgoyne; is complained of by that
officer; supersedes Clinton in America; his humanity; restrains Indian
hostility."]
[Footnote 169: "It was also one of the grievances in Lower Canada that
Protestants alone were appointed Executive Councillors, and that while
the chief Protestant ecclesiastic was admitted, the Roman Catholic
Church was not allowed to be represented. Great offence was also caused
by this to the great majority of the inhabitants, which was made to be
felt the more keenly by the determination of the Council not to
acknowledge the title, or even existence, of a Roman Catholic bishop in
the province." (Miles' School History of Canada, Part III., Chap. ii.,
pp. 195, 196.)]
[Footnote 170: Miles' School History of Canada, Part III., Chap. i., pp.
192, 193.]
CHAPTER XLVI.
GOVERNMENT OF UPPER CANADA.
The Constitution of Upper Canada was the same as that of Lower,
established by the same _Constitutional Act of 1791_, the Act 31 George
III., Chapter 31.
Before the Constitution of Upper Canada was established, when it formed
part of the province of Quebec, Lord Dorchester, by proclamation,
divided the now western part of the province, afterwards Upper Canada,
into four districts with German names--namely, _Lunenburg_, extending
from the River Ottawa to Gananoque; _Mecklenburg_, extending from
Gananoque to the Trent; _Nassau_, extending from the Trent to Long
Point, on Lake Erie; and _Hesse_, including the rest of the western part
of Upper Canada to the Lake St. Clair. To each of these four districts a
judge and a sheriff were appointed, who administered justice by means of
Courts of Common Pleas.
Under the new Constitution, Upper Canada, like Lower Canada, had a
Legislature consisting of a Governor, appointed by the Crown, and
responsible only to it; a Legislative Council, appointed by the Crown,
and the members appointed for life; and a Legislative Assembly, elected
by the freeholders of the country. The Assembly was to be elected once
in four years, but might be elected oftener if dissolved by the
Governor, and was empowered to raise a revenue for public services,
roads, bridges, schools, etc.; the Legislative Council consisted of
seven members, appointed for life by the Crown; the House of Assembly
consisted of sixteen members, elected by the people.
By usage and by approbation of the Imperial Government, though not by
the provisions of the Constitutional Act, the Lieutenant-Governor was
assisted, mostly ruled, by an Executive Council, consisting for the most
part of salaried officers, judges, and members of the Legislative
Council, who were not responsible either to the Governor or to the
Legislative Council, or to the House of Assembly--an independent,
irresponsible body--an oligarchy which exercised great power, was very
intolerant, and became very odious.
The first Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada was General John Graves
Simcoe, who had commanded the Queen's Rangers in the revolutionary war;
he was a landed gentleman, elected to the British House of Commons, in
which he supported the Constitutional Act of 1791, and afterwards
accepted the office of Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada created by
that Act, and did all in his power to give beneficial effect to it. He
arrived in Upper Canada the 8th of July, 1792, when the members of the
Executive and Legislative Councils were sworn in at Kingston, and writs
were issued for the election of members of the Legislative Assembly.
After much hesitation and perplexity, the seat of government was first
established at a village then called Newark, now Niagara, at the mouth
of the Niagara River, where the Governor built a small frame house which
had to serve as a Parliament House, as well as residence for the
Lieutenant-Governor. The Governor, with the usual state and ceremony,
opened the first session of the first Parliament of Upper Canada the
17th of September, 1792. There were present three members of the
Legislative Council and five members of the House of Assembly. The
members of the Assembly have been represented as "plain, home-spun clad
farmers and merchants, from the plough and the store." The members of
the Legislature have always, for the most part, been such from that day
to this, but many of the members of the first Parliament of Upper Canada
had possessed respectable, and some of them luxurious homes, from which
they had been exiled by narrow-minded and bitter enemies; they had
fought on battle fields for the country whose forests they now burned
and felled; their home-spun garments were some of the fruits of their
own industry, and that of their wives and daughters. Eight years had
elapsed since 10,000 of these United Empire Loyalists, driven from their
homes in the States, came into the dense wilderness of Upper Canada, to
hew out homes for themselves and their families in the vast solitude,
the silence of which was only broken by the barking of the fox, the howl
of the wolf and the growl of the bear, and the occasional whoop of the
Indian.[171]
The population of Upper Canada was, in 1792, about 12,000 souls. The
Loyalist pioneers of Upper Canada fought as bravely against privations,
hardships, and dangers in founding their forest homes, as they had done
in the Royal ranks in the defence of the unity of the empire. During the
first ten years of their hard enterprise and labours, the forest began
to yield to the axe of industry, and the little cabins, and clearings,
and growing crops gave evidence of human life and activity; but there
were no towns or large settlements; the inhabitants were scattered in
little groups, or isolated log-houses, along the north shores of the
River St. Lawrence, Lakes Ontario and Erie, and of the Detroit river,
the only gathering of houses or villages being Kingston, Newark, and
Amherstburg.
The first session of the first Parliament of Upper Canada lasted only
four weeks, commencing the 17th of September, and closing the 15th of
October, 1792; the first session of the Parliament of Lower Canada
lasted nearly five months--from the 17th of December, 1792, to the 9th
of May, 1793. During these nearly five months, the Legislature of Lower
Canada passed eight Bills, all well prepared and useful, but with much
ceremony and delay from the polite French seignors; the Legislature of
Upper Canada, in their session of four weeks, also passed eight Bills,
indicating no haste, well prepared, and of importance and useful. The
Bills passed provided for the introduction of English law; the trial by
jury; for the charge of millers, limiting their allowance for grinding
and bolting grain to the rate of one bushel for every twelve bushels
ground; for the easy recovery of small debts; for the change of the
German names of the four districts into which Lord Dorchester had
divided what now constituted Upper Canada, and granted to the United
Empire Loyalists. _Lunenburg_, extending from the River Ottawa to the
River Gananoque, was now called the _Eastern District; Mecklenburg_,
extending from Gananoque to the River Trent, was called the _Middle_ or
_Midland District; Nassau_, extending from the Trent to Long Point, on
Lake Erie, was called the _Home_ or _Niagara District_; and _Hesse_,
embracing the rest of Canada, west to the Lake St. Clair, was called the
_Western_ or _Detroit District_. These districts were again divided into
twelve counties. An Act was also passed to erect a jail and court-house
in each district.
Governor Simcoe closed this session of the Parliament the 15th of
October, 1792, and after complimenting both Houses on the business-like
manner in which they had performed their legislative duties, concluded
his proroguing speech with the following significant words:
"I cannot dismiss you without earnestly desiring you to promote, by
precept and example, regular habits of piety and morality, the surest
foundations of all private and public felicity; and at this juncture I
particularly recommend you to explain _that this province is signally
blessed, not with a mutilated Constitution, but with a Constitution
which has stood the test of experience, and is the very image and
transcript of that of Great Britain_, by which she has long established
and secured to her subjects as much freedom and happiness as is possible
to be enjoyed under the subordination necessary to civilized society."
When Governor Simcoe selected Newark as the seat of government, he
thought that Fort Niagara, on the opposite side of the river, would be
ceded to England, as it was then occupied by a British garrison; but
when he found that the Niagara river was to be the boundary line between
Great Britain and the United States, and that the British garrison was
to be withdrawn from Fort Niagara, he judged it not wise that the
capital of Upper Canada should be within reach of the guns of an
American fort. He made a tour through the wilderness of the western
peninsula, and proposed to found a new London for the Canadian capital,
on the banks of what he then called the River Thames, the site of the
present city of London, in the heart of the western district, and secure
from invasion; but Lord Dorchester preferred Kingston, which he had made
the principal naval and military station of the province. To this
Governor Simcoe objected. It was at length agreed to select _York_, as
it was then called, the site of an old French fort. Though the
surrounding land was low and swampy, the harbour was excellent.
Governor Simcoe removed to the new capital before a house was built in
it, and lodged some time in a large canvas tent, pitched on the site of
the old fort, at the west end of the bay. He employed the Queen's
Rangers, who had accompanied him, to open a main road--Yonge
Street--from York to Lake Simcoe, called after the Governor himself. He
proposed to open a direct communication between Lakes Ontario and Huron,
and then with the Ottawa; and projected an enlightened and vigorous
policy for promoting the development of the country, its agriculture,
fisheries, population, trade, etc.; but before he had time to mature and
give effect to his plans, he was suddenly removed, in 1796, from the
government of Upper Canada to that of St. Domingo, in the West Indies.
He was succeeded in the government by the senior member of the Executive
Council, the Hon. Peter Russel, who improved his two years'
administration, not by carrying out the patriotic plans of his
predecessor, but by granting lands to himself and his friends for
speculation, to the impediment of settlements and often to the
disappointment and wrong of real settlers, whose applications for lands
were rejected, which were afterwards granted to the land-speculating
friends of the Governor, or to himself--whose grants to himself are said
to have run something on this wise: "I, Peter Russel, Lieutenant-Governor,
etc., do grant to you, Peter Russel, etc."[172]
General Simcoe zealously encouraged emigration to and settlement in the
country, and during the four years of his administration the population
increased to 30,000. There was a very considerable emigration from the
United States of persons who did not like the new system of government
there, and to whom the first Loyalist settlers had written, or visited,
giving a favourable account of the climate and productiveness of the
country.
Though the seat of government was removed to Toronto in 1795, the
Parliament continued to meet at Niagara until 1797. During its
successive sessions at Niagara (then Newark), the Parliament passed Acts
for the civil and municipal administration of the country, the
construction of roads, fixing duties on goods imported from England and
the United States, etc., etc. The Legislature gave a reward of twenty
and ten shillings respectively for the heads or scalps of wolves and
bears, an Act suggestive of the exposures of the early settlers; and
allowed the members of the Assembly ten shillings per day each. In the
second session, the first Parliament passed an Act forbidding the
introduction of slavery into the province--ten years in advance of Lower
Canada on this subject.
Major-General Hunter succeeded the Hon. Peter Russel, in 1799, as
Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada. He possessed little energy or
enterprise, and did little or nothing except as advised by his Executive
Council of five; so that the Government of Upper Canada was practically
an oligarchy, irresponsible alike to Governor and people, each member
receiving £100 per annum as Councillor, besides the lands he was able to
obtain. Yet the Government, upon the whole, was satisfactory to the
country, and commanded for many years the support of its elected
representatives.
When General Hunter first met the Parliament in Toronto, the 2nd of
June, 1800, the growth of Upper Canada having been rapid, its population
now numbered upwards of 50,000. This year, 1800, the Legislature passed
an Act prohibiting the sale of spirituous liquors to the Indians. In
1802, the Legislature of Upper Canada, as had that of Lower Canada,
passed an Act appropriating £750 to encourage the growth of hemp, in
order to render England independent of Russia in the supply of hemp for
cordage for the navy, as was being rapidly the case in the supply of
timber to build ships. As obstructions on the St. Lawrence rendered
communication more difficult between Upper and Lower Canada than with
Albany and New York, articles of commerce from Europe could be more
readily brought in by that route than by the St. Lawrence; a
considerable trade sprang up with the United States, which rendered
necessary the establishment of custom-houses on the frontiers.
Accordingly, ports of entry were established at Cornwall, Brockville,
Kingston, Toronto, Niagara, Queenston, Fort Erie, Turkey Point,
Amherstburg, and Sandwich, the duties being the same on American as on
English goods. The Governor was authorized to appoint collectors, at
salaries not exceeding £100 currency per annum, except when the amount
of duties collected at a port was less than £100, in which case the
collector was allowed one-half of the amount collected in lieu of
salary.
In 1807 Parliament made provision for eight masters of grammar schools,
one for each district, and at a salary of £100 currency ($400) for each
master.
In the meantime emigration continued large. Many of the emigrants were
from the United States. The troubles of '98 in Ireland were followed by
a large Irish emigration to Canada; there were also a considerable
number of Scotch and a few English emigrants; but the larger number of
emigrants were from Ireland and the United States.[174]
The Legislature continued from session to session to pass Bills for the
various improvements of the country; after doing which its members did
not give much attention to politics, but devoted themselves to the
culture and enlargement of their farms, of which their descendants are
at this day reaping large advantages.[175]
Mr. McMullen, in his History of Canada, speaking of the year 1809, says:
"No civilized country in the world was less burdened with taxes than
Canada West at this period. A small direct tax on property, levied by
the District Courts of Session, and not amounting to £3,500 for the
whole country, sufficed for all local expenses. There was no poor rate,
no capitation tax, no tithes, or ecclesiastical rates of any kind.
Instead of a road tax, a few days' statute labour annually sufficed.
Nowhere did the working man find the produce of his labour so little
diminished by exactions of any kind. Canada West literally teemed with
abundance; while its people, unlike the early French and Americans, had
nothing to fear from the red man, and enjoyed the increase of the earth
in peace."
I have thus given a brief narrative of the formation of the government
of Upper Canada, and of the first seventeen years of its operations,
down to the period when the anticipated hostilities between Great
Britain and the United States--the latter being the tools of Napoleon to
rescue Canada from Great Britain--rendered preparation necessary on the
part of the Loyalists of Canada to defend their country and homes
against foreign invasion.
I have also given some account of the first settlement of the country,
and the privations and hardships of the first settlers. But believing
that a narrative from a single pen could not do justice to this subject,
or could present to the reader, in so vivid and interesting a light, the
character, sufferings, courage, and enterprise of our country's
forefathers and founders, as narratives from themselves, with the
diversity of style characteristic of communications from various
sources, I have therefore inserted in Chapter XLI. those interesting
papers transmitted to me from time to time, at my request, during the
last twenty years.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 171: But the Indians were friendly to white settlers, as they
have always been. Almost the entire Mohawk tribe, with other loyalist
Indians, under their chief, Joseph Brant, followed the fortunes of their
white loyalist brethren, and settled on their reservation on the Grand
River. Brant had been educated in a Christian school in Philadelphia;
had a comfortable home, and lived respectably on the Mohawk river before
the American revolution; had entertained missionaries, and had assisted
one of them in translating a part of the New Testament and Prayer Book
into the Mohawk language. Colonel Stone, in his "Life of Brant" and the
"History of the Border Wars of the American Revolution," has nobly
vindicated the character of Brant, and of his brethren of the Six
Nations, from the misrepresentations and calumnies of American
historians. Brant was a member of the Church of England, and built a
church in his settlement in 1786, in which was placed the first church
bell ever heard in Upper Canada.]
[Footnote 172: "During Colonel Simcoe's administration he had been
exceedingly careful with regard to the distribution of lands; but
immediately on his departure, irregularities began to creep into the
Crown Land Department, just as it had in Lower Canada, and great
injustice was done to the actual settlers. Large tracts of the most
eligible sites were seized upon by Government officials and speculators,
and the actual settlers found themselves in many instances thrust into
out-of-the-way corners, and cut off from intercourse with any near
neighbours for want of roads." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion of
Canada, Chap. lxxxiii., p. 387.)
"On the removal of Governor Simcoe,[173] of his wise schemes fell
through. Land designed for settlements was seized by speculators,
especially in the vicinity of Toronto, and the general development of
the country was greatly retarded." (Withrow's History of Canada, Chap,
xvi., p. 293.)
Scarcely any--if any--of these early land speculators had served as
_United Empire Loyalists_ during the revolutionary war; and their
descendants, if existing, are as little known as if their fathers had
never lived.]
[Footnote 173: Lord Dorchester did not endorse Governor Simcoe's policy,
as the latter had not concurred with the former in giving German names
to the four first districts of Upper Canada, and in the selection of the
seat of government. The American Government represented Governor Simcoe
as exciting the Iroquois or Mohawks, both in Canada and Western New
York, against it--representations in which there was not a shadow of
truth, though Americans were endeavouring to excite disaffection to the
British Government and sympathy with republican France against England
in both Upper and Lower Canada, especially in the latter province. But
by these representations, and those of disappointed local speculators,
the Home Government removed Governor Simcoe, the father of
constitutional, pure, and progressive government in Upper Canada.]
[Footnote 174: "In Upper as well as Lower Canada the first sixteen
years' experience of the new Constitution had been very encouraging. All
concerned in working it out during that period kept as clear as possible
from causes of discord. The consequence was that harmony and good
progress marked the early career of the province." (Miles' School
History of Canada, Part III., Chap. i., pp. 193, 194.)]
[Footnote 175: "Meanwhile the country had steadily prospered,
undisturbed in its forest isolation by the great European war, which was
deluging with blood a hundred battle fields and desolating thousands of
homes. By the year 1809, the population had increased to about 70,000.
Taxes were exceedingly light. The Customs revenue, derived principally
from the imports of groceries--for clothing was chiefly
home-spun--amounted to £7,000." (Withrow's History of Canada, Chap.
xxi., p. 296.)]
CHAPTER XLVII.
WAR BY THE UNITED STATES AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN, FROM 1812 TO
1815--INTRODUCTORY AND GENERAL REMARKS.
The war between Great Britain and the United States, from 1812 to 1815,
furnishes the strongest example of the present century, or of any age or
country, of the attachment of a people to their mother country, and of
their determination, at whatever sacrifice and against whatever
disparity, to maintain the national life of their connection with it.
The true spirit of _the Loyalists of America_ was never exhibited with
greater force and brilliancy than during the war of 1812-1815.
England was engaged in a death struggle for the independence of the
continental nations of Europe and the rights of mankind. At the darkest
hour of that eventful contest, when the continent was drenched with the
blood of nations, and the Tyrant had his feet upon their neck, and
England alone stood erect, taxing her resources to the utmost and
shedding her best blood for human freedom, the Democratic party in the
United States--the ever anti-British party--the pro-slavery party--the
party in the United States least subordinate to law and most inimical to
liberty--at such a crisis such a party declared war against Britain, and
forthwith invaded Canada, before the declaration of war was known in
England.
At that time the population of Lower Canada was 225,000 souls--200,000
of whom were French; the population of Upper Canada was 75,000; the
population of the United States was upwards of 8,000,000: so that the
population of the _two Canadas_ was to that of the United States as one
to twenty-seven; and the population of _Upper Canada_ was to that of the
United States as one to one hundred and six.
Yet the Canadas, with a frontier of more than 1,000 miles, and aided by
a few regiments of regular soldiers, sent as a mere guard for the
principal cities, from Halifax to Amherstburg, resisted the whole
military power of the United States for two years, at the end of which
not an inch of Canadian ground was in possession of the invaders; and
within six months after England had given freedom and peace to
Europe--chaining its Tyrant to the island rock of Elba, sweeping with
its fleet the coasts of the United States, and sending 16,000 veteran
soldiers to aid the struggling Canadas--the boasting Madison and his
Government sued for peace, without even mentioning the original pretexts
of war, which Great Britain generously granted.
It does not come within our purpose to write a history of this war; we
present only such phases and events of it as will illustrate the
Loyalist spirit and courage of the Canadians, French as well as English,
and even true Americans; for the American settlers in Canada were, with
few exceptions, as loyal subjects and as bold defenders of their adopted
country as the U.E. Loyalists themselves; and even the most virtuous and
intelligent part of the citizens of the United States protested against
the alliance of the Democratic rulers at Washington with the tyrant and
scourge of Europe.
We shall notice, in the first place, the alleged and real causes of the
war; secondly, the preparations for it made by the Governments and
Legislatures of the two Canadas; thirdly, the invasions of each
province, each year, separately, and the battles fought. There were no
less than eleven invasions of the Canadas by the American armies during
the three years of the war, besides naval engagements, and various
incursions of marauding and plundering parties.
CHAPTER XLVIII.
ALLEGED AND REAL CAUSES OF THE WAR.
From the first--from the treaty of peace between Great Britain and the
United States in 1783--there was a large party in the United States
bitterly and actively hostile to England and its colonies; that party
had persecuted and driven the Loyalists from the United States, and
compelled them to seek homes in the Canadian wilderness, and had even
followed them with its enmities in their new abodes; that party had
sympathized with the revolutionists of France, who crimsoned the streets
of Paris with the blood of their Sovereign and fellow-citizens, and who
sent emissaries to Canada to subvert legal authority, and excite the
strife of anarchy and bloodshed. The base of the operations of all the
emissaries of French revolutionists in Canada was for twenty years the
United States, aided directly and indirectly by American sympathizers;
that same party sympathized and even leagued with Napoleon against
England while she was defending the liberties of Europe and of mankind;
it was the same party that in subsequent years aided the rebel Mackenzie
and the rabble Fenians to invade Canada, allowing the United States to
be the base of their organizations, and opening to them the American
arsenals of arms and ammunition; it was the same party that, in
conspiracy with the Tyrant of France and the enemy of human freedom,
declared war against Great Britain in 1812, in order to wrest Canada
from her possession, and make it an appendage of France and the United
States.[176]
The American Government alleged two reasons as the ground of its
declaration of war against Britain: the one was, that the British
Government had issued Orders in Council which injured the American
commerce with other countries; the other was, that the British
Government had infringed the rights of the United States by authorizing
the boarding of American vessels in search of deserters from the English
army and navy, and seizing them.
As to the first of these reasons, namely, the English Orders in Council,
the facts are as follow: "After the annihilation of the naval power of
France at _Trafalgar_ in 1805, by Lord Nelson, the principal
transactions of France at sea were the fitting out and arming of
privateers to prey upon the English merchant vessels and commerce. To
accomplish his purpose more effectually, Napoleon promulgated the
following year after the destruction of his fleet what is called the
Berlin Decree."[177]
"No nation was allowed to trade with any other country in any articles
the growth, produce, or manufactures of any of the British dominions,
all of which, as well as the island of Great Britain itself, were
declared to be in a state of blockade. He appointed residents in every
trading country, and no ship was to be admitted into any of his ports
without a _certification of origin_; that is, of the nature of the goods
they carried, and that no part of these was English. In consequence of
these Decrees, the English commerce, during the months of August,
September, and October, 1807--that part of the year in which the Berlin
Decree of November, 1806, was carried into full effect--was not only
greatly cramped, but lay prostrated on the ground, and motionless,
before a protecting and self-defensive system was adopted by our Orders
in Council."[178]
The British Orders in Council were dated January 7th, 1807, and were a
measure of retaliation for the protection of British commerce in
response to Napoleon's Berlin Decree of the 21st of November, 1806. By
these Orders in Council, "all trade to France or her dependencies was
strictly prohibited; all vessels, of whatever nation, which ventured to
engage in this trade were declared liable to seizure, and France and her
dependencies were thus reduced to that state of blockade with which she
had vainly threatened the British islands. The Orders in Council
admitted but of one exception to this general blockade of the French
empire. The French had declared all vessels liable to seizure which had
touched at a British port; the Orders in Council, to counteract this
provision, declared, on the other hand, that only such ships as were in
that situation should be permitted to sail for France. Thus did the
utter extinction of the foreign trade of France result as a natural
consequence of the very measures of her own Government; measures which
no despotism, how ignorant soever, would have ventured to adopt, had it
not trusted to a power which effectually silenced all popular
opinion."[179]
As France was the aggressor upon the rights of neutrals by the Berlin
Decree, and as the Orders in Council were a defensive retaliation upon
France for her attempt to destroy English commerce, the American
Government should have first remonstrated with France and demanded
reparation; but this was not the case; the outcry of the Madison
partizans was against England alone. It is true some grumbling words
were uttered by some parties against the policy and acts of the French
Government; but mere words to save appearances, not followed up by any
acts; for by a collusion between Napoleon and Madison, it was understood
that the Articles of the Berlin Decree were not intended to apply to
ships of the United States--would not be executed against them--and were
intended to destroy the commerce of Great Britain. An American writer
(Lossing) remarks, "_With a partiality towards the Americans that was
practical friendship_, the French cruisers did not, for a whole year,
interfere with American vessels trading with Great Britain;" and Mr.
Alex. Baring, M.P. (afterwards Lord Ashburton), in his _Inquiry into the
Causes and Consequences of the Orders in Council_, said that _"no
condemnation of an American vessel had ever taken place under it"_.
By this collusion between the Tyrant of Europe and the President of the
United States, the necessities of France were supplied, and the shipping
interests of the United States largely promoted, at the expense of the
commerce and shipping interests of England.
But the collusion, or conspiracy, between Napoleon and Madison were
carried on to weaken the English navy by the desertion of its sailors,
as well as to injure English commerce by connivance in behalf of
American trading vessels. The seduction of deserters from the British
navy, and even army, was carried on successfully on a large scale. The
safety of England consisted chiefly in her navy, which she was
increasing and strengthening by every possible means. Therefore every
skilled sailor was of importance to England, while every practicable
scheme was resorted to by her enemies to induce and facilitate the
desertion of her seamen and soldiers--especially of her seamen, several
thousands of whom were detected and seized on board of American
vessels--constituting as they did the best sailors on board American
merchant vessels, and the vital strength of the French privateers. To
stop this depleting of her naval resources, England put in exercise her
right of boarding vessels of neutral powers in search of deserters from
her navy. The only neutral power in Europe was Sardinia; so that the
United States was the only neutral power that had vessels upon the
ocean; and the President of the United States was conniving against
England with the usurper and oppressor of Europe.
The right of a belligerent power to search the vessels of neutral powers
in search of deserters had never been denied, though the modification of
its exercise had frequently been sought; but under the teachings of
Napoleon, his American pupils now began to exclaim against it as an
infringement of national dignity and rights. The English Government had
directed the exercise of this right with the greatest caution and
courtesy, and only in regard to vessels on board of which, from specific
information, there was reason to believe there were English deserters.
These deserters, on getting smuggled on board of American vessels, would
forthwith take the oath of allegiance to the United States, and be
recognized and claimed as American citizens.[180]
An event now occurred which enabled President Madison to excite his
partizans throughout the United States to a flame of indignation
against England. Information had been received that there were English
deserters on board the American ship _Chesapeake_; the British warship
_Leopard_ sought their restoration, and on being refused fired into the
_Chesapeake_, and recovered the four deserters claimed. The attendant
circumstances being omitted, the simple fact announced by the President
to Congress, that the English warship _Leopard_ had fired into the
American ship _Chesapeake_, and in American waters, killing several
persons, and had seized and carried off four American citizens, produced
the excitement he was anxious to create against England, preparatory to
the war on which he was then determined--in the zenith of Napoleon's
success and power, and in the extremity of England's struggle for her
own existence and the liberties of mankind. The statement of the
American President as to the affair of the ships _Leopard_ and
_Chesapeake_ has been repeated to this day by American historians, and
is used in American school books to illustrate England's arrogance and
cruelty; whereas all the facts of the case prove directly the reverse.
We give the account of the affair from one American writer, who, though
partial, was too honest to omit essential facts, much less to pervert
them; we refer to Dr. Holmes, author of _American Annals_, and quote at
length his account of the affair. He says:
"The frigate _Chesapeake_, being ordered to cruise in the Mediterranean
Sea, under the command of Commodore Barron, sailing from Hampton Roads,
was come up with by the British ship-of-war _Leopard_, one of a
squadron then at anchor within the limits of the United States. An
officer was sent from the _Leopard_ to the _Chesapeake_ with a note from
the captain respecting some deserters from his Britannic Majesty's
ships, supposed to be serving as part of the crew of the _Chesapeake_
and enclosing a copy of an order from Vice-Admiral Berkeley requiring
and directing the commanders of ships and vessels under his command, in
case of meeting with the American frigate at sea, and without the limits
of the United States, to show the order to her captain, and to require
to search his ship for the deserters from certain ships therein named,
and to proceed and search for them; and if a similar demand should be
made by the American, he was permitted to search for deserters from
their service, according to the custom and usage of civilized nations on
terms of amity with each other. Commodore Barron gave an answer that he
knew of no such men as were described; that the recruiting officers for
the _Chesapeake_ had been particularly instructed by the Government,
through him, not to enter any deserters from his Britannic Majesty's
ships; that he knew of none such being in her; that he was instructed
never to permit the crew of any ship under his command to be mustered by
any officers but her own; that he was disposed to preserve harmony, and
hoped his answer would prove satisfactory. The _Leopard_, shortly after
this answer was received by her commander, ranged alongside of the
_Chesapeake_, and commenced a heavy fire upon her. The _Chesapeake_,
unprepared for action, made no resistance, but remained under the fire
of the _Leopard_ from twenty to thirty minutes; when, having suffered
much damage, and lost three men killed and eighteen wounded, Commodore
Barron ordered his colours to be struck, and sent a lieutenant on board
the _Leopard_ to inform her commander that he considered the
_Chesapeake_ her prize. The commander of the _Leopard_ sent an officer
on board, who took possession of the _Chesapeake_, mustered her crew,
and, carrying off four of her men, abandoned the ship. Commodore Barron,
after a communication, by writing, with the commander of the _Leopard_,
finding that the _Chesapeake_ was very much injured, returned, with the
advice of his officers, to Hampton Roads." (American State Papers,
1806-08.)
"On receiving information of this outrage, the President, by
proclamation, interdicted the harbours and waters of the United States
to all armed British vessels, forbade all intercourse with them, and
ordered a sufficient force for the protection of Norfolk, and such other
preparations as the occasion appeared to require. An armed vessel of the
United States was dispatched with instructions to the American Minister
at London to call on the British Government for the satisfaction and
security which the outrage required." (American State Papers, 1806-08,
pp. 183, 184, 248-252.)[181]
Such is the American State Paper account of this affair, published some
years afterwards; and from this it will be seen that what was asked by
the captain of the _Leopard_ was what had been granted by all neutral
nations to belligerents--to seek for and take their own deserters on
board of neutral vessels, in order to prevent neutrals from being, or
suspected of being, in collusion with either belligerent party. The
American Government being in sympathy with the French Government during
the whole of its twenty years' war with England, sought to change and
evade this hitherto undisputed usage of mutually friendly nations in
regard to belligerents. The _Chesapeake_ seems to have been selected to
make up a cause of war with Great Britain, by the warlike proceedings of
the President before communicating with the British Government on the
subject. The American people had nothing but a complete perversion of
the facts of the case until years afterwards.
It is plain from the true version of the affair that the captain of the
_Leopard_ acted courteously and fairly, though in excess of the
authority granted by the British Government; that he offered the same
facilities to the captain of the _Chesapeake_, in regard to examination
for deserters, that he asked himself; that the commander of the
_Chesapeake_ stated what he knew to be untrue when he asserted that
there were no deserters on board the _Chesapeake_, which he knew would
be detected on examination of his crew.
In all the American accounts and discussions on the question, they
ignore the usage or customary law of civilized nations as to neutral or
mutually friendly nations in respect to belligerent powers, and are
silent as to France and England being at war with each other, and that
in encouraging desertions from the English ships, and then claiming them
as American citizens, they were playing into the hands of Bonaparte
against England.
It appears that President Madison, without awaiting or asking
satisfaction or explanation on this affair of the _Leopard_ and
_Chesapeake_, forthwith prohibited the anchoring of British war ships in
American waters, and then sent a special messenger and communication to
the American Minister in London to demand satisfaction of the British
Government for the alleged "outrage" upon the _Chesapeake_. But did the
British Government show the passion and violence of the President of the
United States? Let the American author above quoted be our witness again
on this point. Dr. Holmes says:
"Reparation was made by the British for the attack on the _Chesapeake_.
Augustus J. Foster, the British envoy, informed the Secretary of the
United States that he was instructed to repeat to the American
Government the prompt disavowal made by his Majesty, on being apprised
of the unauthorized act of the officer in command of his naval forces on
the coast of America, whose recall from a highly important and
honourable command immediately ensued, as a mark of his Majesty's
disapprobation; that he was authorized to offer, in addition to that
disavowal on the part of his Majesty, to order the immediate
restoration, as far as circumstances would admit, of the men who [though
deserters], in consequence of Admiral Berkeley's orders, were forcibly
taken out of the _Chesapeake_, to the vessel from which they were taken;
or, if that ship were no longer in commission, to such seaport of the
United States as the American Government may name for the purpose; and
that he was authorized to offer to the American Government a suitable
pecuniary provision for the sufferers in consequence of the attack on
the _Chesapeake_, including the families of those seamen who fell in the
action, and of the wounded survivors. The President acceded to these
propositions; and the officer commanding the _Chesapeake_, then lying in
the harbour of Boston, was instructed to receive the men, who were to be
restored to that ship."--_Ib._, p. 443.
It might be supposed that such a spontaneous, courteous, and just
proceeding on the part of England would have satisfied even the
bellicose President Madison; but he was bent on joining the Tyrant of
Europe in war against England; the American public were kept in
ignorance of the instigating circumstances, and the just and generous
conduct of the British Government in regard to the affair of the
_Leopard_ and the _Chesapeake_, and availed himself of every occurrence
or incident to excite and increase the war feeling in the United States
against England.
An incident soon occurred answerable to President Madison's purpose. A
renegade by the name of _Henry_, who had in youth emigrated from
Ireland, and who had, by the interest of friends, got appointed captain
of militia; but not succeeding in the United States to the extent of his
ambition, emigrated to Montreal, where, by some talents and address, and
professed love of British institutions, he ingratiated himself in the
good graces of the principal persons at Montreal, and commenced his
studies at law there, with a view of qualifying himself for a seat on
the judicial bench of _Upper Canada_, to which he was vain and ambitious
enough to aspire. He at length got access to the Governor-General, Sir
James Craig, into whose confidence he so wormed himself as to obtain a
letter of recognition and recommendation to visit Massachusetts and
other eastern States to ascertain and report upon the state of feeling
there in regard to the sympathy of those States with England in case of
war with England; but neither the British Government nor even Sir James
Craig's Canadian Executive Council had the slightest knowledge of this
confidential epistolary intrigue between his Excellency and the renegade
American militia captain, who professed to be familiar with the politics
and parties of the New England States, where there was vehement
opposition to the democratic and war government of President Madison,
and supposed to cherish a strong leaning to England. While this
unprincipled "Captain Henry" was sauntering in the public-houses and
brothels of Boston, he wrote from time to time letters to Sir James
Craig and other principal persons in Quebec; but the Governor and others
who received his ostentatious and pretentious letters--though amused by
them--derived no more information from his epistles than from the public
newspapers of the day. Henry, however, estimated his own worthless
services of the greatest importance; and failing to get from Sir James
Craig the amount of his demands, he appealed for compensation to the
Government in England. He addressed a memorial to the Earl of Liverpool,
Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, stating his services, and
suggesting that the appointment of Judge Advocate General of Lower
Canada, with the salary of £500 per annum, or a consulate in the United
States, _sine cura_, would be considered by him as a fair discharge of
the obligation of the Government to him for his services. Lord Liverpool
was not disposed to prostitute such favours upon a mercenary and
intriguing vagrant, and referred him to the Government of Lower Canada,
then in charge of Sir George Prevost, who had succeeded Sir James Craig.
Henry knew the little estimate that was placed upon his services in
Canada; he therefore betook himself back to the United States, and
offered his traitorous letters to the American Government for $50,000,
which he obtained, paid out of the United States Secret Service
Fund.[182] President Madison, instead of laying the correspondence
before the British Government for explanation and satisfaction,
communicated it to Congress, as a discovery and illustration of a
conspiracy by the British Government to subvert the Constitution and
Government of the United States, and by his message inflamed the
Congress to the highest pitch of excitement, in the climax of which he
got a vote in favour of a declaration of war against Great Britain. The
President, in his message to Congress, referring to the Henry documents
said: "They prove that at a recent period, while the United States,
notwithstanding the wrongs sustained by them, ceased not to observe the
laws of neutrality towards Great Britain, and in the midst of amicable
professions and negotiations on the part of the British Government
through its public Minister here [Mr. Erskine], a _secret agent of that
Government_ was employed in certain States--more especially at the seat
of government in Massachusetts--in fomenting disaffection to the
constituted authorities of the nation, and in intrigues with the
disaffected, for the purpose of bringing about resistance to the laws,
and eventually, in concert with a British force, of destroying the
Union, and forming the eastern part thereof into a political connection
with England."
Two days before the transmission of President Madison's message of
accusation against England, the British Minister at Washington declared
in the public prints his entire ignorance of any transaction of the
kind, and asked the United States Government to consider the character
of the individual who had made these disclosures,[183] and to "suspend
any further judgment on its merits until the circumstances shall have
been made known to his Majesty's Government." But such fairness to
England did not answer President Madison's purpose to get himself
re-elected President, by exciting hostility and declaring war against
England.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 176: "The war party in the United States was not very strong,
numerically speaking, and it was not composed of the most respectable
portions of the community; but what it lacked in these two requisites it
made up in loud and demonstrative clamour, and the more serious-minded
and important portions of the people were being forced, against their
better judgment, into a position hostile to Great Britain, by the
continued cry of a few demagogues, who were more anxious to give vent to
their old feeling of spite against Great Britain than to consult the
best interests of their country." (Tuttle's History of the Dominion of
Canada, Chap. lxxii., p. 349.)]
[Footnote 177: This Decree is dated "Imperial Camp, Berlin, November
21st, 1806." Its principal Articles are as follow:
"Art. 1. The British islands are in a state of blockade.
"Art. 2. _All commerce and correspondence with them is prohibited_;
consequently, all letters or packets written _in_ England, or _to_ an
Englishman, _written in the English language_, shall not be dispatched
from the post-offices, and shall be seized.
"Art. 3. Every individual, a subject of Great Britain, of whatever rank
or condition, who is found in countries occupied by our troops or those
of our allies, shall be made prisoner of war.
"Art. 4. Every warehouse, all merchandise or property whatsoever,
belonging to an Englishman, are declared god-prize.
"Art. 6. No vessel coming directly from England or her colonies, or
having been there since the publication of this Decree, shall be
admitted into any port.
"Art. 7. Every vessel that by a false declaration contravenes the
foregoing disposition, shall be seized, and the ship and cargo
confiscated as English property.
"Art. 10. Our Ministers of Foreign Relations, etc., are charged with the
execution of the present Decree."]
[Footnote 178: British Annual Register, 1807, Vol. XLII., Chap, xii., p.
227.]
[Footnote 179: Thompson's History of the War of 1812, between Great
Britain and the United States, Chap. III., pp. 23, 24.]
[Footnote 180: The justice of the proceedings and demands of the British
Government, the fairness of its proposals, and the injustice and
unreasonableness of the conduct of the Madison U.S. Government, are
forcibly presented in the following preamble to resolutions adopted by
the Legislature of the State of Massachusetts, as late as the 5th of
February, 1813:
"Whereas the President, in his message to Congress, has made known to
the people of the United States that the British Orders in Council have
been repealed 'in such manner as to be capable of explanations meeting
the views of the Government' of the United States; and therefore none of
the alleged causes of war with Great Britain now remain except the claim
of the right to take British subjects from the merchant ships of the
United States:
"And whereas, during the administration of General Washington and
President Adams, this claim of Great Britain was not considered a
reasonable cause of war; and under the administration of President
Jefferson, the Government of Great Britain did offer to make an
arrangement with the United States, which in the opinion of Messrs.
Montrose and Pinkey, their Ministers, placed this subject on a ground
that was both honourable and advantageous to the United States, and
highly favourable to their interests, and was, at the same time, a
concession which had never before been made; and it is highly probable
that the Government of Great Britain would still be willing to make an
arrangement on this subject which should be alike honourable and
advantageous to the United States:
"And whereas, under the administration of President Madison, when the
arrangement of matters in controversy between the United States and
Great Britain was made with his Britannic Majesty's Minister, David
Montague Erskine, Esq., the impressment of seamen was not considered of
sufficient importance to make it a condition of that arrangement:
"And whereas _the European powers, as well as the United States,
recognize the principle that their subjects have no right to expatriate
themselves, and that the nation has a right to the services of all its
citizens, especially in time of war; and none of those powers respect
the neutralization laws of others so far as to admit their operation in
contravention of that principle--and it is manifestly unjust for a
neutral power to make war upon one nation in order to compel it to
relinquish a principle which is maintained by the others, etc_."]
[Footnote 181: Holmes' American Annals, Vol. II., pp. 434, 435.
The manner in which this affair was presented to the public by the
President and American writers may be inferred from the following:
"This vessel (the _Chesapeake_) was suddenly attacked within our waters
in the time of profound peace, compelled to surrender, and several
seamen, alleged to be British, were then forcibly taken from her. The
burst of indignation which followed was even more violent than that
which was produced by the Orders in Council in 1793 [1807]. Party
animosity was suspended; meetings were assembled in every village; the
newspapers were filled with formal addresses; volunteer companies were
everywhere set on foot; and, in the first frenzy of the moment, the
universal cry was for immediate war. Although hostilities were not
declared, the feelings of America were from that day at war with
England." (Breckenridge's History of the War of 1812.)
This state of feeling was precisely what President Madison wished to
create, preparatory to his meditated war with England, in connection
with the French usurper.]
[Footnote 182: "Indignant at this neglectful treatment, Henry returned
to Boston, and obtained a letter of introduction from Governor Gerry to
Madison, to whom he offered to divulge the whole conspiracy, _of which
he had been the head and soul_, for a certain sum of money. Madison gave
him $50,000, and the swindler embarked for France. There is but little
doubt that Henry made a fool of the Governor of Canada, and completely
overreached the President. The publication of the correspondence,
however, increased the hatred both against the Federalists and the
English nation." [The object President Madison had in view.] (Headley's
History of the War of 1812-1815 with England, p. 49.)]
[Footnote 183: "The _Henry Plot_ (as it was denominated) was clamoured
through America as a crime of the deepest dye on the part of Great
Britain, tending to disorganize the Government, to dismember the Union,
and to destroy the independence of the States. The fictitious and
exaggerated importance which the American Government affected to attach
to this trivial matter had, however, some influence in confirming the
spirit of hostility towards Great Britain which at that time pervaded
America, and shortly after broke out in open war. This self-sufficient
miscreant having, as he fancied, taken ample vengeance upon the
Government of his native country, could not, with any degree of decency,
remain in the States, from whence he sailed for France in an American
sloop-of-war, carrying with him the reward of his treason and the
universal contempt of mankind." (Christie's History of the War of 1812,
p. 55.)
Yet, at this very time, there were American and French emissaries in
both the Canadas (as the proclamations of the Governors show), with a
view of exciting disaffection to the British Canadian Government, in
order to wrest the Canadas from England and subject them to France and
the United States.
"The Americans had been declaring, for several years, that they would
take the provinces. They had even boasted of the ease with which the
intended conquest could be made by them whenever they pleased. They
believed, or pretended to believe, that the majority of the people,
owing to dissensions and a desire to be free from the mother country,
would not take part against them in this contest with Great Britain."
(Dr. Miles' History of Canada, Part III., Chap. iii., p. 201.)]
CHAPTER XLIX.
DECLARATION OF WAR BY THE UNITED STATES AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN, AND
PREPARATIONS FOR THE INVASION OF CANADA.
The Bill for declaring war against Britain passed the Congress June
18th, 1812, after protracted discussions: by the House of Congress, by a
majority of forty--seventy-nine to thirty-nine--by the Senate, by a
majority of six.[184] The vote for the declaration of war was a purely
party vote; the war itself was a purely partizan war--the carrying out
of intrigue between the American Democratic President and the French
despoiler of Europe--a war against the intelligence and patriotism of
the American people, as well as against the independence and liberties
of nations; a war in which the very selection of generals and officers
were, as a general rule, partizan appointments.[185]
The war party consisted largely of the mob or refuse of the nation--of
those who had nothing to lose and everything to gain by such a
war--facts which will go far to account, with three or four exceptions,
for the inferior character of the American generals and officers in the
war; men appointed to offices for which they had no qualifications, and
to situations in which they could, without stint, rob their country of
its money, if not of its reputation.
In New York, a Convention of delegates from several counties of the
State was held at Albany, on the 17th and 18th days of September, 1812,
in which the war was denounced as unjustifiable, unprincipled, and
unpatriotic, and as subservient, simply subservient to the cause of the
French Emperor against England.[186]
The address of the House of Representatives of the State of
Massachusetts presented in a still stronger light and with unanswerable
argument the causes of this unjust and cruel war, as wanton and
unprovoked, and the climax of the various outrages committed against
Great Britain.
Yet even the English Orders in Council--made the pretext for the war by
President Madison and his partizans--impolitic as those Orders were on
the part of England, being founded not on sound national policy, but
dictated by revenge on Napoleon on account of his Berlin and Milan
decrees for the destruction of British commerce--even these British
Orders in Council were actually a source of profit to American
merchants from the indulgent way in which they were administered by the
British authorities. The American historian, Hildreth, says:
"The comparative indulgence of the British, their willingness to allow
to Americans a certain margin of profitable employment, contrasted very
favourably in the minds of ship-owners with the totally anti-commercial
system of France. Forgetting their late pretensions to a neutral trade,
perfectly unshackled, and the loud outcry they had raised against
British invasions of it, they were now ready, with characteristic
commercial prudence, to accept as much of the views of British Ministers
and merchants still left within their reach. A trade still profitable,
however shackled and curtailed, they regarded as decidedly preferable to
no trade at all. In fact, by the calculations of eminent merchants,
fully confirmed by subsequent experience, the trade still allowed under
the British Orders, while far more profitable, was also quite as
extensive as there could be any reasonable expectation of enjoying after
the restoration of general peace.
"The merchants and ship-owners had, however, but a limited influence
over public opinion. Their vast profits of late years had made them
objects of envy. Though their accumulations were but an index of the
general enrichment of the nation, there were multitudes who more or less
openly rejoiced over their present distress [arising from the American
embargo.] Unfortunately, too, they were divided among themselves. Some
even of the wealthiest of their number were among those who applauded
the embargo, of which conduct this not very charitable explanation was
given: that it would enable those who were able to wait for the revival
of trade to buy up at a great discount the ships and produce of their
poorer neighbours."[188]
President Madison having declared a professedly defensive war against
Great Britain for the purpose of defending maritime rights on the
Atlantic Ocean, commenced by invading Canada in three "Grand Armies."
The one was the Grand Army of the West, consisting of 5,000 men, under
General Hull, and the base of whose operations was Detroit; the second
was the Grand Army of the Centre, under the command of General Van
Rensellaer, consisting of 5,000, which was to operate against Canada
from Lewiston; and the third, but first in command, was the Grand Army
of the North, under General Dearborn, consisting of 10,000 men, to
operate from Lake Champlain against Montreal and the rest of Lower
Canada.
Such, then, was the declaration of war against England by President
Madison and his democratic faction; such were the false pretensions for
the war; such was the confederacy between the democratic President of
the United States and the Tyrant of Europe against the liberties of
mankind, under pretence of war with England; such was the noble
opposition of the States of New York and New England to that unholy
coalition between the American President and the oppressor of Europe
against human liberty--States which had been the head and the sinews and
the backbone of American resistance to Great Britain during the struggle
for American independence, and which, having achieved that independence,
abhorred being buccaneers against the independence of Canada, and the
acquisition of the Indian territories of the West and North of the
United States.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 184: In the report of the Committee recommending the Bill for
the declaration, it was, of course, attempted to make England the
aggressive and the United States the injured party. "On presentation of
this report," says Lossing, "the doors were closed, and a motion to open
them was denied by a vote of seventy-seven against forty-nine. Mr.
Calhoun [the democratic leader of the war party of the South] then
presented a Bill, as part of the report, declaring war between Great
Britain and her dependencies and the United States and its territories.
Amendments were offered. Ten votes were given for a proposition by Mr.
McKee, of Kentucky, to include France. Mr. Quincy (of Boston)
endeavoured, by an addition to the Bill, to provide for the repeal of
all restrictive laws bearing upon commerce; and John Randolph, of
Virginia, moved to postpone the whole matter until the following
October. All were rejected, and the Bill, as Mr. Calhoun presented it,
was passed on the 4th day of June by a vote of seventy-nine for it and
thirty-nine against it.
"When the Bill reached the Senate it was referred to a Committee already
appointed to consider the President's message. It remained under
discussion twelve days. Meanwhile the people throughout the country were
fearfully excited by conflicting emotions. A memorial against the war
went from the Legislature of Massachusetts; and another from the
merchants of New York, led by John Jacob Astor. War-meetings were held
in various places, and the whole country was in a tumult of excitement.
Finally, on the 17th of June, the Bill, with some amendments, was passed
in the Senate by a vote of nineteen against thirteen. It was sent back
to the House on the morning of the 18th, when the amendments were
concurred in. The Bill was engrossed on parchment, and at three o'clock
in the afternoon of that day became law by the signature of the
President [who next day declared war against Great Britain]. In the
House, the members from Pennsylvania, and the States of the South and
West, gave sixty-two votes for it to seventeen against it. In the
Senate, the same States gave fourteen for it, to five against it,
'Thus,' says a late writer [Edwin Williams], 'the war may be said to
have been a measure of the South and West to take care of the interests
of the North, much against the will of the latter.'" (Lossing's Field
Book of the War of 1812, Chap. xi., pp. 227, 228.)
The minority of the members of the House of Representatives who voted
against the war, addressed a protest, signed by them all, to their
constituents, exposing the impolicy and objects of the war, and
indicating their own conduct. We quote two sentences of this able paper:
"As to the invasion and seizure of Canada, which was a part of the
programme of the war party, they considered an attempt to carry out that
measure as unjust and impolitic in itself, very uncertain in the issue,
and unpromising as to any good results."--"It cannot be concealed that
to engage in the present war against England is to place ourselves on
the side of France, and expose us to the vassalage of States serving
under the banner of the French Emperor."]
[Footnote 185: The distinguished Joseph Quincy, of Boston, leader of the
Federalist party, said, in his place in Congress, "I have evidence
satisfactory in my own mind, that the Secretary of War has made it a
principle not to appoint any man to a command in that army who is not an
open partizan of the existing Administration. If it be denied, appoint a
Committee of Inquiry. If the intention had been to unite the nation as
one man against a foreign enemy, is not this the last policy that any
Administration ought ever to have adopted? Is not a partizan army the
most dreadful and detestable of all engines, and most likely to awaken
suspicions and to inspire discontent?" (Hildreth, Second Series, Vol.
III., Chap. xxi., p. 123.)
"The place of the first major-general, with the command of the Northern
Department, had been given to the petted favourite, Henry Dearborn, late
Secretary of War, and, since Madison's accession, collector of the port
of Boston--a lucrative post, kept in his family by his son's appointment
to it."--"Wilkinson, the senior brigadier, just acquitted by
court-martial of long-pending charges against him, had been sent to New
Orleans [afterwards to Canada] to relieve Hampton [who was afterwards
sent to Canada], whose command there had been a constant scene of
collision and turmoil with his officers. Commissions as brigadiers,
under the late Acts, had been given to Bloomfield, Governor of New
Jersey; to James Winchester, of Tennessee; and to Hull, Governor of
Michigan Territory. * * Hampton and Smythe had been civilians for more
than thirty years, and were indebted for their present appointments
rather to political than to military considerations. Of the inferiors of
the old army, presently distinguished, Alexander MacNab, of the
Engineers, was now a colonel, and Winfield Scott and Edmund Gaines
lieutenant-colonels. A lieutenant-colonelcy in one of the new regiments
had been given to Eleazar W. Ripley, a young Democrat from Maine, who
had succeeded Storey, of the late Democratic Massachusetts House of
Representatives. Ripley's subsequent conduct justified his appointment;
but the colonel of that same regiment was afterwards cashiered for
peculation; and as few of the new regimental officers had any military
knowledge, so numbers of them were quite destitute of those qualities
without which even that knowledge would have been of little avail."
(Hildreth's History of the United States, Second Series, Vol. III.,
Chap, xxiv., pp. 308-310.)]
[Footnote 186: "The following are extracts from the resolutions of this
famous Convention:
"Taking solely into consideration the time and circumstances of the
declaration of the present war, the condition of the country, and state
of the public mind, we are constrained to consider, and feel it our duty
to pronounce it a most rash, unwise, and inexpedient measure, the
adoption of which ought forever to deprive its authors of the esteem and
confidence of an enlightened people; because, as the injuries we have
received from France are at least equal in amount to those we have
sustained from England, and have been attended with circumstances of
still greater insult and aggravation, if war were necessary to vindicate
the honour of the country, consistency and impartiality required that
both nations should have been included in the declaration; because, if
it were deemed expedient to exercise our right of selecting our
adversary, prudence and common sense dictated the choice of an enemy
from whose hostility we had nothing to dread. A war with France would
equally have satisfied our insulted honour, and at the same time,
instead of annihilating, would have revived and extended our commerce;
and even the evils of such a contest would have been mitigated by the
sublime consolation, that, by our efforts, we were contributing to
arrest the progress of despotism in Europe, and essentially serving the
great interests of freedom and humanity throughout the world;" * *
"because, before the war was declared, it was perfectly well ascertained
that a vast majority of the people in the Middle and Northern States, by
whom the burden and expenses of the war must be borne almost
exclusively, were strongly opposed to the measure." * *
"Whereas the late revocation of British Orders in Council has removed
the great and ostensible cause of the present war, and prepared the way
for an immediate accommodation of existing differences, inasmuch as, by
the concession of the present Secretary of State, satisfactory and
honourable arrangements might easily be made, by which abuses resulting
from the impressment of our seamen might in future be effectually
prevented. Therefore,
"Resolved,--That we shall be constrained to consider the determination
on the part of our rulers to continue the present war, after official
notice of revocation of the British Orders in Council, as affording
conclusive evidence that the war has been undertaken from motives
entirely distinct from those which have been hitherto avowed, and for
the promotion of objects wholly unconnected with the interest and honour
of America.
"Resolved,--That we contemplate with abhorrence even the possibility of
an alliance with the present Emperor of France, every action of whose
life has demonstrated, that the attainment, by any means, of universal
empire, and the consequent extinction of every vestige of freedom, are
the sole objects of his incessant, unbounded, and remorseless ambition.
His arms, with the spirit of freemen, we might openly and fearlessly
encounter; but of his secret arts, his corrupting influences, we
entertain a dread we can neither conquer nor conceal. It is therefore
with the utmost distrust and alarm that we regard his late professions
of attachment and love to the American people, fully recollecting that
his invariable course has been, by perfidious offers of protection, by
deceitful professions of friendship, to lull his intended victims into
the fatal sleep of confidence and security, during which the chains of
despotism are silently wound round and riveted on them.
(Signed) "JACOB MORRIS, _President_.
"WILLIAM HENDERSON, _Secretary_."]
[Footnote 187: These Orders in Council were cancelled five days after
President Madison's declaration of war--weeks before that declaration
could have been known in England.]
[Footnote 188: Hildreth's History of the United States, Second Series,
Vol. III., Chap. xxi., pp. 86, 87.]
CHAPTER L.
PREPARATIONS BY CANADA AGAINST THE AMERICAN INVASIONS.
1. LOWER CANADA.
It now becomes our duty to state the preparations made by the Canadians
for their own defence against the American invasions. Though so few in
number and modest in pretensions to their multitudinous and boasting
invaders, they had the hearts of freemen and patriots, and trusted to
the Divine blessing in the justness of their cause.[189] We shall notice
first the preparations of Lower Canada, and then those of Upper Canada.
Sir George Prevost, in the autumn of 1811, succeeded Sir James H. Craig
in the government of Lower Canada, and in the chief command of the North
American provinces. He had been Lieutenant-Governor of Nova Scotia. The
known mildness of his character, and the popularity of his
administration in Nova Scotia, caused his arrival at Quebec to be
heartily welcomed by the friends of just and liberal government. The
narrow-mindedness and harshness of Sir James Craig's administration had
caused serious agitation and differences in Lower Canada, which Sir
George Prevost, by his impartiality and kindness, soon succeeded in
allaying and reconciling. He called the first meeting of the Legislature
on the 21st of February, 1812, and, in his opening speech, stated that
he had hastened, in obedience to his orders, to assume the
administration of Lower Canada; congratulated the Legislature on the
brilliant achievements of the British arms in rescuing Portugal and
Spain "from the tyranny of the Ruler of France;" and recommended an
increased and unremitted care and vigilance in securing the country from
either open invasion or insidious aggression, and hoped the Parliament
would testify its loyalty by an early attention to those Acts which
experience had proved essential for the preservation of his Majesty's
government, as also by its readiness in supplying the Government with
such aid as should be suitable to the exigence of the times, by enabling
the loyal Canadian subjects to assist in repelling any sudden attack
made by a tumultuary invasion, and effectually to participate in the
defence of their country against a regular invasion at any future
period.
The Assembly, in answer, among other things assured the Governor that
they would give attention to those acts recommended by him. The Assembly
passed a Militia Bill, by which the Governor was authorized to embody
2,000 unmarried men, between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five years,
for three months in the year; and in case of invasion or imminent
danger, to retain them for one year, relieving one-half the number
embodied, by fresh drafts at the expiration of that period. In the event
of war, invasion, insurrection, or imminent danger thereof, he was
empowered to embody the whole militia of the province, should it become
necessary. No substitutes were allowed, nor commissioned officers
permitted to take any militiamen for their servants, under a penalty of
£10 for every offence of that nature. These provisions, from their
harshness and inconsistency, were, however, winked at in practice. It
was penal to enlist any militiamen into the regular forces, and such
enlistments were declared null.
_Twelve thousand pounds_ were granted by the Legislature, one moiety
thereof for drilling and training the local militia, the other moiety
for other purposes of the Militia Act. _Twenty thousand pounds_ were
granted to be employed for such services as the safety of the province
and the exigence of the times might require. And a further sum of
_thirty thousand pounds_ currency, to be at the Governor's disposal in
case of war between Great Britain and America.
These liberal supplies enabled the Government to meet the approaching
crisis with confidence in the patriotism and support of the Provincial
Legislature, and the whole mass of the Canadian population. In closing
the session, the Governor thanked the House for the labour they had
bestowed upon the improvement of the militia system, and for the
increased means thereby afforded him for the defence of the province. He
also expressed his best thanks for the proofs he had received of their
confidence in his administration, by the liberal provision they had made
for the exigencies of the public service.[190]
After the declaration of war by President Madison, June 19th, 1812,
which was made known at Quebec the 28th of June, a notification was
immediately made by the police that all Americans must leave Quebec by
the 1st of July, and be out of the district by the 3rd of the same
month. On the last day of June the period was extended by the Governor's
proclamation; fourteen days were allowed to such Americans as were in
the province, they being principally persons who had entered the same in
good faith, and in prosecution of commercial pursuits.
"On the same day a proclamation issued imposing an embargo upon the
shipping in port, and convoking the House of Assembly on the 16th of
July."[191]
"At the opening of the session, the Governor, after informing the
Legislature of the recent declaration of war by the United States
against Great Britain, expressed his reliance upon the spirit of his
Majesty's subjects in the province, their loyalty to their Sovereign,
and their ardent love for the true interests of their country; and that
he should depend implicitly, under Divine Providence, upon their best
exertions, aided by the courage and loyalty of the militia, and by the
valour, skill, and discipline of his Majesty's regular forces, for
repelling every hostile attempt that might be made upon the colony. He
observed with concern that the necessary establishment of the militia
forces, together with the various services and operations of the
approaching campaign, would be attended with considerable expense, but
that he relied upon their wisdom and public spirit for such supplies as
the exigencies of affairs might be found to require: he at the same time
expressed his approbation of the embodied militia, and his confidence in
their increased discipline, which encouraged an expectation that they
would materially contribute to the defence of their country." * *
"A Bill to Facilitate the Circulation of Army Bills was introduced, and
the liberality of the House of Assembly surpassed the hopes of the
Executive. Fifteen thousand pounds were granted to pay the interest that
might become due upon army bills, of which £250,000 were authorized to
be put in circulation (large bills of twenty-five dollars and upwards
bearing interest at the rate of fourpence per day for every hundred
pounds). They were made current in the revenue, were to have the effect
of a legal tender, and were redeemable at the Army Bill Office, either
in cash or Government bills of exchange on London, at the option of the
commander of the forces. Small bills of four dollars were at all times
payable in cash at the Army Bill Office. On the 1st day of August, 1812,
this Bill received the royal sanction, and the Governor prorogued the
Parliament, with acknowledgments for the liberal aid they had granted
him to meet the exigencies of the public service."[192]
Such were the provisions made spontaneously, and with wonderful
unanimity, in Lower Canada for the defence of the province against the
impending American invasion. These provisions were prior to
corresponding provisions made in Upper Canada, and the statement of
which has been made in so much detail that the English reading public
might be reminded, or informed, of what has been too little known--the
loyalty, liberality, and courage of the French as well as of the English
inhabitants of Lower Canada, from the very beginning of the contest, and
followed by deeds of heroism and fortitude (to be noticed hereafter),
which successfully repelled successive American invasions, and prevented
the American armies, ten times as numerous as the Voltigeurs and all
other Canadian volunteers, from gaining a single foothold in Lower
Canada.
2. UPPER CANADA.
Upper Canada was not second to Lower Canada. Sir Francis Gore left for
England in 1811, and was succeeded by General Brock as President of
Upper Canada, and commander of the forces, who called the Legislature
together as early as possible after the declaration of war. Colonel John
Clarke, Adjutant-General of Militia, in his manuscripts (with the use of
which I have been favoured by the learned and excellent librarian of the
Dominion at Ottawa, entitled "U.E. Papers"), says:
"Whilst the Americans were busily preparing for the campaign, we were
not idle in Canada. On the 27th of July, 1812, General Brock proceeded
to York and called a meeting of the Legislature, to which he delivered
an animated and spirited address, concluding with the following
remarkable words:
"'We are engaged in an awful and eventful contest.
"'By unanimity and dispatch in our councils, and by vigour in our
operations, we may teach the enemy this lesson, that a country defended
by FREE MEN, enthusiastically devoted to the cause of their King and
Constitution, cannot be conquered.'"
The Legislature heartily responded to the noble appeal of General Brock
at the opening of the session; passed the necessary Acts for the
security of the country, for the organization and training of the
militia, and for the expenses and support of the war, and concluding
their work by an earnest and patriotic address to the people of Upper
Canada. We will extract some passages of this "Address of the House of
Assembly to the People of Upper Canada, on the Declaration of War." This
powerful address, which occupies twelve pages, is signed "Allan MacLean,
Speaker," and dated "Commons House of Assembly, August 5th, 1812"--just
ten days before General Brock took Detroit:
"The House of Assembly having nearly completed the necessary business
for which they were called together, beg leave, before they return home,
to lift up their warning voice at this eventful crisis. The declaration
of war issued against Great Britain by the United States, when first
announced, appeared to be an act of such astonishing folly and
desperation as to be altogether incredible, and not only excited the
greatest surprise among the inhabitants of this province, but among the
great majority of our enemies themselves. That that Government,
professing to be the friend of man and the great supporter of his
liberty and independence, should light up the torch of war against the
only nation that stands between itself and destruction, exhibited a
degree of infatuation or madness, altogether incomprehensible. But the
men at present ruling the States, infatuated, or, as their more
enlightened countrymen say, 'bribed by the Tyrant of France,' regardless
of the best interests of their country, and the feelings and affections
of a great majority of their own people, have commenced hostilities
against our mother country whilst treating their vessels with
hospitality, and instead of threatening their liberties, offering most
equitable terms of accommodation.
"This war, on the part of the United States, includes an alliance with
the French usurper, whose dreadful policy has destroyed all that is
great and good, memorable and holy, on the continent of Europe. The
government of this bloody tyrant penetrates into everything; it crushes
individuals as well as nations; fetters thoughts as well as motives; and
delights in destroying forever all that is fair and just in opinion and
sentiment. It is evidently this tyrant who now directs the rulers of
America, and they show themselves worthy disciples of such a master." * *
"We turn with joy to you, many of whom have already risked your lives
for the unity of the empire. We are confident that the same spirit still
animates your breasts and those of your children--that you still retain
the same love of your excellent King, the same veneration for a free and
happy Constitution, that you exhibited during the American war. * * When
we picture to ourselves the sublime prospect the world would have
exhibited this day, had the population of the neighbouring States
preserved, like you, their filial love, we should not now behold the
continent of Europe groaning under the yoke of a sanguinary tyrant, nor
his satellites in America studiously imitating his example.
"It is therefore from former experience that we look to you for the same
patriotic principles--principles which enabled you to face death in its
most dreadful attire--principles which exalt human nature, and which
have been warmly cherished by the most virtuous and renowned of every
age: and surely when we are attacked by the same enemies who once, aided
by the mistaken lenity of the mother country and the misconduct of her
commanders, were able to drive us from our native homes and possessions
to this province--a people whose lands are manured with the blood of our
friends and kinsmen, who drove our wives and children from their homes
in the woods, or threw them into dungeons, and who now envy us the
habitations which, through the blessing of Providence, the beneficence
of our parent state, and our own industry, we have gained from the
wilderness, we are confident that you will display the same energy, and
certainly with better hopes of success. Great Britain will not now
consider such Americans as perverse children who may be reclaimed, but
as her most malignant foes. Her commanders will not, as formerly,
temporize and raise hosts of enemies by their misconduct and delays, but
they will hasten to punish them with all the rigour of war.
"Already have we the joy to remark, that the spirit of loyalty has burst
forth in all its ancient splendour. The militia in all parts of the
province have volunteered their services with acclamation, and displayed
a degree of energy worthy of the British name. * * When men are called
upon to defend everything they call precious--their wives and children,
their friends and possessions--they ought to be inspired with the
noblest resolutions, and they will not be easily frightened by menaces,
or conquered by force. And beholding, as we do, the flame of patriotism
burning from one end of the Canadas to the other, we cannot but
entertain the most pleasing anticipations.
"Our enemies have indeed said that they could subdue this country by
Proclamation; but it is our part to prove to them that they are sadly
mistaken--that the population is determinedly hostile to them, and that
the few who might be otherwise inclined will find it their safety to be
faithful. * *
"Innumerable attempts will be made by falsehood to detach you from your
allegiance; for our enemies, in imitation of their European master,
trust more to treachery than to force; and they will, no doubt, make use
of many of those lies, which, unfortunately for the virtuous part of
these States, and the peace and happiness of the world, had too much
success during the American rebellion: they will tell you that they are
come to give you freedom--yes, the base slaves of the most contemptible
faction that ever distracted the affairs of any nation--the minions of
the very sycophants who lick the dust from the feet of Bonaparte will
tell you that they are come to communicate the blessing of liberty to
this province; but you have only to look at your own situation to put
such hypocrites to confusion. * *
"Trusting more to treachery than to open hostility, our enemies have
already spread their emissaries through the country, to seduce our
fellow-subjects from their allegiance, by promises as false as the
principles on which they are founded. A law has been enacted for the
speedy detection of such emissaries, and for their condign punishment
on conviction."[193]
"Remember, when you go forth to the combat, that you fight not for
yourselves alone, but for the whole world. You are defeating the most
formidable conspiracy against the civilization of man that was ever
contrived; a conspiracy threatening greater barbarism and misery than
followed the downfall of the Roman Empire--that now you have an
opportunity of proving your attachment to the parent state, which
contends for the relief of oppressed nations--the last pillar of true
liberty, and the last refuge of oppressed humanity.
(Signed) "ALLAN MACLEAN,
"_Speaker, Commons House of Assembly, August 5th, 1812._"
The effect of this manly and animated address to the people of Upper
Canada was most beneficial, and contributed greatly to unite and
encourage the people to face the struggle impending over them. There was
no inflated boasting--no undervaluing of danger and sacrifice, but a
plain statement of facts, and a heartfelt appeal to loyalty, patriotism,
and manly courage.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 189: "A war with Great Britain had been long contemplated by
the rulers in America, and a seasonable moment only was sought for, to
grasp the provinces which they had fallaciously been induced to believe
were ripe for revolt, and would therefore fall a willing conquest to
America. The Peninsular war had engrossed the attention and resources of
the mother country, and the Canadas were necessarily the less provided
with means to encounter the struggle in which they were likely soon to
be engaged. The coffers were exhausted, nor were hopes entertained of
their being speedily replenished from home; the regular forces were too
thin to preserve an extensive frontier of some hundred miles against the
pressure of an enemy which, if united, must become irresistible; and the
Canadians, though naturally brave and hardy, and attached to their
Constitution, might from recent occurrences be fairly presumed to have
been so far disgusted as to leave doubt of their hearty co-operation and
zeal in the cause." (Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. iii.,
p. 48.)]
[Footnote 190: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap, iii., pp.
49-53.
"The Governor, by a General Order of the 28th of May, 1812, organized
four battalions of embodied militia, in virtue of the late Act. The
first battalion rendezvoused at Point-aux-Trembles, near Quebec, under
the command of Colonel De Salaberry; the second at Laprairie, near
Montreal, commanded by Colonel De Rouville; the third at Berthier, in
the district of Montreal, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Cuthbert; and
the fourth at St. Thomas, near Quebec, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel
Taschereau. The alacrity with which they were filled, and the
cheerfulness with which the young men submitted to the restraints of
discipline, reflected credit upon the military character of the
Canadians. This proof of the zeal and the loyalty of the people inspired
Government with hopes of successful resistance against the approaching
war, and a reciprocal confidence between the Governor and the people
seems to have resulted, as much from the danger of the moment as from
any studied policy on the part of the present Administration. They who
had incurred the displeasure of the late Government were treated with
confidence, and gradually appointed to situations of trust.
"A regiment of Canadian Voltigeurs was recruited, and placed under the
command of Major De Salaberry, of the 60th Regiment of Foot, which in
the course of the war became eminent for discipline and its steadiness
in action, as well as for the fatiguing duties on which it was
unremittingly employed."--_Ib._, pp. 55, 56.]
[Footnote 191: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. iii., pp.
36, 37.]
[Footnote 192: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. iii., pp.
57-60.]
[Footnote 193: Colonel Clarke remarks that "the moderation of the
different Acts which were then passed, for the preservation and defence
of the province, is an additional proof that _internal treachery_ was
not one of the causes which were found."]
CHAPTER LI.
FIRST AMERICAN INVASION OF UPPER CANADA BY GENERAL HULL, FROM DETROIT,
WHOSE PROCLAMATION "TO THE INHABITANTS OF CANADA" IS GIVEN ENTIRE, AND
GENERAL BROCK'S NOBLE ANSWER TO IT, IN AN ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF UPPER
CANADA.
In the meantime Canada, in its western extremity, had been invaded. The
American Government had been for several months collecting an army of
some 3,000 or 4,000 regular troops and militia, around and west of
Detroit, in order to strike a blow upon Canada the moment war should be
declared. General Hull was the Governor of the territory of Michigan,
and Commander-in-Chief of the "Grand Army of the West." On the 12th of
July he crossed the River Detroit with a force of 2,500 of the above
troops, and a strong park of artillery, and planted the American
standard on the shores of Canada, at Sandwich. He forthwith issued a
pretentious, inflated, cajoling, patronising, threatening proclamation
to the inhabitants of Canada, and pronouncing instant death to any one
who should be fighting in company with the Indians, while at the same
time the Americans were employing in their army all the Indians they
could induce to join them. The American democratic party which ruled at
Washington had persecuted and driven the fathers of Canada from their
homes in the United States, and had always been the enemies of their
peace and prosperity in Canada; yet they were under the strange delusion
that the people of Canada must be still as much in love with them as
they were with themselves, and that the magnetism of their star-spangled
banner planted in Canada would draw all Canadians to it; that an
address from their commanding general would supply the place of armies,
and that taking Canada would be but a holiday march, in which, as their
language of the time was, they would "breakfast at Sandwich, take dinner
at York (Toronto), and sup at Montreal." It was in this spirit of vanity
and delusion that General Hull issued his famous proclamation, on his
landing at Sandwich, and which I give entire in a note.[194]
In a noble address to the people of Upper Canada, General Brock answered
the proclamation of General Hull, repelling and exposing with
overwhelming power his misstatements, and answering with withering
sarcasm General Hull's attack upon the Indians, and the "barbarous and
savage policy of Great Britain" in recognizing the Indians as allies and
fellow-subjects, and their right to defend their homes and liberties
against American invasion and rapine. We present the reader with the
following extracts of this masterly address, transcribed from the
manuscripts of the Dominion Library at Ottawa.
In the course of his Address to the People of Canada, General Brock
says:
"The unprovoked declaration of war by the United States of America
against Great Britain and Ireland and its dependencies, has been
followed by the actual invasion of this Province, in a remote frontier
of the Western District, by a detachment of the armed force of the
United States.
"The officer commanding that detachment [General Hull] has thought
proper to invite his Majesty's subjects not merely to a quiet and
unresisting submission, but insults them by offering with a call to seek
the protection of his Government.
"Without condescending to notice the epithets bestowed, in this appeal
of the American commander to the people of Upper Canada, on the
administration of his Majesty, every inhabitant of the Province is
desired to seek the confutation of such indecent slander in the review
of his own particular circumstances.
"Where is the Canadian subject who can truly affirm to himself that he
has been injured by the Government in his person, his property, or his
liberty?
"Where is to be found in any part of the world a growth so rapid in
prosperity and wealth as this colony exhibits? Settled not thirty years,
by a band of veterans exiled from their former possessions on account of
their loyalty, not a descendant of these brave people is to be found who
has not, under the fostering care of their Sovereign, acquired a
property and means of enjoyment superior to what were possessed by their
ancestors.
"This unequalled prosperity would not have been attained by the utmost
liberality of the Government or the persevering industry of the people,
had not the maritime power of the mother country secured to the
colonists a safe access to every market where the produce of their
labour was in request. * *
"The restitution of Canada to the empire of France was the _stipulated_
reward for the aid afforded to the revolted colonies, now the United
States. The debt is still due; and there can be no doubt but that the
pledge has been renewed as a consideration for commercial advantages, or
rather for an expected relaxation in the tyranny of France over the
commercial world.
"Are you prepared, inhabitants of Canada, to become willing subjects, or
slaves, to the Despot who rules the nations of continental Europe with a
rod of iron?
"If not, arise in a body; exert your energies; co-operate cordially with
the King's regular forces to repel the invader, and do not give cause to
your children, when groaning under the oppression of a Foreign Master,
to reproach you with having so easily parted with the richest
inheritance of this earth--a participation in the name, character, and
freedom of Britons. * *
"Be not dismayed at the unjustifiable threat of the commander of the
enemy's forces, to refuse quarter should an Indian appear in the ranks.
"The brave bands of aborigines which inhabit this colony were, like his
Majesty's other subjects, punished for their zeal and fidelity by the
loss of their possessions in the late colonies, and rewarded by his
Majesty with lands of superior value in this Province.
"The faith of the British Government has never been violated. The
Indians feel that the soil they inherit is to them and their posterity
protected from the base arts so frequently devised to overreach their
simplicity.
"By what principle are they to be prohibited from defending their
property? If their warfare, from being different to that of other
people, be more terrific to the enemy, let him retrace his steps; they
seek him not--and cannot expect to find women and children in an
invading army.
"But they are men, and have equal rights with all other men to defend
themselves and their property when invaded, more especially when they
find in the enemy's camp a ferocious and mortal enemy, using the same
warfare which the American commander affects to reprobate.
"This inconsistent and unjustifiable threat of refusing quarter, for
such a cause as being found in arms with a brother sufferer, in defence
of invaded rights, must be exercised with the certain assurance of
retaliation, not only in the limited operations of war in this part of
the King's dominions, but in every quarter of the globe; for the
national character of Britain is not less distinguished for humanity
than strict retributive justice, which will consider the execution of
this inhuman threat as deliberate murder, for which every subject of the
offending power must make expiation.
(Signed) "ISAAC BROCK,
"_Major-General and President_.
"HEADQUARTERS,
"Fort George, July 22nd, 1812."
"By order of his Honour the President,
(Signed) "J.B. GLEGG, A.D.C.,
_General_."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 194: The following is General Hull's Proclamation:
"PROCLAMATION.
"Headquarters, Sandwich, 12th July, 1812.
"_Inhabitants of Canada_,--
"After thirty years of peace and prosperity, the United States have been
driven to arms. The injuries and aggressions, the insults and
indignities of Great Britain have once more left them no alternative but
manly resistance or unconditional submission. The army under my command
has invaded your country. The standard of the Union now waves over the
territory of Canada. To the peaceable, unoffending inhabitants it brings
neither danger nor difficulty. I come to find enemies, not to make them;
I come to protect, not to injure you.
"Separated by an immense ocean and an extensive wilderness from Great
Britain, you have no participation in her councils, nor interest in her
conduct. You have felt her tyranny; you have seen her injustice; but I
do not ask you to avenge the one, or to redress the other. The United
States are sufficiently powerful to afford every security consistent
with their and your expectations. I tender you the invaluable blessings
of civil, religious, and political liberty, and their necessary
result--individual and general prosperity; that liberty which gave
decision to our councils and energy to our conduct, in a struggle for
independence--which conducted us safely and triumphantly through the
stormy period of the revolution--the liberty which has raised us to our
elevated rank among the nations of the world, and which afforded us a
greater measure of peace and security, of wealth and improvement, than
ever fell to the lot of any people.
"In the name of my country and the authority of Government, I promise
you protection to your persons, property, and rights. Remain at your
homes; pursue your peaceful and customary avocations; raise not your
hands against your brethren. Many of your fathers fought for the freedom
and independence we now enjoy. Being children, therefore, of the same
family with us, and heirs of the same heritage, the arrival of an army
of friends must be hailed by you with a cordial welcome. You will be
emancipated from tyranny and oppression, and restored to the dignified
status of freemen.
"Had I any doubt of eventual success, I might ask your assistance; but I
do not. I come prepared for every contingency--I have a force which will
break down all opposition, and that force is but the vanguard of a much
greater. If, contrary to your own interest, and the just expectations of
my country, you should take part in the approaching contest, you will be
considered and treated as enemies, and the horrors and calamities of war
will stalk before you.
"If the barbarous and savage policy of Great Britain be pursued, and the
savages are let loose to murder our citizens, and butcher our women and
children, this war will be a war of extermination. The first stroke of
the tomahawk, the first attempt with the scalping knife, will be the
signal of one indiscriminate scene of desolation. No white man found
fighting by the side of an Indian will be taken prisoner--instant death
will be his lot. If the dictates of reason, duty, justice, and humanity,
cannot prevent the employment of a force which respects no rights, and
knows no wrongs, it will be prevented by a severe and relentless system
of retaliation.
"I doubt not your courage and firmness. I will not doubt your attachment
to liberty. If you tender your services voluntarily, they will be
accepted readily. The United States offer you peace, liberty, and
security. Your chance lies between these and war, slavery, and
destruction. Choose, then, but choose wisely; and may He who knows the
justice of our cause, and who holds in His hands the fate of nations,
guide you to a result the most compatible with your rights and
interests, your peace and happiness.
"By the General,
A.P. HULL."
_Note._--It is a curious commentary on the above proclamation, that
within six weeks of its being so pompously put forth, General Hull
himself, with all his army, was a prisoner in the hands of the
Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, to whom was surrendered nearly
3,000 prisoners, Fort Detroit, an immense quantity of arms and munitions
of war, together with the whole territory of Michigan, and the secured
alliance of the numerous Indian tribes to the west and north.]
CHAPTER LII.
GENERAL BROCK PREPARES FOR AN ATTACK ON DETROIT, AND WITH A SMALL FORCE
TAKES GENERAL HULL AND HIS ARMY PRISONERS, AND ACQUIRES POSSESSION OF
DETROIT AND THE TERRITORY OF MICHIGAN--INCIDENTS PRECEDING AND ATTENDING
THE TAKING OF DETROIT--GENERAL BROCK'S PROCLAMATION TO THE INHABITANTS
OF THE MICHIGAN TERRITORY--HIS COUNCIL WITH THE INDIANS, AND
CONVERSATION WITH THE GREAT CHIEF TECUMSEH, AND ESTIMATE OF HIM--GENERAL
BROCK RETURNS TO YORK (TORONTO)--WHAT HE DID IN NINETEEN DAYS.
General Brock did not content himself in replying to General Hull on
paper, in defence of the British Government and the people of Canada; he
answered him in a more substantial way on the battle-field. General
Brock lost no time in collecting the few soldiers in Upper Canada, and
the militia volunteers, and proceeding by boats, vessels, and by land,
from Niagara to Detroit, to meet face to face the boasting commander of
the Grand Army of the West, and, in less than four weeks of his manly
reply to Hull's inflated proclamation, he made Hull and all his army
prisoners of war, with the surrender of the whole Michigan territory. It
was an achievement worthy of perpetual remembrance, that General Brock,
with forces hastily collected, "consisting of thirty of the Royal
Artillery with three six-pounders, under the command of Lieutenant
Troughton, two hundred and fifty of the 41st Regiment, fifty of the
Newfoundland Fencibles, and four hundred Canadian militia--in all
amounting to seven hundred and thirty, to whom six hundred Indians
attached themselves--making an aggregate of one thousand three hundred
and thirty;" we say, it is an achievement worthy of all remembrance and
honour, that General Brock should, with such motley and slender forces,
cross the Detroit river, and, by the skilful arrangement of his handful
of soldiers, take, without shedding a drop of blood, a fort strongly
protected by--_iron_ ordnance, nine twenty-four-pounders, eight
twelve-pounders, five nine-pounders, three six-pounders; _brass_
ordnance, three six-pounders, two four-pounders, one three-pounder, one
eight-inch howitzer, one five and a-half inch howitzer--in all
thirty-three pieces of ordnance; and defended by upwards of 2,500
regular soldiers and militia.
But there was this essential difference between the two armies: the
little Canadian army had homes, families, and liberties to defend,
connection with the mother country to maintain, and the consciousness of
right; the great American army, with its fortifications, had the
consciousness of long-continued and wide-spread wrongs in depredations
against their western Indian neighbours, bloated avarice for conquest,
and inveterate hatred of Great Britain.
There are several incidents connected with this remarkable military
achievement. Mr. Thompson, in his History of the War of 1812, says:
"General Brock having made such arrangements, in the government of the
province, as were necessary during his absence from York, proceeded
thence to Fort George, and thence to _Long Point, on Lake Erie, where he
was joined by two hundred and sixty of the militia, who had, in a few
days, and in the very height of their harvest, gallantly volunteered
their services to share the dangers of the field in defence of their
country_, together with the detachment of the 41st Regiment, who had
been previously sent to that quarter." (Thompson's History of the War of
1812, p. 106.)
Among the 260 volunteers from the county of Norfolk--Long Point, Lake
Erie--were the elder brother and brother-in-law of the writer of these
pages (he being then ten years of age); the one of them was lieutenant
and the other captain, who, with a great number of their neighbours,
proceeded in a vessel from Port Ryerse to Amherstburg--making the
passage in forty-eight hours--General Brock marching by land. The vessel
with the militia volunteers reached Amherstburg some five days before
General Brock, and, under the command of Colonel Proctor and the
direction of a skilful engineer, commenced erecting a battery at
Windsor, opposite to Detroit, behind a tuft of trees which skirted the
river shore. Sentries were stationed at convenient distances along the
north shore of the river, to prevent any intercourse with the American
side; while the militia, officers and men, worked each night with the
utmost quietness, in the erection of the battery, retiring at the
approach of day. In four nights the battery was erected and mounted with
cannon, when General Brock arrived, approved of what had been done,
called a Council of the Indian allies, as well as of his officers, and
determined forthwith to cross the river and attack Fort Detroit. The
Indians were to cross in the night, which they did some three or four
miles below Detroit, and spread themselves in the woods that surrounded
the town, which then contained from 6,000 to 8,000 inhabitants. The
night-erected battery was unmasked by felling the trees and underwood in
front of it, when, to the astonishment and terror of the Americans, they
saw a battery fully equipped, and already firing effectually upon their
town and fort. Early in the morning of the 15th of August, General
Brock, with his little army of 730 men (the militia being accoutred as
regular soldiers), crossed the river unopposed about three miles below
the fort (which was in the centre of the town), and marched in order of
battle, under cover of corn fields, to within half a mile of the fort,
from which, not cannon balls, but a flag of truce was sent out,
proposing the surrender to the British commander of the fort, army,
town, and territory.[195]
The terrific war-whoop of the dreaded Indians, who seemed to swarm in
the woods around the town, filled the people and General Hull with
irresistible terror; and at the very moment that General Hull was
holding a council of war with his officers in a room within the fort, a
shell, thrown from the British battery at Windsor, fell into the council
room, killed some officers, and wounded several more. This catastrophe,
with the terrible yells of the surrounding Indians, seemed to have
decided General Hull and his advisers that _surrender_ "was the better
part of valour."
A _second_ incident connected with the surrender of Detroit and the
Michigan territory is the council which General Brock held with the
Indians the day before the attack upon and surrender of Detroit, and his
interview with them the day after, for the account of which I am
indebted to Colonel John Clarke's manuscripts in the Dominion Library at
Ottawa:
"On General Brock's arrival at Sandwich, a council of war was assembled
on the following morning. Along with others were 1,000 Indians, whose
equipment generally might be considered very imposing.
"The council was opened by General Brock, who informed the Indians that
he was ordered by their great Father, the King, to come to their
assistance, and with them to drive the enemy from Fort Detroit. His
speech was highly applauded, and Tecumseh was unanimously called upon to
speak in reply. He commenced with expressing his joy that their great
Father beyond the Salt Lake (meaning the King of England) had at length
awoke from his long sleep, and sent his warriors to the assistance of
his red children, who had roused themselves in their honour, and were
now ready to shed the last drop of their blood in their great Father's
service.
"Previously to passing over to Detroit, General Brock inquired of
Tecumseh what kind of country he should have to pass through, in the
event of his proceeding further. Tecumseh, taking a roll of elm bark,
and extending it on the ground, drew forth his scalping knife, and
presently etched upon the bark a plan of the country; which, if not so
neat, was as fully intelligible as if a surveyor had prepared it.
Pleased with this talent in Tecumseh, and with his characteristic
boldness, General Brock induced the Indians to cross the river for the
attack on Detroit, prior to the embarkation of the white troops.
"Soon after Detroit was surrendered, General Brock took off his sash,
and publicly placed it around the body of the chief Tecumseh, who
received the honour conferred on him with evident gratification; but was
seen the next day without his sash. The British general, fearing that
something had displeased the Indian chief, sent his interpreter for an
explanation. Tecumseh told him that he did not wish to wear the sash as
a mark of distinction, when an older warrior than himself was present;
he had transferred the sash to the Wyandot chief, Roundhead.
"In his correspondence, General Brock states that 'of many Indians whom
he met at Amherstburg, he who most attracted his notice was the Shawnee
chief, Tecumseh, brother of the Prophet--a more gallant or sagacious
warrior does not, I believe, exist; he was the admiration of every one,
and was as humane as he was brave.'
"General Brock, in General Orders of the 16th of August, 1812, after the
capture of Detroit, states that two fortifications had been already
captured, Michilimackinac and Detroit, without a drop of blood being
shed by the hands of the Indians; the moment the enemy surrendered, his
life became sacred.
"On congratulating General Brock, after the capture of Detroit, Tecumseh
said to the General, 'We observed you from a distance standing the whole
time in an erect position, and when the boats reached the shore, you
were the first man on the land; your bold and sudden movements
frightened the enemy, and so compelled them to surrender to half their
number.'
"General Brock engaged the Indians to throw away the scalping
knife--implanting in their hearts the virtue of clemency, and teaching
them to feel pleasure and pride in compassion extended to a vanquished
enemy. In return, they revered him as their common Father, and whilst
under his control, were guilty of no excesses; and thereby the noble
Tecumseh was humane as well as brave."[196]
Such was the character and results of the first American invasion of
Canada.
It may be worth while to notice some events which preceded the taking of
Detroit, and which doubtless disappointed and disheartened General Hull.
In the island of St. Joseph, in Lake Huron, there was a fort or
block-house, under the command of Captain Roberts, with thirty regulars.
General Brock, in communicating to Captain Roberts the American
declaration of war against Great Britain, instructed him to take every
precaution for the protection of St. Joseph, and, if possible, to get
possession of Michilimackinac, now called Mackinac, and pronounced
Mackinaw, an island about nine miles in circumference, commanding the
entrance from Lake Huron into Lake Michigan, on which the Americans had
a fort with a captain in command, and a garrison of seventy-five men.
Captain Roberts was aided by Mr. Pothier, a gentlemen of the South-west
Fur Company, who volunteered his own services, attended by about 160
Canadian voyageurs, and placed the contents of the stores at the
disposal of Captain Roberts, who, with his little armament, consisting
of thirty regulars, two artillerymen and a sergeant, 160 Canadians, and
two iron field-pieces, set out on the 16th of July with his flotilla of
boats and canoes, convoyed by the _Caledonia_ brig, belonging to the
North-West Company, loaded with stores and provisions. On the ensuing
morning he reached Mackinac, a distance of about forty miles, landed
without opposition, and immediately summoned the garrison to surrender,
which was complied with in a few minutes. Thus was this key of the West
taken without the effusion of a drop of blood.
The Americans had carried on a brisk trade in schooners and sailing
vessels from Detroit, through Lake Huron, to the head of Lake Michigan,
now Chicago. The capture of Mackinac--which was a surprise to the
commander, who had not heard of the declaration of war--interrupted this
trade, and gave confidence to the Canadian voyageurs and Indians in the
British interests employed in the fur trade in these distant countries.
"This achievement, effected by the promptitude and judicious
arrangements of Captain Roberts, not only inspired the people with
confidence, and gave a turn to the present campaign fatal to the views
of the United States, by enabling us to maintain our influence among the
Indians of the West, which otherwise must have been lost, but it
essentially contributed to the successful struggle afterwards maintained
against the American arms in Upper Canada. General Hull, after the
capture of his army and the fall of Detroit, in his official despatch
relative to these events, attributes his disasters to the fall of
Mackinac; after the surrender of which, almost every tribe and nation of
Indians, except a part of the Miamis and Delawares, north from beyond
Lake Superior, west from beyond the Mississippi, south from Ohio and the
Wabash, and east from every part of Upper Canada, and from all the
intermediate country, joined in open hostility against the army he
commanded."[197]
"General Hull remained some time inactive, under pretext of making
preparation to prosecute the campaign with vigour; but it was the
fallacious hope of an early insurrection in his favour that lulled him
into a supineness fatal to the safety of his army. Amherstburg lay about
eighteen miles below him, and the mud and picketed fortifications of
that post was not in a condition to make resistance against a regular
siege. The Americans, confident of an easy conquest, had not as yet a
single cannon or mortar mounted, and to endeavour to take it at the
point of the bayonet he thought inexpedient. During this delay his
situation became more and more precarious; three detachments from his
army were, on three successive days, beaten back by a handful of the
41st Regiment and a few Indians, from a bridge over the River Canard,
three miles from Amherstburg, which they endeavoured to seize, in order
to open the route to that port. Another detachment, in attempting to
ford the river (Canard) higher up, was put to flight by a small party of
eighteen or twenty Indians who lay concealed in the grass. The enemy,
panic-struck at their sudden and hideous yell, fled with precipitancy,
leaving their arms, accoutrements, and haversacks. The British sloop of
war _Queen Charlotte_, carrying eighteen twenty-four pounders, lay in
the Detroit river, opposite the mouth of the River Canard, so that it
was impossible for the Americans to convey by water to Amherstburg any
artillery, of which, after much labour, they had at last mounted two
twenty-four-pounders. Lieutenant Rolette, commanding the armed brig
_Hunter_, had on the 3rd of July, at about ten o'clock in the forenoon,
by a bold attempt in his barge, with only six men, succeeded in
capturing the _Cayahaga_ packet, bound from Miami river to Detroit with
troops, and loaded with baggage, and the hospital stores of the American
army, the loss of which was now severely felt. Mackinac, in his rear,
had been taken since the commencement of the invasion, while the Indians
from that quarter were flocking to the British standard. Our naval force
being superior on the lake, Colonel Proctor pushed over to Brownstown, a
village nearly opposite to Amherstburg, twenty miles below Detroit,
with a small detachment of the 41st Regiment, under the command of
Captain Tallon, with a few Indians, who on the 5th of August surprised
and routed a party of 200 Americans under Major Vanhorne, on their way
from Detroit to River Raisin, to meet a detachment of volunteers from
Ohio, under Captain Brush, with a convoy of provisions for the army. In
this affair a quantity of booty, and General Hull's despatches to the
Secretary at War, fell into the hands of the victors, whereby the
deplorable state of the American army was disclosed." * *
"In the interim, the American general received a despatch from General
Hull, on the Niagara frontier, intimating that he could not expect
co-operation in that quarter, which would have created a diversion in
his favour. Such was the hopeless state of things when the American
general began to be sensible of his danger. His army hemmed in on every
side, cut off from its resources, and hourly wasting away with defeat,
death, sickness, and fatigue, unsupported by an expected insurrection of
Canadians in his favour, and unaided by any co-operating army, and,
above all, dismayed at the report of General Brock's resolution to
advance against him; his schemes of conquest vanquished, and in the
sinking state of his affairs, he saw no other alternative than to
retreat back to Detroit, under pretence of concentrating his main army,
and after re-opening his communications with the Rivers Raisin and
Miami, through which he received his whole supplies, to resume offensive
operations against Upper Canada. Accordingly, on the evening of the 7th
and the morning of the 8th of August, the whole of his army, except a
garrison of 250 men and a few artillery left in charge of a small
fortress they had thrown up on the British side, a little below Detroit,
_recrossed the river_.
"General Hull now detached a body of 600 men, under Lieutenant-Colonel
Miller, to dislodge the British from Brownstown, and open the
communication with the Rivers Raisin and Miami, upon which the existence
of the army depended. On the 9th, this detachment was met by the British
and Indians under Major Muir at Magnogo, between Brownstown and Detroit,
which, after a desperate battle, in which the Americans lost
seventy-five men, was obliged to retreat with inconsiderable loss
compared with that of the Americans.
"On the 7th, Lieutenant Rolette, with the boats of the _Queen Charlotte_
and _Hunter_, under cover of the guns of the latter, attacked and
captured a convoy of eleven batteaux and boats, having on board
fifty-six of their wounded, and two English prisoners, on their way from
Magnogo to Detroit, escorted by 250 American troops on shore.
"Amidst these reverses of fortune, the American general was startled at
the summons to surrender the fort of Detroit, by General Brock, who,
after having closed the public business at York, and prorogued
Parliament, and collecting a few regulars and militia with incredible
exertion, had reached Amherstburg by the 13th of August. So resolute a
demand struck the American commander with dismay, who, at the most, had
never contemplated a pursuit into his own territory by the British. He
still, however, maintained sufficient presence of mind to return a
prompt and positive refusal, upon receipt of which, the British, who now
occupied the ground so lately in possession of the enemy, in front of
Detroit, where they had thrown up a battery (erected by night) under the
direction of Captain Dixon, of the Royal Engineers, commenced, on the
afternoon of the 15th, a brisk cannonade on Detroit, from two
five-and-a-half-inch mortars, and two twelve-pounders, under the
management of Captain Hall, of the Provincial Navy, with a party of
sailors, which was continued for upwards of an hour with great effect.
Early in the morning of the 16th the cannonade recommenced, while
General Brock, with about 700 regulars and militia, and 600 Indians,
crossed the river without opposition at the Spring Wells, three miles
below Detroit, under cover of the _Queen Charlotte_ and _Hunter_. This
small but resolute force, after forming upon the beach, advanced in
column, flanked on the left by the Indians, with the river of Detroit on
their right, and took (at the distance of a mile) position in line, in
front of the American fort, into which the enemy had retired. Here every
preparation was making for an immediate assault, when, to the surprise
of both armies, a white flag was seen flying upon the walls of the fort,
and a messenger advancing with proposals from the American general to
_capitulate_. Lieutenant-Colonel McDowell, of the Militia, and Major
Glegg, of the 49th Regiment, aide-de-camp to General Brock, immediately
proceeded by his orders to the tent of the American general, where, in
a few minutes, they dictated the terms of capitulation. By this the
whole American army, including a detachment of 350 men, under Colonels
McArthur and Cass, dispatched on the 14th for River Raisin to escort the
provisions in charge of Captain Brush from thence to Detroit, became
prisoners of war; and Detroit, with the Michigan territory, were
surrendered to the British arms, without the effusion of a single drop
of British blood.
"The American statements of their own strength nearly coincide with
British reports, which make it 2,500 men, regulars and militia. The
militia were paroled, and permitted to return home, on condition of not
serving during the present war. The regulars were sent down to Quebec.
"The British force, including Indians, is acknowledged by the enemy to
have consisted of only 1,030 men or thereabout. Our own, and perhaps
more correct reports, state it to have consisted of 350 regular troops,
400 militia, and 600 Indians, who, upon the present occasion, are said
not to have sullied the glory of the day by any wanton acts of savage
barbarity incident to the Indian mode of warfare. Twenty-five pieces of
iron and eight pieces of brass ordnance, with an immense quantity of
stores of every description, and one armed brig, called the _John Adams_
(afterwards named _Detroit_), fell into the hands of the British"
[besides nearly 3,000 stand of small arms, much ammunition, and three
weeks' provisions for the whole army]. (Thompson's History of the War of
1812, pp. 67-72.)
"Thus ended this (first) rash and imbecile attempt at the conquest of
Canada. The loss of Mackinac and Detroit, with the flower of their army,
at the outset of the war, was a disgrace that filled the American
Government with consternation and alarm, as their plans of
aggrandisement were not only totally defeated, but their whole western
frontier was laid open to the inroads of the hostile Indians, and at the
mercy of a people still warm with indignation at the late
invasion."--_Ib_., pp. 72, 73.
General Brock, the day after taking Detroit, addressed to the
inhabitants of the Michigan territory the following Proclamation:
"Whereas the territory of Michigan was this day, by capitulation, ceded
to the arms of his Britannic Majesty, without any other condition than
the protection of private property; and wishing to give an early proof
of the moderation and justice of his Majesty's government, I do hereby
announce to all the inhabitants of the said territory, that the laws
heretofore in existence shall continue in force until his Majesty's
pleasure be known, and so long as the peace and safety of the said
territory will admit thereof; and I do hereby also declare and make
known to the said inhabitants, that they shall be protected in the full
exercise and enjoyment of their religion--of which all persons, both
civil and military, will take notice, and govern themselves accordingly.
"All persons having in their possession, or having knowledge of any
public property, shall forthwith deliver in the same, or give notice
thereof to the officer commanding, or to Lieutenant-Colonel Nicholl, who
are duly authorized to receive and give the proper receipts for the
same.
"Officers of militia will be held responsible that all arms in
possession of the militiamen be immediately delivered up; and all
individuals whatever who have in possession arms of any kind, will
deliver them up without delay.
"Given under my hand, at Detroit, this 16th day of August, 1812, and in
the 52nd year of his Majesty's reign. God save the King.
(Signed) "ISAAC BROCK,
"_Major-General_."
The purport and spirit of this proclamation was very different from
those issued by successful American commanders in former years, when
they required the conquered to take a new oath of allegiance, to enrol
themselves in a new army under pain of confiscation of property,
imprisonment, and even death. The true genius of English government is
justice, law, and liberty; the genius of democratic government is the
domination of party, and the spoils to the victors. In the conquest of a
vast territory by General Brock, there was no plunder or sacrifice of
life, by Indian or soldier, much less plunder for the benefit of the
general. It was not so with the promising, threatening, ostentatious,
grasping General Hull, who, according to the Patriotic Society of Upper
Canada (of which hereafter), is thus reported:
"In 1812, General Hull invaded the British province of Upper Canada, and
took possession of the town of Sandwich. He threatened (by proclamation)
_to exterminate the inhabitants if they made any resistance_. _He
plundered_ those with whom he had been on habits of intimacy years
before the war. Their plate and linen were found in his possession after
his surrender to General Brock. He marked out the loyal subjects of the
King as objects of his peculiar resentment, and consigned their property
to pillage and conflagration."
General Brock left Colonel Proctor in command of Detroit, and returned
to York (Toronto), where he arrived the 27th of August, amidst the
heartfelt acclamations of a grateful people.
"In the short space of nineteen days he had, with the assistance of the
Provincial Parliament, settled the public business of the province,
under the most trying circumstances that a commander could encounter,
and having united and prepared his little army, had effected a long and
fatiguing march of several hundred miles; and with means incredibly
limited, had repelled an invading enemy of double his force, pursued him
into his own territory, and finally compelled him to surrender his whole
army and jurisdiction; thus extending the British dominions, without
bloodshed, over an extent of territory almost equal to Upper
Canada."--"Our little navy on Lake Erie, and on Lake Ontario, though the
enemy were making the most active exertions, still maintained a decided
ascendency, and upon it depended the safety of Upper Canada and the
future fate of the British provinces. General Brock intended to have
followed up his first success by an attempt on Niagara, a fort nearly
opposite to Fort George; which, in all probability, as well as Oswego
and Sackett's Harbour, the nursery of the enemy's fleet and forces,
would have yielded to the terror of his name and the tide of success
that attended his arms; but, _controlled by his instructions_, he was
prevented from adopting measures which probably might have for ever
blasted the hopes of the United States in Upper Canada." (Christie.)
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 195: The brother-in-law and elder brother of the writer were
ordered by General Brock to select the fleetest horses of those captured
from the Americans, in order to convey the intelligence of the capture
of Detroit, and of General Hull and army, to Colonel Talbot, at Port
Talbot, and to General Vincent, commander of the forces at Burlington
Heights. They had wrought all night before they received their orders,
and travelled, one of them two days and two nights, and the other two
nights and three days without sleep. But these deeds were not peculiar;
similar deeds were performed on the Niagara and Lower Canada frontiers
during that and the following years. The Loyalist defenders of Canada of
those days were patriots and soldiers to the heart's core; and they had
wills, and nerves, and muscles "to endure hardness as good soldiers," in
the hardest and darkest hours of our country's trials and struggles.
It may be added, that the horse on which the elder brother of the writer
of these pages rode, in execution of the orders of General Brock, was
afterwards stolen by the traitor Wilcox, who escaped to the United
States, but was afterwards killed while invading Fort Erie.]
[Footnote 196: I think the reader will be interested in the following
particulars, which I have collected of this remarkable Indian Chief:
"In the year 1809, Tecumseh, attended by several hundred warriors,
encamped near Vincennes, then capital of Indiana, and demanded an
interview with the Governor of the State; for which interview was
assembled a Council, when it was observed there was no vacant seat for
the noble chief, Tecumseh. One of the Council officers hastily offered
his seat, and having respectfully said to him, 'Warrior, your Father,
General Harrison, offers you a seat.' 'My Father,' exclaimed Tecumseh,
extending his arms towards the heavens, 'There, son, is my Father, and
the earth is my mother; she giving me nourishment, and I dwell upon her
bosom.' He then sat himself upon the ground."
"The Indian warrior Tecumseh, a Shawnee chief, himself and warriors,
attached themselves to the cause of Great Britain, on the declaration of
the American war of 1812. * *
"Tecumseh's first engagement, under the British Colonel Proctor, then in
command of the Western District, was attacking and defeating a
detachment of Americans under Major Howe, from Detroit to the Beaver
river. In this affair, General Hull's despatches, and correspondence of
his troops, fell into the hands of Tecumseh; and it was partly from the
discouraging nature of their contents that General Brock attempted the
capture of the American army under General Hull."
"On the 16th of July, Tecumseh and a few of his warriors pursued near
Sandwich [on the Canadian side of the river] a detachment of the
American army, under Colonel McArthur, and fired on the rear guard. 'The
colonel suddenly faced about and gave orders for a volley, when all the
Indians fell flat on the ground, with the exception of Tecumseh, who
stood firm on his feet, with apparent unconcern."
"As Colonel Proctor retired to Nassau (Moravian town), on the Thames,
and when the regulars and militia had surrendered on the right, the
Indians carried on the contest on the left, and did not retreat until
the day was lost, and thirty-three of their number had been slain,
including the noble warrior, Tecumseh. After his fall, his lifeless
corpse was recovered with great interest by the American officers, who
declared that the contour of his features was majestic even in death. He
left a son who fought by his side when he fell, and was seventeen years
of age.
"The Prince Regent, in 1815, as a mark of respect to the memory of his
father, sent a handsome sword as a present to his son."]
[Footnote 197: Christie's War of 1812, pp. 65, 66.]
CHAPTER LIII.
SECOND AMERICAN INVASION OF UPPER CANADA AT QUEENSTON--DISPROPORTION OF
AMERICAN AND CANADIAN FORCES--DEATH OF GENERAL BROCK--DEFEAT AND LOSS OF
THE AMERICANS--ARMISTICE--INCIDENTS WHICH OCCURRED ON THE NIAGARA
FRONTIER, AT FORT ERIE, AS RELATED BY LIEUTENANT DRISCOLL, OF THE 100TH
REGIMENT.
The _second invasion_ of Upper Canada took place on the Niagara
frontier, at Queenston. We will give the account of it (condensed) from
the History of the War by Mr. Thompson, of the Royal Scots:
"Dispirited at such a total failure in General Hull's expedition, it
became late in the season before the American Government could collect a
force on the frontiers with which, with any safety, another descent upon
Canada could be made. At length, Major-General Van Rensellaer, of the
New York Militia, with a force of _four thousand men_ under his command
(1,500 of whom were regular troops), established his camp at Lewiston,
on the Niagara river, nearly half-way between Lake Ontario and the
Falls.
"Before daylight on the morning of the 13th of October, a large division
of General Van Rensellaer's army, under Brigadier-General Wadsworth,
effected a landing at the lower end of the village of Queenston
(opposite to Lewiston), and made an attack upon the position, which was
defended with the most determined bravery by the two flank companies of
the 49th Regiment, commanded by Captains Dennis and Williams, aided by
such of the militia forces and Indians as could be collected in the
vicinity.
"Major-General Brock, on receiving intelligence, immediately proceeded
to that post, from Fort George, and arrived at the juncture when the
handful of British regulars was compelled to retire for a time before an
overwhelming force of the enemy. However, on the appearance of their
gallant chief, the troops were seized with a fresh animation, and were
led on by that brave general to a renewed exertion to maintain the post;
but at the moment of charging the enemy's position, within pistol-shot
of the line, General Brock was killed by a musket ball, and with him the
position was for a short time lost. Colonel Macdonell, his provincial
aide-de-camp, was mortally wounded about the same time, and died shortly
afterwards of his wounds.
"A reinforcement of the 41st Regiment, commanded by Captain Derenzy,
with a few of the Lincoln Militia and a party of Indians, were
immediately marched from Fort George to the succour of the troops at
Queenston, under the direction of Major-General Sheaffe, who now assumed
the command; and persons who were, by their situations in life and
advanced age, exempt from serving in the militia, made common cause,
seized their arms, and flew to the field of action as volunteers.
"The conflict was again renewed, and from the advantageous position of
Norton, the Indian chief, with his warriors, on the woody brow of the
high grounds, a communication was opened with Chippewa, from whence
Captain Bullock, of the 41st Regiment, with a detachment of that corps,
was enabled to march for Queenston, and was joined on the way by parties
of militia who were repairing from all quarters, with all the enthusiasm
imaginable, to the field of battle. The fight was maintained on both
sides with a courage truly heroic. The British regulars and militia
charged in rapid succession against a force in number far exceeding
their own, until they succeeded in turning the left flank of their
column, which rested on the summit of the hill. The event of the day no
longer appeared doubtful."
"Major-General Van Rensellaer, commanding the American army, perceiving
his reinforcements embarking very slowly, recrossed the Niagara river to
accelerate their movements; but, to his utter astonishment, he found
that at the very moment when their services were most required, the
ardour of the engaged troops had entirely subsided. He rode in all
directions through his camp, urging the men by every consideration to
pass over. Lieutenant-Colonel Bloome, who had been wounded in the
action and recrossed the river, together with Judge Peck, who happened
to be in Lewiston at the time, mounted their horses and rode through the
camp, exhorting the companies to proceed--_but all in vain_. Crowds of
the United States Militia remained on the American bank of the river, to
which they had not been marched in any order, but run as a mob; _not one
of them would cross_. They had seen the wounded re-crossing; they had
seen the Indians, _and were panic-struck_." (American Report of the
Battle of Queenston.)
"No sooner had the British forces succeeded in turning the left flank of
the enemy, than he visibly began to give way; one grand effort was
therefore made upon the crest of his position, in which the heights were
carried at the point of the bayonet.
"General Van Rensellaer, having found that it was impossible to induce a
man to cross the river to reinforce the army on the heights, and that
the army had nearly expended its ammunition, immediately sent boats to
cover their retreat; but the fire, which was maintained upon the ferry
from a battery on the bank of the lower end of Queenston, completely
dispersed the boats, and many of the boatmen re-landed and fled in
dismay.
"Brigadier-General Wadsworth was therefore compelled, after a vigorous
conflict had been maintained for some time on both sides, to surrender
himself and all his officers, with 900 men, between three and four
o'clock in the afternoon, to a force far inferior to his in numbers--a
circumstance which speaks loudly in favour of the plan of defence and
attack adopted by Major-General Sheaffe.
"The loss of the British in this battle did not exceed 100 men,
including killed, wounded, and missing; while that on the side of the
Americans, including deserters, was not less than 2,000; but amongst the
killed, the British Government and the country had to deplore the loss
of Sir Isaac Brock, one whose memory will long live in the warmest
affections of every British subject in Canada."[198]
"On the morning subsequent to the battle of Queenston, General Sheaffe
entered into an armistice with the American general commanding at
Lewiston, to be confined to that part of the frontier comprised between
Lakes Ontario and Erie, subject to a condition that forty-eight hours'
notice should be given by either party for a recommencement of
hostilities [a condition violated by the American commander]. This
arrangement [considered disadvantageous to the British cause] was at
first censured by individuals unaware of the motives by which General
Sheaffe was actuated. It was not, in the flush of victory, taken into
consideration that the number of American prisoners then in his charge
far exceeded the numerical strength of his army, when the Indian force
was withdrawn; and that, with his very limited means of defence, he had
a frontier of forty miles to protect."[199]
Before noticing the _third_ American invasion of Canada, in 1812, or the
second on the Niagara frontier, we will conclude this Chapter by adding
a few incidents on the Niagara river frontier, at Fort Erie, after the
death of General Brock, October 13, 1812, by Lieutenant Driscoll, of the
100th Regiment:
"I was stationed at Fort Erie on the memorable 13th of October, 1812. At
daybreak, having returned with my escort as visiting rounds, after a
march of about six miles in muddy roads through the forests, and about
to refresh the inward man, after my fatiguing trudge, I heard a booming
of distant artillery, very faintly articulated.
"Having satisfied myself of the certainty of my belief, hunger, wet, and
fatigue were no longer remembered; excitement banishes these trifling
matters from the mind; and I posted off to my commanding officer to
report the firing, now more audible and rapid.
"I found my chief, booted, spurred, and snoring--lying, as was his wont,
on a small hair mattress on the floor in his barrack-room, which boasted
of furniture, one oak table covered with green baize, a writing-desk, a
tin basin containing water, and a brass candlestick, which had planted
in it a regulation mutton-dip, dimly flickering its last ray of light,
paling before the dawn, now making its first appearance through the
curtainless window.
"The noise I made on entering the major's sleeping and other apartment
awoke him. As he sat up on his low mattrass, he said, 'What is the
matter?' 'Heavy firing down the river, sir.' 'Turn the men out.' 'All
under arms, sir.' 'That'll do.'
"By this time he was on his legs--his hat and gloves on. His hutman was
at the door with his charger, and his spurs in his horse's flanks in an
instant--leaving the orderly, hutman, and myself to double after him up
to the fort, some hundred yards off.
"As we reached it, the men were emerging through the gate in measured
cadence, and we were on our way to the batteries, opposite the enemy's
station at Black Rock.
"Before we reached our post of alarm the sun was up and bright. We had
not assumed our position long before an orderly officer of the
Provincial Dragoons rode up, and gave us the information that the enemy
were attempting to cross at Kingston, and that we must annoy them along
the whole line, as was being done from Niagara to Queenston, by any and
every means in our power short of crossing the river. Everything was
ready on our parts. The enemy all appeared asleep, judging from the
apparent quiet that prevailed on their side of the river.
"The command to annoy the enemy was no sooner given than, bang! bang!
went off every gun we had in position.
"Now there was a stir. The enemy's guns were in a short time manned, and
returned our fire; and the day's work was begun, which was carried on
briskly the greater part of the day on both sides of the Niagara.
"About two o'clock, another Provincial dragoon, bespattered, horse and
man, with foam and mud, made his appearance--not wearing his sword or
helmet.
"Said an old Green Tiger to me, 'Horse and man jaded, sir; depend upon
it, he brings bad news.' 'Step down and ascertain what intelligence he
brings.' Away my veteran doubles, and soon returns at a funeral pace.
'Light heart, light step,' were my inward thoughts. I knew by poor old
Clibborn's style of return something dreadful had occurred.
"'What news, Clibborn? What news, man? Speak out,' said I, as he
advanced towards the battery, that was still keeping up a brisk fire.
Clibborn walked on, perfectly unconscious of the balls that were
ploughing up the ground, uttered not a word, but shook his head.
"When in the battery, the old man sat down on the platform; still no
word, but the pallor and expression of his countenance indicated the
sorrow of his soul.
"I could stand it no longer. I placed my hand on his shoulder, 'For
Heaven's sake, tell us what you know.' In choking accents he revealed
his melancholy information: 'The general is killed; the enemy has
possession of Queenston Heights.'
"Every man in the battery was paralyzed; the battery ceased firing.
"A cheer by the enemy from the opposite side of the river recalled us to
our duty. They had heard of their success down the river. Our men, who
had in various ways evinced their feelings--some in weeping, some in
swearing, some in mournful silence--now exhibit demoniac energy. The
heavy guns are loaded, traversed and fired, as if they were
field-pieces--too much hurry for precision. 'Take your time, men; don't
throw away your fire, my lads.' 'No, sir, but we will give it to them
hot and heavy.'
"All the guns were worked by the 49 men of my own company, and they
wished to avenge their beloved chief Brock, whom they knew and valued
with that correct appreciation peculiar to the British soldier. They had
all served under him in Holland and at Copenhagen.
"I had a very excellent reconnoitring-glass; and as I kept a sharp
look-out for the effect of our fire, and the movements of the enemy, I
observed that powder was being removed from a large wooden barrack into
ammunition waggons. The only man of the Royal Artillery I had with me
was a bombardier, Walker. I called his attention to the fact I had
observed, and directed him to lay a gun for that part of the building
wherein the powder was being taken. At my request he took a look through
my glass, and, having satisfied himself, he lay the gun as ordered. I,
with my glass, watched the spot aimed at. I saw one plank of the
building fall out, and at the same instant the whole fabric went up in a
pillar of black smoke, with but little noise, as it was no more.
Horses, waggons, men, and building all disappeared; not a vestige of any
was seen.
"Now was our turn to cheer; and we plied the enemy in a style so quick
and accurate, that we silenced all their guns just as a third dragoon
come galloping up to us, shouting 'Victory! Victory!' Then again we
cheered lustily; but no response from the other side. Night now hid the
enemy from our sight.
"The commissariat made its appearance with biscuit, pork, rum, and
potatoes; and we broke our fast for that day about nine p.m.
"How strange and unaccountable are the feelings induced by war! Here
were men of two nations, but of a common origin, speaking the same
language, of the same creed, intent on mutual destruction, rejoicing
with fiendish pleasure at their address in perpetrating murder by
wholesale, shouting for joy as disasters propagated by the chances of
war hurled death and agonizing wounds into the ranks of their opponents!
And yet the very same men, when chance gave them the opportunity, would
readily exchange, in their own peculiar way, all the amenities of social
life, extending to one another a draw of the pipe, and quid, or glass;
obtaining and exchanging information from one and the other of their
respective services, as to pay, rations, and so on--the victors, with
delicacy, abstaining from any allusion to the victorious day. Though the
vanquished would allude to their disaster, the victors never named their
triumphs.
"Such is the character of acts and words between British and American
soldiers which I have witnessed, as officer commanding a guard over
American prisoners.
"J. DRISCOLL,
"Of the 100th Regiment."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 198: Such was the high esteem in which the character of
General Brock was held even by the enemy, that during the movement of
the funeral procession of that brave man from Queenston to Fort George,
a distance of seven miles, minute guns were fired at every American post
on that part of the lines; and even the appearance of hostilities was
suspended.]
[Footnote 199: Thompson's History of the War of 1812, Chap. xv.]
CHAPTER LIV.
THIRD AMERICAN INVASION OF UPPER CANADA, AT AND NEAR FORT ERIE, ON THE
NIAGARA RIVER, UNDER GENERAL SMYTH--HIS ADDRESS TO HIS SOLDIERS--THE
LUDICROUS AND DISGRACEFUL FAILURE OF HIS EXPEDITION--THREE AMERICAN
EXPEDITIONS REPELLED IN 1812 BY THE SPARTAN BANDS OF CANADIAN
VOLUNTEERS, ASSISTED BY A FEW REGIMENTS OF ENGLISH SOLDIERS.
Such was the result of the _second invasion of Canada_--the first
invasion on the Niagara frontier by the American "Grand Army of the
Centre."
The Americans, after recovering in some measure from their disastrous
defeat at Queenston, commenced gigantic preparations for assembling
another army near Buffalo, for a second descent on the Niagara frontier,
under the command of General Smyth, with an army which, according to the
latest accounts of the American reports themselves, was 8,000 strong,
with fifteen pieces of field ordnance--sustained in the rear by a
populous and fertile country, and the facility afforded by good roads to
draw the supplies for his army and to bring into the field a formidable
artillery. So confident was General Smyth himself of a successful result
of his expedition, that he boasted on the 10th of November "that in a
few days the troops under his command would plant the American standard
in Canada," and issued an order to the commandant of Fort Niagara to
save the buildings at Fort George and the adjacent town of Newark
(Niagara), as they would be required for winter quarters for the "Army
of the Centre."
It was a difficult if not doubtful task for General Sheaffe and the
regular and militia officers under his command to provide for the
defence of the country against such formidable odds; for up to the time
at which the American general had violated the terms of the armistice
not a single British soldier had arrived to reinforce the little
Canadian army; and "after the conflict at Queenston, the militia, which
constituted the majority of the British force, had been permitted to
return home to secure the remainder of their harvest." (Thompson.)
"However, on the first alarm being given of the hostile movements of the
American army, those already harassed but loyal Canadian militiamen
promptly returned to their posts, fully determined to dispute every inch
of ground while a man was left to defend it."--(_Ib_). Nor were these
volunteer Loyalists intimidated by General Smyth's extended columns of
cavalry and infantry with which he lined the American shore, his
marching and countermarching of countless battalions, and all the pomp
of war and parade of martial bombast with which the fertile mind of
General Smyth hoped to terrify the apparently defenceless Canadians; to
which he added a flaming proclamation, not excelled in pomposity and
brag by that of General Hull issued to Canadians three months before. We
give this proclamation, as we have done that of General Hull, in a
note.[200]
This proclamation, ridiculous as it is, and appealing to the lowest
mercenary as well as better motives of democratic Americans, produced a
considerable effect in Pennsylvania, and caused an accession of some
2,000 volunteers to General Smyth's already large forces; but when the
crisis of action arrived, this grandiloquent General Smyth was not to be
found on the field of action; and of the twenty boats which were
provided to convey across the river the first instalment of invaders of
Canada, fourteen boats were sunk or driven back, and only six boats
reached the Canadian shore and gained a temporary hold, but some of them
were driven back with loss before the next morning, and the remainder
were taken prisoners. The next day General Smyth promised to do very
great things; but we will narrate these doings and the results in the
words of the American writer Lossing, in his _Field Book of the War of_
1812. Lossing says:
"November 27th [1812].--It was sunrise when the troops began to embark,
and so tardy were the movements that it was late in the afternoon when
all was ready. General Smyth did not make his appearance, and all the
movements were under the direction of his subordinates. A number of
boats had been left to strand upon the shore, and became filled with
water, snow, and ice; and as hour after hour passed by, dreariness and
disappointment fell upon the spirits of the shivering troops. Meanwhile
the enemy had collected on the opposite [British] shore, and were
watching every movement. At length, when all seemed ready and impatience
had yielded to hope, an order came from the commanding general '_to
disembark and dine_.' The wearied and worried troops were deeply
exasperated by this order, and nothing but the most positive assurances
that the undertaking would be immediately resumed kept them from open
mutiny. The different regiments retired sullenly to their respective
quarters, and General Porter, with his dispirited New York volunteers,
marched in disgust to Buffalo.
"November 28th [1812].--Smyth now called a council of officers. They
could not agree. The best of them urged the necessity of crossing in
force at once, before the (Canadian) enemy could make formidable
preparations for their reception. The General decided otherwise; and
doubt and despondency brooded over the camp that night. The ensuing
Sabbath brought no relief. Preparations for another embarkation were
indeed in progress, while the (Canadian) enemy, too, was busy in
opposing labour. It was evident to every spectator of judgment that the
invasion must be attempted at another point of the river, when, towards
evening, to the astonishment of all, the General issued an order
perfectly characteristic of the man--for the troops to be ready at
eight (November 30) o'clock the next morning for embarkation. 'The
General will be on board,' he pompously proclaimed. 'Neither rain, snow,
or frost will prevent the embarkation,' he said. 'The cavalry will soon
scour the fields from Black Rock to the bridge, and suffer no idle
spectators. While embarking, the bands will play martial airs; _Yankee
Doodle_ will be the signal to get under way. * * The landing will be
effected in despite of cannon. The whole army has seen that cannon is to
be but little dreaded. * * Hearts of war! to-morrow will be memorable in
the annals of the United States.'
"'To-morrow' came, but not the promised achievement. All the officers
disapproved of the time and manner of the proposed embarkation, and
expressed their opinions freely. At General Porter's quarters a change
was agreed upon. Porter deferred the embarkation until Tuesday morning,
the 1st of December, an hour or two before daylight, and to make the
landing-place a little below the upper end of Grand Island. Winder
suggested the propriety of making a descent directly upon Chippewa, 'the
key of the country.' This Smyth consented to attempt, intending as he
said, if successful, to march down to Queenston, and lay siege to Fort
George. Orders were accordingly given for a general rendezvous at the
Navy Yard, at three o'clock on Tuesday morning, and that the troops
should be collected in the woods near by on Monday, where they should
build fires, and await the signal for gathering on the shore of the
river. The hour arrived, but when day dawned only fifteen hundred were
embarked. Tannehill's Pennsylvania Brigade were not present. Before
their arrival rumours had reached the camp that they, too, like Van
Rensellaer's militia at Lewiston, had raised a constitutional question
about being led out of their State. Yet their scruples seem to have been
overcome at this time, and they would have invaded Canada cheerfully
under other auspices. But distrust of their leader, created by the
events of the last forty-eight hours, had demoralized nearly the whole
army. They had made so much noise in embarkation that the startled
Canadian had sounded his alarm bugle and discharged signal guns from
Fort Erie to Chippewa. Tannehill's Pennsylvanians had not appeared, and
many other troops lingered upon the shore, loth to embark. In this
dilemma Smyth hastily called a Council of the regular officers, utterly
excluding those of the volunteers from the conference; and the first
intimation of the result of that Council was an order from the
commanding general, sent to General Porter, who was on a boat with the
pilot, a fourth of a mile from shore, in the van of the impatient
flotilla, _directing the whole army to debark, and repair to their
quarters_. This was accompanied by a declaration that the _invasion of
Canada was abandoned at present_, pleading in bar of just censure, that
his orders from his superiors were, not to attempt it with less than
3,000 men. The regulars were ordered into winter quarters, and the
volunteers were dismissed to their homes.
"The troops, without order or restraint, discharged their muskets in all
directions, and a scene of insubordination and utter confusion followed.
At least a thousand of the volunteers had come from their homes in
response to his invitation, and the promise that they should be led into
Canada by a victor [without personal danger, and with the promise of
plunder and glory]. They had implicit confidence in his ability and in
the sincerity of his great words, and in proportion to their faith and
zeal were now their disappointment and resentment. Unwilling to have
their errand to the frontier fruitless of all but disgrace, the
volunteers earnestly requested permission to be led into Canada under
General Porter, promising the commanding general the speedy capture of
Fort Erie if he would furnish them with four pieces of artillery.[201]
But Smyth evaded their request, and the volunteers were sent home
uttering imprecations against the man whom they considered a mere
blusterer without courage, and a conceited deceiver without honour. They
felt themselves betrayed, and the inhabitants in the vicinity
sympathized with them. Their indignation was greatly increased by the
ill-timed and ungenerous charges made by Smyth in his report to General
Dearborn against General Porter, in whom the volunteers had the
greatest confidence. General Smyth's person was for some time in danger.
He was compelled to double the guards around his tent, and to move it
from place to place to avoid continual insults. He was several times
fired at when he ventured out of his marquee. Porter openly attributed
the abandonment of the invasion of Canada to the cowardice of Smyth." * *
"Thus ended the melodrama of Smyth's invasion of Canada. The whole
affair was disgraceful and humiliating. 'What wretched work Smyth and
Porter have made of it!' wrote General Wadsworth to General Van
Rensellaer from his home at Genesee at the close of the year. 'I wish
those who are disposed to find so much fault could know the state of the
militia since the day you gave up the command. It has been "confusion
worse confounded."' The day that saw Smyth's failure was indeed
'memorable in the annals of the United States,' as well as in his own
private history. Confidence in his military ability was destroyed; and
three months afterwards he was 'disbanded,' as the _Army Register_ says;
in other words, he was deposed without a trial, and excluded from the
army."[202]
Such was the third and last American invasion of Upper Canada in 1812.
Three large American armies defeated--two of them taken prisoners by
less than one-third their number of Canadian volunteers, aided by a few
hundred regular soldiers and as many Indians, who, notwithstanding the
abuse of them by the American generals, never murdered a woman or child
during the year, or killed a prisoner, and who were no more "savages"
than the men who maligned them.
The Spartan bands of Canadian Loyalist volunteers, aided by a few
hundred English soldiers and civilized Indians, repelled the Persian
thousands of democratic American invaders, and maintained the virgin
soil of Canada unpolluted by the foot of the plundering invader.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 200: The following is General Smyth's proclamation, issued to
his soldiers, on his intended invasion of Canada:
"_General Smyth to the Soldiers of the Army of the Centre._
"Companions in arms!--The time is come when you will cross the stream
of Niagara to conquer Canada, and to secure the peace of the Canadian
frontier.
"You will enter a country that is to be one of the United States. You
are to arrive among a people who are to become your fellow-citizens. It
is not against _them_ that we come to make war. It is against that
Government which holds them as vassals.
"You will make this war as little as possible distressful to the
Canadian population. If they are peaceable, they are to be secure in
their persons; and in their property as far as our imperious necessities
will allow.
"Provided that, plundering is absolutely forbidden. Any soldier who
quits his rank to plunder on the field of battle, will be punished in
the most exemplary manner.
"But your just rights as soldiers will be maintained; whatever is booty
by the usages of war, you shall have. All horses belonging to the
artillery and cavalry; all waggons and teams in the public service, will
be sold for the benefit of the captors. Public stores will be secured
for the service of the United States. The Government will, with justice,
pay you the value.
"The horses drawing the light artillery of the enemy are wanted for the
service of the United States. I will order $200 for each to be paid to
the party who may take them. I will also order $40 to be paid for the
arms and spoils of each savage warrior who shall be killed.
"_Soldiers!_--You are amply provided for war. You are superior in number
to the enemy. Your personal strength and activity are greater. Your
weapons are longer. The regular soldiers of the enemy are really old,
whose best years have been spent in the sickly climate of the West
Indies. They will not be able to stand before you--you who charge with
the bayonet. You have seen Indians, such as those hired by the English
to murder women and children, and kill and scalp the wounded. You have
seen their dances and grimaces, and heard their yells. Can you fear
_them_? No; you hold them in the utmost contempt.
"_Volunteers!_--Disloyal and traitorous men have endeavoured to dissuade
you from your duty. Sometimes they say, if you enter Canada you will be
held to service for five years. At others they say that you will not be
furnished with supplies. At other times they say that if you are
wounded, the Government will not provide for you by pensions. The just
and generous course pursued by Government towards the volunteers who
fought at Tippecanoe, furnishes an answer to that objection. The
others are too absurd to deserve any.
"_Volunteers!_--I esteem your generous and patriotic motives. You have
made sacrifices on the altar of your country. You will not suffer the
enemies of your fame to mislead you from the path of duty and honour,
and deprive you of the esteem of a grateful country. You will show the
_eternal_ infamy that awaits the man who, having come in sight of the
enemy, basely shrinks in the moment of trial.
"_Soldiers of every corps!_--It is in your power to retrieve the honour
of your country, and to cover yourselves with glory. Every man who
performs a gallant action shall have his name made known to the nation.
Rewards and honours await the brave. Infamy and contempt are reserved
for cowards.
"_Companions in arms!_--You come to vanquish a valiant foe; I know the
choice you will make. Come on, my heroes! And when you attack the
enemy's batteries, let your rallying word be 'The cannon lost at
Detroit, or death.'
(Signed) "ALEXANDER SMYTH,
"_Brigadier-General Commanding_.
"Camp near Buffalo, 17th Nov., 1812."]
[Footnote 201: We are inclined to think that those volunteers and others
who professed such patriotic indignation against Smyth, and promised
such great things, were, in general, no less poltroons than Smyth
himself. It was as easy for them to denounce Smyth, and to boast of what
they could and would do, as for Smyth, in his proclamation, to denounce
those who opposed the invasion of Canada.]
[Footnote 202: Lossing's Field Book of the War of 1812, Chap, xx., p.
430-432.
Mr. Lossing adds, in a note, that "General Smyth petitioned the House of
Representatives to reinstate him in the army. That body referred the
petition to the Secretary of War--the General's executioner. Of course,
its prayer was not answered. In that petition Smyth asked the privilege
of 'dying for his country.' This phrase was the subject of much
ridicule. At a public celebration of Washington's birthday, in 1814, at
Georgetown, in the District of Columbia, the following sentiment was
offered during the presentation of toasts: 'General Smyth's petition to
Congress to die for his country; may it be ordered that the prayer of
said petition be granted.'
"A wag wrote on a panel of one of the doors of the House of
Representatives:
"'All hail, great chief, who quailed before
A Bishop on Niag'ra's shore;
But looks on Death with dauntless eye,
And begs for leave to bleed and die,
"'Oh my!'"]
CHAPTER LV.
FOURTH AMERICAN INVASION--FIRST INVASION OF LOWER CANADA, COMPLETELY
DEFEATED BY THE COURAGE AND SKILL OF THE CANADIANS; AND GENERAL DEARBORN
RETIRES INTO WINTER QUARTERS AT PLATTSBURG.
But in addition to these three abortive invasions of Upper Canada in
1812, was one of _Lower Canada_, which will be narrated in the words of
Mr. Christie, illustrating as it does the ardent loyalty and noble
heroism of the French Canadians:
"The American forces, under General Dearborn, gradually approached the
frontier of Lower Canada; and early on the morning of the 17th of
November, 1812, Major (now Lieutenant-Colonel) De Salaberry,
Superintendent of the Canadian Voltigeurs, commanding the cordon of
advanced posts on the lines, received information at St. Philip's that
the enemy, to the number of ten thousand (10,000), were advancing to
Odletown. He immediately despatched two companies of the Voltigeurs,
under the command of Captain Perrault, of the same regiment, with 300
Indians under Captain Duchesne, of the Indian Department, to reinforce
Major Laforce, of the 1st Battalion embodied militia, who was posted
with the two flank companies of that battalion at the River La Cole.
This detachment, after a fatiguing march of thirty-six miles, chiefly
through _morasses_ and _abatis_, arrived early in the afternoon of the
same day at Burtonville, and took a position within the River La Cole, a
mile distant from it, in conjunction with a party of thirty Algonquin
and Abenaki Indians, and a few Voyageurs under Captain McKay, a
gentleman of the North-West Company in the Voyageurs' corps. Major De
Salaberry arrived the day following, with the remainder of the
Voltigeurs and the Voyageurs, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel
McGillivray, and four companies of the volunteer Chasseurs from the
parishes of Chateauguay, St. Constant, St. Philip, and l'Acadie.
"In the meantime the enemy occupied Champlain Town, two or three miles
from the lines, and an earnest invasion was momentarily expected.
Nothing occurred of any consequence until the 20th, in the morning, when
Captain McKay, visiting the picquet between three and four o'clock,
perceived the enemy fording the River La Cole, and at the same instant
heard them cock their firelocks in the surrounding bushes. He had
scarcely time to apprise the picquet under Captain Bernard Panet, of
their danger, when the enemy, who had surrounded the guardhut on all
sides, discharged a volley of musketry so close that their wads set fire
to the roof and consumed the hut. The militia and Indians discharged
their pieces, and dashing through the ranks of the enemy, escaped
unhurt, while the Americans, who had forded the river in two places,
mistaking each other for the enemy in the darkness and confusion of the
night, kept up a brisk fire for near half an hour, in which they killed
and wounded several of their own people. After discovering their error
they retired back to Champlain Town, leaving five of their men wounded,
and three or four killed, who were found by the Indians on the same day.
The American party is said to have consisted of fourteen hundred (1,400)
men and a troop of dragoons, and was commanded by Colonels Pike and
Clarke.
"This movement of the enemy gave room to expect another more vigorous
attempt to invade Lower Canada; and on the 22nd, the Governor, by a
General Order, directed the whole of the militia of the province to
consider themselves commanded for active service, and to be prepared to
move forward to meet the enemy as soon as required.
"Lieut.-Colonel Deschambault was ordered to cross the St. Lawrence at
Lachine to Cahuaugo, with the Point Claire, Riviere du Chene, Vaudreuil,
and Longue Point Battalions, and to march upon l'Acadie. The volunteers
of the 1st Battalion of Montreal Militia, the flank companies of the 2nd
and 3rd Battalions, and a troop of Militia Dragoons, crossed the river
to Longueuil and Laprairie; and the whole mass of population in the
district of Montreal made a spontaneous movement towards the point of
invasion with an enthusiasm unsurpassed in any age or country.
"General Dearborn, who, no doubt, was well informed of the state of the
public mind in Lower Canada at this crisis, foresaw, from the multitude
assembled to oppose his progress, and the hostile spirit of the
Canadians, the fruitlessness of an attempt to invade Lower Canada, and
began to withdraw his sickly and already enfeebled host into winter
quarters at Plattsburg and Burlington.
"All apprehensions of an invasion of Lower Canada for the present season
having disappeared, the troops and embodied militia were, on the 27th of
November, ordered into winter quarters."[203]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 203: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap, iv., pp.
90-92.
"The armistice between General Smyth and Sheaffe after the battle of
Queenston was terminated on the 20th of November, pursuant to
notification to that effect from the former. This and the former
armistice, without affording any present advantage, proved in the event
materially prejudicial to the British on Lake Erie. The Americans
availed themselves of so favourable an occasion to forward their naval
stores unmolested from Black Rock to Presqu' Isle [Erie] by water, which
they could not otherwise have effected, but with immense trouble and
expense by land, and equipped at leisure a fleet which afterwards
wrested from us the command of that lake."--_Ib._, pp. 92, 93.]
CHAPTER LVI.
PART I.
WAR CAMPAIGNS OF 1813--THREE DIVISIONS OF THE AMERICAN ARMY--BATTLE OF
FRENCHTOWN, AMERICANS DEFEATED--MISREPRESENTATIONS CORRECTED.
The campaign of 1813 opened auspiciously for the Canadians, in both
Upper and Lower Canada, notwithstanding the fewness of their defenders
in regulars, militia, and Indians, and though they suffered severely in
several instances towards the close of the year.
It was manifest from the movement of the American army to the frontiers
of Upper and Lower Canada, before the close of the year 1812, that on
the opening of the campaign of 1813 they intended to retrieve the
disasters and disgraces of the first year of the war, and make descents
upon the colonies in good earnest. Sir George Prevost, Governor-General,
was placed at great disadvantage for their general defence, as the small
British force then occupying the Canadas, and the wide extent of
frontier the British commander-in-chief had to defend, rendered it
impossible for him to cope with the American enemy in point of numbers.
The American army, to whom was committed this year _the honour of
conquering Canada_, was divided, as the year before, into three
divisions: first, the Army of the North, consisting of 18,000 men,
commanded by General Hampton, and stationed along the southern shore of
Lake Champlain, on the south precincts of Lower Canada; the second, the
Army of the Centre, consisting of 7,000 effective men, which was again
subdivided into two divisions, commanded by Generals Dearborn and
Wilkinson, and were posted from Buffalo, at the lower extremity of Lake
Erie, to Sackett's Harbour, at the lower end of Lake Ontario; and the
third, the Army of the West, consisting of "8,000 effective men,"
according to the American account, commanded by Generals Harrison and
Wilkinson, whose limits extended from Buffalo westward, as far as the
British frontier extended.
After the capture of Detroit by General Brock and his little army,
Colonel Proctor was appointed to command that fort, with a force of
about 600 regulars and a number of Indians--an entirely insufficient
force, but all that could be spared and provided from the slender forces
of Upper Canada. The American General, Harrison, who succeeded Hull in
the command of the West, organized a large force by the end of 1812, of
over 5,000 men, consisting principally of men from Ohio and Kentucky.
Among the small outposts which Proctor had established in the
neighbourhood of Detroit, was one at _Frenchtown_, on the River Raisin,
twenty-six miles from Detroit, which consisted of thirty of the Essex
Militia, under Major Reynolds, and about 200 Indians. On the 17th of
January, 1813, Brigadier-General Winchester, commanding a division of
the American army, sent Colonel Lewis with a strong force to dislodge
the British--which he succeeded in doing, after a sharp encounter in
which the Americans lost twelve killed and fifty wounded. Reynolds
retreated to Brownstown, sixteen miles in his rear, and gave information
to Colonel Proctor of the advance of Winchester's brigade, which now
occupied _Frenchtown_, and _was over one thousand strong_.
Colonel Proctor knew that his only hope of success was by prompt action
to fight the enemy in detail, before General Harrison could unite his
whole force to bear on Detroit. He therefore forthwith assembled all his
available force at Brownstown, and on the 21st pushed on to attack the
American camp at Frenchtown, with about 500 regular soldiers and militia
and 600 Indians. The attack upon the American camp was made on the
morning of the 22nd; and the Indians, under the Wyandot chief Roundhead,
speedily turned the enemy's flank and caused him to retreat--Chief
Roundhead with his Indians taking General Winchester himself prisoner,
and delivering him unharmed to Colonel Proctor. About 500 of General
Winchester's men had thrown themselves into the houses, where they were
making deadly resistance from fear of falling into the hands of the
Indians, who were greatly exasperated by this mode of warfare, and
assailed and pursued their retreating but resisting enemies with a
ferocity unequalled during the whole three years' war. Colonel Proctor
informed General Winchester that the houses would be set on fire, and he
would be utterly unable to restrain the Indians, if this kind of warfare
were persisted in, and they refused to surrender. They at length
surrendered, on being assured that they would be protected from the
Indians. Thirty-two officers and upwards of 500 men were taken
prisoners, not one of whom sustained any injury from their captors,
whether regular soldiers, militia, or Indians.
But many Americans were slaughtered in refusing to surrender for fear of
the Indians, and determined to fight and retreat in hopes of making
their escape. They suffered severely; and on that account several
American writers have represented the Indians at the battle of
Frenchtown as committing unheard-of cruelties upon helpless men, women,
and children. Even President Madison joined in the misrepresentation, as
he was always ready to seize upon any pretext to assail the British
Government for admitting the alliance of the Indians in the
war--forgetful that his Government had repeatedly sought to do the same
thing, but had only succeeded in a few instances. But in vindication of
the Indians and their commander, Colonel Proctor, the following facts
may be stated, which are conclusive on the subject. In the first place,
General Winchester, the commander of the American detachment, was taken
prisoner by the Indians, and instead of being butchered and scalped, was
delivered unharmed by the Wyandot chief Roundhead into the hands of
Colonel Proctor.
However, many of the Americans refused to surrender from fear of falling
into the hands of the Indians, and attempted to retreat and fight, in
hopes of escape, but were mostly killed in the attempt by the Indians,
so greatly exasperated by the mode of warfare adopted against them from
the houses. Under this pretext most American writers have represented
the Indians, with the sanction of the English, as having committed
unheard-of cruelties against helpless men, women, and children at the
battle of Frenchtown--statements which were pure fiction, as has been
proved to demonstration in Chapter XXXV. of this history, in the
fictions of the alleged "Massacre of Wyoming."
For example, General Harrison, who was one of the few old American
generals employed by the democratic President Madison in the war, and
who was one or two days' march from Frenchtown, was informed and wrote
in a despatch two days after the battle (24th of January), that "General
Winchester had been taken by the Indians, _killed and scalped; his body
was cut up and mangled in a shocking manner, and one of his hands cut
off_;" when not a hair of General Winchester's head was injured, and he
was afterwards exchanged, and appeared on the Niagara frontier, and was
again taken prisoner, safe and sound, by the British at the battle of
Stony Creek.
General Harrison, in his despatches written five days afterwards, after
having ascertained all the facts of the battle, makes no mention of any
cruelties practised by the Indians, which he doubtless would have done
had there been any truth in the imputations against the Indians or the
English soldiers with whom they acted. He speaks of General Winchester
as among the prisoners, notwithstanding his statement five days before
that he had been killed, scalped, and cut to pieces. The following
facts, given by Mr. Thompson in his "History of the War of 1812," are
conclusive on this affair of the battle of Frenchtown, the 22nd of
January, 1813:
"Much has been said by American writers regarding the conduct of the
combined forces of the affair of Frenchtown. They have not even stopped
to charge British officers and soldiers with the most enormous
cruelties, committed in conjunction with the Indians, when it was in
their power to have prevented them. Such have been the contemptible
misrepresentations to which many publications, otherwise deserving of
merit, have descended, as well of this as of many other affairs during
the war; and even amongst a few British subjects they have gained
credence.
"General Harrison, however, in writing his despatches to Governor Meigs,
as well as several officers of his army who avail themselves of the
general express to write to their friends in Chillicothe, in most of
their letters give the details of the battle, _but seem to be ignorant
as regards the greatest part of that 'Massacre_,' as it has been
gravely termed. It is gathered from these despatches and letters by a
Chillicothe journal of the 2nd of February, 1813, that '_those who
surrendered themselves on the field of battle were taken prisoners by
the British, while those who attempted to escape were pursued,
tomahawked, and scalped_.' Now, even this account, in part, is
incorrect; for the Indians, by whom they were assailed, were posted
there for the express purpose of cutting off their retreat; and _those
who surrendered to the Indians were safely conducted to the British
camp_; but such was the panic with which these unfortunate fugitives
were seized, that no persuasions on the part of the Indian chiefs, _who
were fully disposed to comply with the orders of Colonel Proctor_, could
prevail on them to surrender until they were either wounded and taken,
or overtaken in the chase by their pursuers, when no efforts of the
chiefs could save them from their fury.
"In a letter containing copies of despatches from General Harrison,
dated 24th January, 1813, it is stated that 'when the attack commenced,
General Winchester ordered a retreat, but from the utter confusion which
prevailed, this could not be effected; and he then told them that every
man must take care of himself, and attempted to make his own escape on
horseback, but was overtaken by the Indians before he had gone a mile,
and killed and scalped. His body was cut up and mangled in a most
shocking manner, and one of his hands cut off.'
"Now, here is an awful Indian tale, manufactured, as many others have
been of like description, which turns out to be a mere fabrication; for
when General Winchester found himself pursued in his attempt to escape,
he with a few others surrendered themselves to a chief of the Wyandot
nation, and not a hair of their heads was hurt, _except the injury
received from the fight_.
"It is also stated in the same letter that Colonels Allen and Lewis were
among the slain; in contradiction of which, in General Harrison's letter
to Governor Meigs, dated 29th January, it is stated that General
Winchester and Colonel and Brigade-Major Gerrard are among the
prisoners.
"The conclusion is plain, that had those deluded people not been
overcome by fear, and surrendered themselves at once, they might have
enjoyed the same safety as did General Winchester and his
companions."[204]
"This spirited and vigorous measure (on the part of Colonel Proctor)
completely disconcerted the arrangements made by General Harrison for
the recovery of Michigan territory, and secured Detroit from any
immediate danger. The House of Assembly of Lower Canada [as also of
Upper Canada] passed a vote of thanks to Colonel Proctor for the skill
and intrepidity with which he planned and carried into effect this
enterprise. A vote of thanks was also passed to the officers,
non-commissioned officers, and privates who assisted in its
accomplishment; and Colonel Proctor was immediately promoted to the rank
of brigadier-general by Sir George Prevost, the commander of the forces,
until the pleasure of the Prince Regent should be known, who was pleased
to approve and confirm the appointment."[205]
PART II.
AMERICANS ATTACK AND PLUNDER IN AND ABOUT BROCKVILLE--SUCCESSFUL
RETALIATORY ATTACK ON OGDENSBURG.
The next military affairs in the order of time, illustrative of the
loyalty and courage of the Canadians, occurred on the River St.
Lawrence, in the neighbourhoods of Prescott and Brockville. Most of the
American invasions were mere raids for destruction and plunder of
property. In the winter of 1813 several of these raids were made from
Ogdensburg on the British settlements. "After winter (1813) had fairly
set in, and the St. Lawrence was frozen over, the Americans on several
occasions sent marauding parties across the ice to pillage and destroy
the Canadian settlements. [The American mode of giving liberty to
Canada.] On the night of the 6th of February, two companies of riflemen
from Ogdensburg, under command of Captain Forsyth, made a descent on the
town of Brockville, wounded a sentry, fired several houses, and carried
off a quantity of plunder, together with fifty of the inhabitants.
Several inroads from Ogdensburg were made; and the British were anxious
to retaliate." (Tuttle.) On the closing of the session of the
Legislature of Lower Canada, the 17th of February, 1813, the
Governor-General, Sir George Prevost, made a tour of inspection of the
forts of Upper Canada. On his arrival at Prescott he was importuned to
authorize an attack upon Ogdensburg, in retaliation for an attack upon
Brockville by the enemy some days previous. He consented to a
demonstration on the river to ascertain the enemy's force; and on the
ensuing morning (22nd February), as the Governor-General departed,
accompanied to Kingston by Lieut.-Colonel Pearson (commander of
Prescott), Lieut.-Colonel M'Donnell, second in command, moved with his
party across the river on the ice, towards Ogdensburg. The enemy,
perceiving the movement, were prepared to receive him; and
Lieut.-Colonel M'Donnell, impelled by that spirit characteristic of
British soldiers, turned the demonstration into a real attack.
The enemy was driven from the town after a short contest, leaving about
twenty killed and a considerable number wounded. Four brass
field-pieces, seven pieces of iron ordnance, complete, with several
stand of arms and a considerable quantity of stores, fell into the hands
of the victors, who lost seven killed, and seven officers (including
Lieutenant-Colonel M'Donnell) and forty-one men wounded. After having
destroyed two small schooners and two gun-boats left there to winter,
they removed the stores and arms to their own side of the river at
Prescott. This brilliant achievement prevented any further American
forays on the Canadians from Cornwall to Gananoque for the rest of the
winter.
PART III.
WINTER PREPARATIONS IN LOWER CANADA FOR THE CAMPAIGN--UNPRECEDENTED
MARCH ON SNOW-SHOES OF LOYALIST VOLUNTEERS FROM NEW BRUNSWICK TO LOWER
CANADA--AMERICAN PLAN OF OPERATIONS.
The greatest exertions were made in Canada during the winter to prepare
for the ensuing campaign. The Canadian regiment of Fencibles, the
Voltigeurs, the Glengarries, were recruited with diligence and success,
though still without reinforcements from England--too much engrossed
with her European wars to afford much assistance to the colonies. A
volunteer regiment from New Brunswick came, by permission and authority,
to the assistance of the beleaguered but hitherto successful Canadians.
"The King's Regiment of New Brunswick was mustered into the regular army
as the 104th Regiment, and sent to Canada for active service. The
regiment was first formed amongst the Loyalists who had settled in York
county, about Fredericton, in 1784, and on its voluntary enrolment in
the regular army, the Legislature passed complimentary resolutions to
officers and men, and presented the regiment with a handsome silver
trumpet. A portion of this regiment was conveyed to Quebec by sea; but
several companies made a very trying march on snow-shoes, through an
unbroken country, during very cold weather, to arrive in Canada in time
for the spring campaign."[206]
"The plan of the American campaign for 1813 was that a large army under
General Dearborn was to threaten Lower Canada, whilst a determined
effort was to be made to retake Michigan territory, capture the forts of
Niagara frontier, and thus reduce the whole of Upper Canada. This
accomplished, all the armies were to make a joint descent upon Montreal
and Quebec, which would be followed by the occupation of the Maritime
Provinces, and thus the British would be driven from the American
continent."[207]
PART IV.
AMERICAN FLEET ON LAKE ONTARIO SUPERIOR TO THE BRITISH FLEET, AND, WITH
THE ARMY, ATTACKS AND TAKES YORK (TORONTO), AND AFTER OCCUPYING IT LESS
THAN TWO WEEKS, RETIRE WITH MUCH HASTE.
The American fleet on Lake Ontario was superior to that of the British,
and was being daily augmented at Sackett's Harbour--their principal navy
yard on Lake Ontario. The first descent was expected to be upon
Kingston; but the American Government deemed it too hazardous a game to
risk their Lake armament upon an enterprise against this principal
military depot of the British in Upper Canada, and resolved to direct
their forces against more distant and defenceless places on the lake.
Commodore Chauncey having equipped his fleet for an expedition, and
received on board upwards of 1,700 troops under the command of Generals
Dearborn and Pike, sailed from Sackett's Harbour as early as the 25th of
April, and on the following evening arrived off York (Toronto) with
fourteen sail of armed vessels; and on the following day commenced
landing their troops about three miles west of the town--the British
being compelled to retire after making a strong resistance. The
grenadiers of the 8th Regiment, who lost their captain, M'Neal, were,
after a desperate contest, almost annihilated by the overwhelming
numbers of the enemy.
The best account we have read of this expedition against, or rather raid
upon, the town of York, is given by Thompson, and which I quote at
length, relating as it does to what was then and now is the capital--the
defenceless capital--of Upper Canada:
"In the month of April, the ice having completely broken up in the port
of Sackett's Harbour, where the American squadron under Commodore
Chauncey had wintered, General Dearborn, commanding the right division
of the Army of the Centre, consisting of 4,000 men stationed in that
vicinity, selected 2,000 of the most efficient of his division [American
History of the War, published in New York], and on the 22nd of the month
embarked them on board the fleet, with which he ascended the lake, and
with this force appeared off the harbour of York, the capital of Upper
Canada, on the morning of the 27th.
"The enemy appearing to threaten an attack upon the town, General
Sheaffe collected his forces, which consisted of nearly 700 men,
including regulars and militia, with about 100 Indians; and with these
he made a most determined resistance to the landing of the enemy; but at
length, overcome by numbers, he was compelled to retire; by which means
the enemy was enabled to effect his landing a short distance above the
fort, which was situated about two miles to the west of the town, at the
entrance of the harbour.
"So soon as the American troops, who were led on by General Pike, had
made good their landing, they formed into two lines (the first of which
was commanded personally by General Pike, and the rear or reserve line
by General Pearce), and in this order advanced upon the first battery
and carried it by assault; they then advanced towards the citadel in the
same order, and by the same means captured an intervening battery.
"Here the columns halted, in order to dress the lines for an attack upon
the main works. At this moment a large magazine accidentally exploded,
by which a quantity of stones and timbers were thrown into the air, and
in their fall killed and wounded a number on both sides, amongst whom
was the American general, Pike.
"The British regulars and militia performed prodigies of valour, but
were overpowered by a force three times their number, and in a high
state of discipline;[208] they were compelled to retreat towards the
town.
"General Sheaffe then held a Council with his principal officers and
civil authorities of the town, by whom it was advised that he should
retreat towards Kingston with the remainder of his troops; and that the
commandant of the militia, Lieutenant-Colonel Chewett, should treat
with the American commander for terms for the surrender of York.
"At the capture of York the British lost not less than 400 men, 300 of
whom were made prisoners of war, and about forty killed and wounded by
the explosion. The Americans lost 378, thirty-eight of whom were killed
and two hundred and twenty-two wounded by the explosion of the magazine.
General Pike died of his contusions a few minutes after being carried on
board of one of the vessels.[209]
"On the 8th of May, the American army under General Dearborn once more
evacuated York, after having occupied it twelve days, and secured much
booty."
PART V.
AMERICAN FLEET AND ARMY RETURN TO SACKETT's HARBOUR--MAKE PREPARATIONS
FOR ATTACKING FORT GEORGE AND THE TOWN OF NEWARK, WHICH, AFTER A SEVERE
BATTLE, THEY TAKE AND OCCUPY.
After evacuating York, the American fleet and army proceeded again to
Sackett's Harbour, where preparations were immediately made for invading
the Niagara frontier. On the 20th of May the American fleet again
ascended Lake Ontario, and on the morning of the 23rd they appeared off
the mouth of the Niagara river, soon after which, the weather being
favourable to their purpose, they attacked Fort George and the town of
Newark (now Niagara), by land and water. Early in the morning of the
27th of May the enemy commenced a combined attack upon the fort, having
previously, on the 24th and 25th, materially injured the works by a
warm cannonade from their ships and batteries. A body of about 800
riflemen, under Colonel Winfield Scott, landed near the Two Mile Creek,
while the fleet ranged up in the form of a crescent, extending from the
north of the Lighthouse to the Two Mile Creek, so as to enfilade the
British batteries by a cross fire. The riflemen, after forming and
ascending the bank, were met by the British, and compelled to give way
in disorder, and return to the beach, from whence they kept up a smart
fire under cover of the bank. In the meantime, another body of upwards
of 2,000 men, under the command of General Lewis, made a landing, and
formed on the beach under cover of a tremendous cannonade of round shot,
and showers of grape and canister from the fleet, that swept the
adjacent plain, and compelled the British to retire. General Vincent,
finding the works torn to pieces by the enemy's artillery, and no longer
tenable against so overwhelming a force, caused the fort to be
dismantled, and the magazines to be blown up, and retreated to
Queenston, leaving the Americans to take possession of the ruins of the
fort. The British loss consisted of fifty-two killed and upwards of
three hundred wounded and missing [more than half the entire force]. The
Americans state their loss at thirty-nine killed and a hundred and
eleven wounded.[210]
PART VI.
THE BRITISH RETREAT TO BURLINGTON HEIGHTS--BATTLE OF STONY CREEK--DEFEAT
OF THE AMERICANS, AND THEIR DISORDERLY RETREAT TO FORT GEORGE.
"General Vincent, on the ensuing day, having collected all the forces
from Chippewa and Fort Erie, and destroyed or rendered useless the posts
and stores along the frontier, commenced his retreat towards Burlington
Heights, at the head of Lake Ontario." (Christie.)
"General Vincent continued his retreat as far as Burlington Heights; and
on the 1st day of June was followed by an American army of 3,500
infantry, and about 300 cavalry, commanded by Generals Chandler and
Winder, for the purpose, as was vainly boasted, of making prisoners of
the whole British army, and thus terminate the contest of the
north-western frontier."
This expected conquest of the whole British army was commenced by the
affair of Stony Creek, when both of the American generals themselves
were taken prisoners.
On the evening of the 5th of June, the American forces encamped at the
village of Stony Creek, about nine miles from the British camp at
Burlington Heights, with the purpose of attacking and taking the British
position next day. But General Vincent was on the alert to obtain
information as to the enemy's strength and movements, and dispatched
Colonel (afterwards Major-General) Harvey, with two companies, to
reconnoitre their camp at Stony Creek, and, from the report received,
determined to attack them that very night.
"All the troops, both regulars and militia, that could possibly be
spared from the garrison at Burlington Heights, together with those who
had retreated from Fort George, amounting in all to 700, were ordered to
be in readiness for a movement. Immediately after dark they commenced an
advance towards Stony Creek, where, after several halts in order to
reconnoitre the country through which they were marching, they arrived
between one and two o'clock on the morning of the 6th of June.
Immediately the quarter guard of the enemy was surprised and taken, and
the assailants rushed into the camp, where all was in apparent security.
But such a scene of carnage commenced--the huzzas of the besiegers; the
yells of the Indians, led on by Captain Brant; the clashing of bayonets,
and, above all, the thunder of the cannon and musketry, rendered it
truly appalling. A column of the enemy was at length formed into some
kind of order, but to no purpose; they were by this time completely
unnerved and dispirited, which, together with the darkness of the night
and the clouds of smoke, threw them into the greatest confusion and
disorder. Not so, however, with the British troops; their plans had been
so well concerted, that every man knew his rallying signal; they were,
therefore, at all times beyond surprise. The American army, being
completely discomfited, retreated from their bivouac in the greatest
confusion.
"As soon as General Vincent had completed the defeat of the enemy, he
again fell back upon Burlington Heights, taking as trophies of his
victory three field-pieces and a brass field howitzer, captured from the
enemy, besides both their generals, and about 150 officers, sergeants,
and rank and file.
"After the defeat at Stony Creek, the American army, in the most
indescribable manner [helter-skelter, every man for himself] retreated
towards Fort George [whence they came] without the least military order
or subordination; in fact, such officers as could avail themselves of
horses on the road, regardless of the means employed for that purpose,
took them and made their way to the lines with all possible speed, and
left the rest of the army to shift for themselves; they, therefore,
retreated [or scampered] in small detached parties, some of whom had
exonerated themselves of their arms and equipments. Thus did they travel
[at double-quick] towards their headquarters from two or three to a
dozen; and were, in compassion for their sufferings, succoured by those
very people whose houses, a day or two previous, they had ransacked and
plundered."[211]
PART VII.
GENERAL VINCENT, REINFORCED, PURSUES THE RETREATING ENEMY--BRILLIANT
AFFAIR OF THE BEAVER DAMS, IN WHICH SEVERAL HUNDRED AMERICANS SURRENDER
TO ONE-FIFTH THEIR NUMBER--THE AMERICANS COOPED UP IN FORT GEORGE--FORT
SCHLOSSER AND BLACK ROCK ATTACKED BY THE BRITISH, AND THE PUBLIC FORTS
AND MAGAZINES DESTROYED OR TAKEN--THE AMERICAN ARMY CANNOT BE INDUCED TO
COME OUT OF FORT GEORGE INTO OPEN FIELD FIGHT.
In a short time General Vincent received some reinforcements, and
assumed the offensive, advanced towards Fort George with a view to
investing it--forming his line on the Four Mile Creek, with his left
resting on the lake; but he ultimately extended his line from the Twelve
Mile Creek (St. Catharines) to Queenston.
General Lewis, who now had full command (General Dearborn having
resigned), finding his advance posts and foraging parties continually
harassed and frequently made prisoners by small detachments of British
and Canadian troops stationed at different posts through the country, in
order to prevent the American camp at Fort George from obtaining
supplies, dispatched Colonel Boerstler with about 600 or 700 men, by way
of Queenston, with a view of dislodging a detachment or picquet posted
at a place called the Beaver Dams, a few miles from Queenston. Colonel
Boerstler was surprised by a small party of Indians under Captain Ker;
and believing themselves hemmed in by superior numbers, surrendered to
Lieutenant (afterwards Colonel) Fitzgibbon, of the 49th Regiment, who
arrived in time to complete the victory with a detachment of forty-six
rank and file. The prisoners were five to one to the captors, being 512
in number, including twenty-five officers, two field pieces, and a stand
of colours.
By these successes, the Americans were compelled to confine themselves
to Fort George and its neighbourhood; and before the 1st of July the
British had formed a line extending from Twelve Mile Creek, on Lake
Ontario (Port Dalhousie), across to Queenston, on the Niagara river; and
the Canadians began now to retaliate the game of marauding which the
Americans had been practising on the Niagara frontier. From Chippewa an
attack was made on Fort Schlosser, on the American side of the river,
during the night of the 4th of July, by a small party of militia and
soldiers under Lieutenant-Colonel Clarke, who surprised the guard at
that post, and brought away a brass six-pounder, upwards of fifty stand
of arms, a small quantity of stores, with a gun-boat and two batteaux.
At daybreak in the morning of the 11th of July, Lieutenant-Colonel
Bishop, lately commanding Fort Erie, crossed over the river with 240
men, consisting of a small party of militia and detachments of the 41st
and 49th Regiments, and effectually surprised the enemy's post at Black
Rock, burning his block-houses, stores, barracks, dockyard, and a
vessel, but were compelled to hasten their departure by a reinforcement
of American militia and some Indians in their interest, who opened a
smart fire under cover of the surrounding woods, killing thirteen of the
British attacking party, and wounding a considerable number--among
others, Lieutenant-Colonel Bishop, mortally; but the British party
brought away seven pieces of ordnance, two hundred stand of small arms,
and a great quantity of stores.
The two armies were almost in sight of each other at Fort George; the
commander of the British wished to ascertain the extent of the enemy's
works and his means of defence, and to draw him into an open field of
battle, and therefore, on the 24th of August, made a demonstration as if
to assault the fort, drove in the picquets; took several of them,
advanced to within a few hundred yards of the enemy, who, though
supported by the fire upon the British from their batteries on the
American side of the river, could not be induced to leave their
entrenchments and venture in the open field, although the force of the
British did not exceed 2,000, while the American force exceeded 4,000,
but wholly depending upon resources from the American side for their
subsistence, and compelled to act solely on the defensive, from the
hostile front assumed by the British in the neighbourhood. The American
army of 4,000 men, being cooped up within the limits of the fort,
depending for their supplies from the United States, and not daring to
go out of their fortifications, could do little harm and be of little
use to the American cause, the British commander did not think it
advisable to incur the loss and risk of an assault upon the fort.
PART VIII.
WAR IN THE WEST--GENERAL PROCTOR'S UNSUCCESSFUL SIEGE OF LOWER SANDUSKY.
In the meantime General Harrison was on the Sandusky river, making
preparations to prosecute the war with vigour, in order to recover the
Michigan territory, as soon as the fleet fitting out at Erie (Presqu'
Isle), under Captain Perry, who had been dispatched thither by Commodore
Chauncey towards the end of May, should be sufficiently strong to
co-operate with the land forces. General Proctor resolved to make
another effort to defeat General Harrison's purpose to recover Michigan,
and immediately besieged the American fort at Lower Sandusky; but in
consequence of the withdrawment of the Indians out of the reach of the
enemy's guns, and disinclined to the delay of a siege, and General
Harrison with a respectable force at no great distance, General Proctor
thought proper to raise the siege and retire to Amherstburg.
PART IX.
FAILURE OF THE EXPEDITION OF SIR GEORGE PREVOST AND COMMODORE SIR JAMES
YEO AGAINST SACKETT'S HARBOUR.
During the absence of Commodore Chauncey and his fleet from Sackett's
Harbour, engaged in operations on the Niagara frontier, an expedition
was planned and fitted out at Kingston against that chief depot of
American naval supplies on Ontario. Sir George Prevost,
Commander-in-Chief, and the British Commodore, Sir James L. Yeo (just
arrived from England), were both at Kingston, and much was expected from
their joint counsels, and the arrival of some naval officers and sailors
from England. On the 27th of May a body of 800 or 1,000 men were
embarked on board the British flotilla at Kingston, consisting of
_Wolfe_, 24 guns; _Royal George_, 24; _Earl of Moira_, 18; and four
schooners, carrying from ten to twelve guns each, with a sufficient
number of batteaux; and at noon the following day they were off
Sackett's Harbour. The weather was propitious, and the troops were
transferred to the batteaux to make their landing under an escort of
two gun-boats, commanded by Captain Mulcaster--the whole under the
immediate direction of the land and naval commanders-in-chief. They had
not proceeded far when a convoy of American boats, loaded with troops,
was descried doubling Stanley Point, on their way from Oswego to
Sackett's Harbour. The Indians, who had previously landed on an island,
fired upon them as they passed, and threw them into confusion, while the
British boats and batteaux bore down and captured twelve of them, with
about 150 men; the remainder escaped to Sackett's Harbour.
The landing was deferred until next day, thus giving the Americans time
to spread the alarm throughout the country--to collect reinforcements
from all quarters--to collect and station their soldiers, with a
field-piece, in the surrounding woods, and make every possible
preparation for their defence. The fine day was followed by a dark,
rainy, and stormy night, which scattered the boats, so that the British
could not succeed in landing in the morning before the Americans had
lined the woods with their men. Nevertheless the British succeeded in
landing; the enemy retreated, but posting themselves securely behind
large trees, kept up a smart fire on the British.
The fleet in the meantime, as well as small vessels intended to have
been landed in time to support the advance of the troops, were, through
the light and adverse wind, a long way in the rear. Under these
circumstances, Colonel Baynes, the Adjutant-General of the Forces in
British North America, who was charged with this service, found it
impossible to bring up or wait for the arrival of the artillery, and
ordered his detachment to divide and scour the woods. The enemy,
dislodged from the woods at the point of the bayonet, fled to their fort
and block-houses, whither they were pursued by the British, who set fire
to their barracks.
At this juncture it was thought by the commanding officer, Colonel
Baynes, that the enemy's block-houses and stockaded battery could not be
carried by assault, even with the assistance of the field-pieces, had
they been landed. The fleet were still too far out of reach to aid in
battering them, while the men were exposed to the fire of the enemy,
secure within the works. The _signal of retreat_ was therefore given to
the indignant assailants, and the enterprise was abandoned at a moment
when the enemy had so far calculated upon a victory on the part of the
British as to set fire to their naval stores, hospital, and marine
barracks, by which all the booty previously taken at York, and the
stores for their new ship, were consumed. They had also set fire to a
frigate on the stocks; but on discovering the retreat of the British,
they succeeded in suppressing the fire, and saved her. The troops were
immediately re-embarked, and returned to Kingston, after having
sustained a loss of 259 in killed, wounded, and missing, while the loss
of the enemy must have been double that number.
Thus terminated this expedition, to the disappointment of the public,
who, from the presence and co-operation of the two commanders-in-chief,
fondly flattered themselves with a far more brilliant result. This
miscarriage, with other reverses at the commencement of the present
campaign, destroyed in the opinion of the enemy the invincibility our
arms had acquired the preceding autumn.[212]
PART X.
OCCURRENCES ON LAKE ONTARIO--NAVAL MANOEUVRES AND BATTLES.
On Lake Ontario the two naval commanders strove with indefatigable
emulation for the dominion of the lake. Chauncey, after the capture of
Fort George, returned to Sackett's Harbour to await the equipment of his
new ship, the _Pike_; while his adversary, Sir James Yeo, scoured the
lake, and supplied the British army in the neighbourhood of Fort George
with abundance of stores. In the early part of July, Sir James fitted
out an expedition of boats for Sackett's Harbour, with a view of cutting
out their new ship, then almost rigged and ready to appear on the lake.
He arrived unobserved in the vicinity of that port, and would probably
have effected his purpose had not the escape of two deserters from his
party, which had landed for refreshments, and in order to remain
concealed until night should favour the enterprise, given the alarm to
the enemy. This unlucky incident induced him to relinquish the
undertaking and return to Kingston.
Towards the end of July the American fleet again appeared with
augmented force upon the lake, and Commodore Chauncey having received a
company of artillery, with a considerable number of troops under Colonel
Scott, proceeded for the head of the lake, with a view of seizing and
destroying the stores at Burlington Heights, the principal depot of the
army on the Niagara frontier, then occupied by a small detachment under
Major Maule. The design of the enemy against this depot being suspected,
Lieutenant-Colonel Battersby, commanding the Glengarry Regiment, upon
being notified to that effect by Lieutenant-Colonel Harvey,
Deputy-Adjutant-General, moved forward from York, and, by a march of
extraordinary celerity, arrived with a reinforcement in time to save the
depot, which the enemy, on finding the British ready to receive them,
did not deem it prudent to attack.
Commodore Chauncey, on learning that York, by the advance of
Lieutenant-Colonel Battersby to Burlington Heights, was left destitute
of troops, seized the opportunity and bore away for that port, which he
entered on the 31st of July. Here the Americans landed without
opposition, and having taken possession of a small quantity of stores
found at that place, they set fire to the barracks and public
store-houses, and having re-embarked their troops, bore away to Niagara.
It is a coincidence worthy of notice, that on the same day in which the
American commander was employed in burning the barracks and stores at
York, Lieutenant-Colonel Murray was no less actively employed on the
same business at Plattsburg.
The British fleet sailed from Kingston on the last day of July, with
supplies for the army at the head of the lake, and on the 8th of August
looked into Niagara, where the enemy's fleet lay moored. The latter hove
up and bore down upon the British fleet, with which they manoeuvred
until the 10th, when a partial engagement ensued, in which two small
vessels (the _Julia_ and _Growler_) were cut off and captured by the
British.[213]
Commodore Chauncey, somewhat disheartened with the loss of these, and
two other small vessels--the _Scourge_ of eight, and the _Hamilton_ of
nine guns--upset by press of sail to escape, with the loss of all hands,
except sixteen men picked up by the English, bore up for Niagara, from
whence he sailed almost immediately for Sackett's Harbour, where he
arrived on the 13th of August. Here he provisioned his fleet, and
instantly made sail for Niagara, where he remained at anchor until the
British fleet appeared off the harbour, early in the morning of the 7th
of September, when the American fleet again weighed and bore down upon
the British fleet, with which they manoeuvred until the 12th, when the
latter returned into Amherst Bay, near Kingston. During these five days
but few shots were exchanged between the larger ships, without any
injury to either side. The Americans, however, had much the advantage in
weight of metal and long guns.
The fleets again met on the 28th of September, off York, when an
engagement ensued for nearly two hours, in which the _Wolfe_, commanded
by Sir James Yeo, lost her main and mizen-top-masts, and would probably
have been captured had not the _Royal George_, commanded by Captain
Mulcaster, run in between the _Wolfe_ and the _Pike_, taking the latter
in a raking position, so as to afford the _Wolfe_ an opportunity of
hauling off and clearing away the wreck. This affair terminated in the
retreat of the British fleet under Burlington Heights, whither the enemy
did not think proper to pursue it.
On the 1st of October, the American fleet set sail from Fort George with
a convoy of troops for Sackett's Harbour, where an expedition was
preparing whose destination was as yet unknown. The British fleet left
their anchorage under Burlington Heights on the next day, and came in
sight of the enemy; but no attempt was made to bring on a general
engagement. The American fleet, on their way to Sackett's Harbour; fell
in with and captured five small vessels out of seven, with upwards of
250 men of De Watteville's Regiment, from York, bound for Kingston,
where an attack was apprehended. This loss, though apparently trifling
in itself, was severely felt, by reason of the few forces in the Upper
Provinces.
For the remainder of the season nothing of moment occurred on this lake;
and indeed the naval commanders appeared to have considered the question
of too great importance to their respective Governments to stake the
fate of war in Upper Canada upon a decisive naval engagement.[214]
PART XI.
OCCURRENCES ON LAKE ERIE AND IN THE WEST--LOSS OF THE BRITISH
FLEET--EVACUATION OF DETROIT AND THE TERRITORY OF MICHIGAN BY GENERAL
PROCTOR, WHO IS PURSUED IN HIS RETREAT UP THE THAMES, AND DEFEATED BY
GENERAL HARRISON, AND IS AFTERWARDS TRIED AND CONDEMNED TO BE SUSPENDED
AND DEPRIVED OF HIS PAY FOR SIX MONTHS.
_The operations on Lake Erie and in the West_ were disastrous to the
British cause during the latter part of the summer and early autumn of
1813. General Harrison, with an army of 8,000 men on the Miami river,
only awaited for the equipment of the American fleet fitting out under
Commodore Perry, at Presqu' Isle (Erie), to move his forces against
Detroit, and to carry on offensive operations against the British in the
neighbourhood of Lake Erie. Captain Barclay, who had early in the summer
assumed the command of the British squadron on Lake Erie, blockaded the
American fleet, so as to prevent their crossing the bar at Presqu' Isle
(which they could not effect without unshipping their guns) until the
end of August; when, having occasion to bear away for Long Point,[215]
the enemy seized the moment of his absence and crossed the bar. Finding
on his return the enemy ready for the lake, and too powerful for his
small squadron, he bore away for Amherstburg, to await the equipment of
the _Detroit_, recently launched.
Commodore Perry sailed shortly after him for the head of the lake, and
appeared at the commencement of September, for several days
successively, off Amherstburg, in defiance of the British squadron,
retiring every evening to his anchorage at _Put-in-Bay_. The British
forces in Michigan territory and its neighbourhood, under General
Proctor, falling short of supplies for which they depended solely upon
the fleet, the captain had no other alternative than that of risking a
general naval engagement. With this resolution he made sail from
Amherstburg on the 9th of September, manned with only fifty or sixty
seamen (including a small reinforcement of thirty-six men from Lake
Ontario), and detachments from the 41st and Royal Newfoundland Regiment
as marines. On the 10th, in the morning, the enemy's fleet was descried
at anchor in _Put-in-Bay_, which immediately weighed and bore down upon
the British squadron, while the wind blowing a gentle breeze from the
south-west, turning round to the south-east, gave the enemy the weather
gage. At a quarter before twelve the British commenced firing, which was
in ten minutes afterwards returned by the enemy, who bore up for close
action. The engagement continued with unabated fury until half-past two,
when the enemy's principal ship being rendered unmanageable, Commodore
Perry left her in charge of his first lieutenant, Yarnal, and hoisted
the pendant on board the _Niagara_. Soon after Commodore Perry had left
the _Lawrence_, her colours were struck, but the British, from weakness
of their crews and destruction of their boats, were unable to take
possession of her.
It was at this anxious and interesting juncture that the fate of the day
seemed to poise in favour of the British; and Commodore Perry even
despaired of the victory, when a sudden breeze revived his hopes, and
turned the scale in his favour. This fortunate commander, finding the
_Niagara_ had suffered lightly in the engagement, made a desperate
effort to retrieve the fortune of the day, and taking advantage of the
breeze, shot ahead of the _Lady Prevost, Queen Charlotte_, and _Hunter_,
raking them with her starboard guns, and engaged the _Detroit_, which,
being raked in all directions, soon became unmanageable. The _Niagara_
then bore around ahead of the _Queen Charlotte_, and hauling up on
starboard tack, engaged that ship, giving at the same time a raking fire
with her larboard guns to the _Chippewa_ and the _Little Belt_, while
the smaller vessels, closing to grape and canister distance, maintained
a most destructive fire. This masterly and but too successful
manoeuvre decided the contest. Captain Barclay being severely and
dangerously wounded, Captain Finnis, of the _Queen Charlotte_, killed,
and every commander and officer second in command either killed or
disabled, the _Detroit_ and _Queen Charlotte_, perfect wrecks, after a
desperate engagement of upwards of three hours, were compelled to
surrender.
By this decisive action, the whole of the British squadron on Lake Erie
was captured by the enemy, who now became masters of the lake. The enemy
lost in this action twenty-seven men in killed and ninety-six men
wounded. The British lost three officers and thirty-eight men killed,
and nine officers and eighty-five men wounded.
The prisoners were landed at Sandusky, and treated with the greatest
humanity by the American commodore, who paroled Captain Barclay, and
treated that gallant officer with all the kindness and attention which
his unsuccessful bravery deserved.
The British army in possession of the Michigan territory and the
neighbourhood of Detroit, by this disastrous defeat, were deprived of
every prospect of obtaining future supplies from Kingston by way of Lake
Ontario, and a speedy evacuation of Detroit, and a retreat towards the
head of that lake became inevitable.
General Harrison having received reinforcements amounting to 7,000 or
8,000 men, including 4,000 volunteers from Kentucky under Samuel Shelby,
the ex-governor of that State, and an old revolutionary officer, was
conveyed by Commodore Perry, in his flotilla, with all the troops and
stores, from the mouth of the Miami to the Canadian shore, except the
thousand dragoons who were to advance by land, and so order their march
that they might arrive in the neighbourhood of Malden at the same time
with the infantry. General Harrison occupied Amherstburg the evening of
the 23rd of September, General Proctor having previously abandoned it
and fallen back upon Sandwich, after having set fire to the navy yard,
barracks, and public stores at the former place.
General Harrison, on his arrival, having found the different points
evacuated, invested General McArthur with the chief command of these
garrisons, and prepared to pursue the retreating army up the River
Thames, with a force of 3,000 men, including Colonel Johnson's corps of
dragoons, consisting of 1,000. General Harrison occupied Sandwich the
27th of September, and on the 2nd of October he marched in pursuit of
the shattered remains of the British forces under General Proctor. In
this, his reverse of fortune, the Indians, under Colonel Elliot, of the
Indian Department, with Tecumseh, still adhered to his standard with
unshaken fidelity, and covered his retreat.
On the 4th of October, General Harrison came up with the rear-guard of
the British, and succeeded in capturing the whole of their ammunition
and stores. General Proctor, under this second reverse of fortune, by
which he was left destitute of the means of subsistence or defence,
found himself compelled to stake the fate of the remnant of his small
army on a general engagement. Accordingly he assumed a position on the
right bank of the River Thames, near the Indian village of Moravian
Town--the left resting on the river supported by a field-piece, his
right on a swamp, at a distance of 300 yards from the river, and flanked
by the whole Indian force attached to the division. The intermediate
ground, covered with lofty trees, was dry and somewhat elevated. Here
General Proctor formed his troops into line, to the number of 500 or
600. The Indians under Tecumseh amounted to 1,200. In this position he
awaited the approach of the enemy, who, on the morning of the 5th of
October, passed the river at a rapid twelve miles below the Moravian
village, and came up with the British in the afternoon. General Harrison
drew up his men in two lines, and secured his left flank, which was
opposed to the Indians, by a division thrown back _en potence_; and
without any previous engagement by infantry, ordered his mounted
Kentuckians (accustomed from their boyhood to ride with extraordinary
dexterity through the most embarrassed woods) to charge at full speed
upon (the _open_ line of) the British, which had effected before the
latter had time to discharge their third fire. This cavalry charge of
the enemy on the British line decided the issue of the day. The line
gave way at the charge; the troops, worn down with fatigue and hunger,
dispirited by the unpromising appearance of the campaign, became totally
routed, and for the most part surrendered themselves prisoners, while
General Proctor and his personal staff sought safety in flight.
To the left of the enemy's position, which was opposed to the Indians,
the battle raged with more obstinacy. This part of the enemy's line had
even given way until a column under ex-Governor Shelby was brought up to
its support. These faithful allies continued to carry on the contest
with the left of the American line with furious determination,
encouraged by the presence of Tecumseh, until finding all hopes of
retrieving the day to be in vain--General Proctor and his soldiers
having fled or surrendered--they yielded to the overwhelming numbers of
the enemy, and left the field--upwards of 100 of them having fallen in
battle, and the bodies of 33 of them being found around the dead body of
their famous chief and warrior, Tecumseh; celebrated no less for his
humanity than for his bravery, his eloquence, and his influence among
the Indian allies of the British in the West.
Upwards of 600 of the British, including twenty-five officers, were made
prisoners of war. Those who escaped made the best of their way to
Ancaster, a few miles from Burlington Heights, exposed at an inclement
season to all the horrors of the wilderness, of hunger, and famine. The
number thus escaped to that place amounted to only 246, including the
general and seventeen officers.
This disaster of the British arms in that quarter seems not to have been
palliated by those precautions and that presence of mind which, even in
defeat, reflects lustre on a commander. In rapid retreats from a
pursuing enemy cumbrous and useless baggage is abandoned, and bridges
and roads are destroyed and rendered as impassable as possible, in order
to impede the progress of the pursuers; but General Proctor encumbered
himself with a cumbrous load of baggage, and left the bridges and roads
in his rear entire, to the advantage of his pursuers. Whether this error
and neglect arose from contempt of the enemy, or from disobedience of
the commanding officer's orders, is not well understood; but the defeat
led to the harshest recrimination, and involved in unmerited disgrace
the division of the brave troops that had served with honour in the
Michigan territory; and General Proctor was subjected to a trial by
court-martial for his conduct in the whole affair--censured and deprived
of his pay for six months.
PART XII.
AMERICANS BURN MORAVIAN TOWN, BEFORE RETURNING TO DETROIT--FORM ALLIANCE
WITH INDIANS, WHICH THEY HAD EXCLAIMED SO MUCH AGAINST ON THE PART OF
THE BRITISH--ARE INTOXICATED WITH THEIR SUCCESSES IN THE
WEST--MAGNIFICENT CLOSE OF THE YEAR 1813, AS OF 1812, IN BEHALF OF
CANADIANS, BOTH IN UPPER AND LOWER CANADA--CANADIAN VICTORY OF
ISLE-AUX-NOIS--SPLENDID CANADIAN VICTORIES OF CHATEAUGUAY AND
CHRYSTLER'S FARM--AMERICAN ARMIES RETREAT INTO WINTER QUARTERS.
The American army returned to Detroit after the battle of Moravian Town;
but before doing so, they consigned the town to the flames, assigning as
a justification of the savage act against the unoffending Christian
Moravian Indians, a retaliation for what they called the massacre of
River Raisin.
During General Harrison's absence from Detroit, a few of the Indian
tribes tendered their services to General McArthur, to raise the hatchet
against the British, and their proffered services were readily
accepted--showing that, according to the American rule of judging, the
alliance of the Indians with the United States was quite right, while
with England it was all wrong and barbarous.
The success of the American arms on Lake Erie and its surrounding shores
so intoxicated and bewildered them, that, in their subsequent movements,
they calculated upon nothing but victory and conquest, made no allowance
for failure in any point. "Canada must now be ours" was their exulting
and arrogant language. But they had overlooked the fact that, however
gloomy the prospects of the Western Canadians were in October of the
year 1813, there were remaining elements of strength with them--their
courage and zeal were unabated, and even increased, by the transactions
of the months of disaster; their loyalty to their principles, and their
love of their independence, were intensified rather than enfeebled; they
would not be a _conquered people_; and before the end of the year 1813,
the American armies had to relinquish every inch of Canadian soil both
in Upper and Lower Canada.
But to present a connected and intelligent view of the magnificent close
of the year 1813, as was that of 1812, we must first turn to the
American campaigns against Lower Canada in 1813; and the defeats and
want of success for several months in Upper Canada were more than
compensated by the heroic deeds and splendid success of both the English
and French defenders of Lower Canada, as well as by victories gained in
Upper Canada in the months of November and December.
The Isle-aux-Nois was termed the key of Lower Canada, and its old
fortifications had been repaired, and three gun-boats sent thither from
Quebec. The little garrison was under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel
George Taylor, Inspecting General Field Officer (then major of the 100th
Regiment), who, apprehending, from previous private information, a
combined attack from the American naval force on Lake Champlain and the
troops in the neighbourhood of his post, commanded by the
Brigadier-Generals Smyth and Clarke, lost no time in equipping the three
gun-boats lying unemployed for want of seamen; and Lieutenant-Colonel
Taylor having no sailors, he manned the gun-boats from his regiment,
with three artillerymen for each boat, and took the precaution to man
two batteaux with a detachment of soldiers, for the double purpose of
rendering assistance to the gun-boats in the event of their being either
sunk or disabled in the engagement, or to assist in boarding if it
should be found necessary. The enemy, discovered in approaching,
consisted of the sloops of war _Growler_ and _Eagle_, fitted out in the
most complete manner, each carrying eleven guns (eighteens, twelves, and
sixes), long eighteens on pivots, with complements each of fifty-five
men, comprehending a company of marines, which they had received at
Champlain the evening previous to the engagement; the whole under the
command of the United States navy. The admirable execution with their
small arms of the two small detachments of soldiers landed on the east
side of the river, and the well-directed fire from the gun-boats, of
round and grape shot, completely decided the fate of the action, which
the enemy gallantly contested from half-past four to half-past eight in
the morning, and did not surrender until further resistance became
utterly unavailing--one of the vessels being run aground to prevent her
from sinking.
The whole force of the British in this affair was only 108. The men
killed on board the American vessels were thrown overboard by their
surviving comrades; the prisoners amounted to 100 men, of whom many were
wounded. Of the captors, not a man was killed, and only three severely
wounded. The naval force of the enemy on Lake Champlain was, by the
capture of these vessels, almost annihilated, while it afforded the
British immediate and effectual means for offensive operations on that
lake, and checked the invasion meditated on Lower Canada.
The American Government, with a view of conquering Lower Canada, had
been at considerable pains and expense in erecting barracks, hospitals,
and magazines at different points along Lake Champlain, particularly at
Burlington, Plattsburg, Champlain, and Swanton, in the neighbourhood of
the Canadian frontiers--all under the direction of the two American
generals, Moore and Hampton. To counteract these movements, the captured
vessels, _Growler_ and _Eagle_--re-named the _Shannon_ and _Brock_--were
speedily put in commission, and the three gun-boats being put in repair,
the small squadron was placed under the command of Captain Pring. Still
there were no sailors; but, fortunately, at this juncture the _Wasp_
sloop-of-war arrived from England at Quebec, and Captain Everard, her
commander, was ordered to transfer his crew to the _Shannon_ and other
vessels, and take command of the little fleet on Lake Champlain.
On the 29th of July the fleet took 900 regulars from the 13th, 100th,
and 103rd Regiments, with some artillery, and a number of Canadian
militia, who acted as batteaux men, and proceeded up the lake, landing
near Plattsburg on the 31st, without meeting any opposition--the
American general, Moore, with 1,500 men, having retreated at the
approach of the British. Colonel John Murray, who was in command of the
British, took possession of the arsenals, etc., and after having
embarked all the warlike stores, of which a considerable quantity was
found in the arsenal, and having destroyed such as he could not
conveniently take away, set fire to the enemy's arsenal, public
buildings, commissariat stores, and barracks, recently erected, and
capable of accommodating from 4,000 to 5,000 men. While the troops were
thus employed during the whole of the night, Captains Everard and Pring,
in the _Growler_ and _Eagle_, with a gun-boat proceeded to Burlington,
where General Hampton lay encamped with 4,000 men, and threw that place
into the utmost consternation. Having captured and destroyed, within
sight of the American forces, four vessels, Captain Everard returned to
Plattsburg, where the troops were re-embarked, and proceeded to Swanton.
Colonel Murray, while on the way thither, sent a detachment to Champlain
for the purpose of destroying the barracks and block-house at that port.
The main body having visited Swanton, and effected the purpose of the
expedition to the fullest extent of his Excellency the Governor-General's
orders, returned to the Isle-aux-Nois, where they arrived the 4th of
August, without the loss of a man, and having been completely successful.
But these successes were only preliminary to two victories remarkable in
the annals of military warfare, considering the disparity in the number
and means of the parties concerned--known as the battles of
_Chateauguay_ and _Chrystler's Farm_.
General Hampton, after having transported his force across Lake
Champlain, lay encamped some days at Cumberland Head, near Plattsburg.
On the 20th of September he entered Lower Canada at Odletown, at the
lower extremity of Lake Champlain, with upwards of 5,000 men. The road
leading from thence to l'Acadie, and the open country in the
neighbourhood of Montreal, lies through a swamp of about fifteen miles,
which had been cut up and rendered almost impracticable by abatis since
the preceding campaign, by the Voltigeurs under Lieutenant-Colonel De
Salaberry, and guarded by some Voltigeurs and Indians. Deterred by these
obstructions, General Hampton evacuated Odletown on the 22nd of
September, and moved with his whole force westward, toward the head of
Chateauguay river, under pretext of the impracticability of advancing
through the Odletown road for want of water for his cavalry and cattle,
owing to the extraordinary drought of the season. Colonel De Salaberry,
with the Canadian Voltigeurs, on ascertaining the route the enemy had
taken, moved in like manner to Chateauguay, and by his skilful
precautions and arrangements of defence and attack, he gained advantage
in several skirmishes with scouting and advance parties of the
enemy--thus leading his Voltigeurs for the first time into action, and
acquiring a just confidence in the valour of his countrymen, which a few
days afterwards they nobly exemplified under their gallant leader at
Chateauguay. Finally he assumed a judicious position in a thick wood on
the left bank of the Chateauguay river, at a distance of two leagues
above the Turk, or confluence of the English and Chateauguay rivers,
where he threw up temporary breastworks of logs, covering his front and
right flank with extended abatis, while his left was covered by the
river. Here he resolved to await the enemy and maintain his ground with
a Spartan handful of Canadians against the whole strength of the
invading army. In his rear there was a small rapid where the river was
fordable; this he covered with a strong breastwork and guard; keeping at
the same time a strong picquet of the Beauharnois Militia in advance of
the right bank of the river, lest the enemy, approaching under cover of
the forest, might cross the ford and dislodge him from his ground.
The occupancy of this position General Hampton justly considered of the
first importance to the ulterior object of the campaign against
Montreal, as the country from thence to the mouth of the Chateauguay,
being principally open and cultivated, afforded no strong points to
check his progress to the St. Lawrence, and prevent his junction with
General Wilkinson's division; but which in fact was not yet in readiness
to move.
General Hampton, in the meantime, to distract and divide the attention
of the British, directed Colonel Clarke to carry on a petty warfare on
the eastern side of Lake Champlain; and that ruthless depredator
invested the settlements in Missisquoi Bay, where he plundered the
inhabitants in the most wanton manner.
On the 21st of October, General Hampton again entered Lower Canada,
having early in the morning of that day dispatched his light troops and
a regiment of the line, under Brigadier-General Izard, to dislodge a
small picquet of sedentary militia, at the junction of the Outarde and
Chateauguay rivers, where the main body arrived on the 22nd. On the
24th, having opened and completed a large and practicable road from his
position at Four Corners (a distance of twenty-four miles), through
woods and morasses, which Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry, on returning
from the Four Corners, had broken up and embarrassed with abatis,
General Hampton brought forward the whole of his artillery (ten
field-pieces) and stores to his new position--about seven miles from
Lieut.-Colonel De Salaberry's post.
From this point General Hampton dispatched Colonel Purdy with a light
brigade, and a strong body of infantry of the line, at an early hour of
the night of the 25th, with orders to gain the Ford, and fall on the
rear of Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry's position; while the main body
were to commence the attack in front. Purdy's brigade proceeded, but
were misled and bewildered in the woods, and did not gain the point of
attack as directed by the commanding officer. General Hampton, however,
advanced next morning (26th October) under the expectation of having the
intended attack at the Ford, and at ten o'clock made his appearance with
about _three thousand five hundred men_, under General Izard, on the
high road leading to the abatis, and drove in a picket of twenty-five
men, who falling back on a second picket made a resolute stand, and
maintained a smart fire upon the enemy. Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry,
upon hearing the musketry, promptly advanced with the light company of
the Canadian Fencibles, commanded by Captain Ferguson, and two companies
of his Voltigeurs, commanded by Captains Chevalier and Jucheseau
Duchesnay. The first of these companies he posted on the right, in front
of the abatis, in extended order, its right skirting on the adjoining
woods and abatis, among which were distributed a few Abenaqui Indians.
Captains Chevalier and Duchesnay's companies of Voltigeurs, in extended
order, occupied the ground from the left of this company to the River
Chateauguay, and the third company, under Captain L. Jucheseau
Duchesnay, with the sedentary militia, under Captain Lougtain, were
thrown back _en potence_ along the margin of the river for the purpose
of flanking, or preventing a flank fire from the enemy in the event of
his appearing on the opposite side of the river. The enemy in the
meantime advanced with steadiness in open column of sections to within
musket shot, when Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry discharged his rifle
as signal to commence firing, at which a mounted officer was seen to
fall. The bugles sounded, and a quick fire was immediately opened upon
the enemy who wheeled up into line, and commenced a fire in battalion
vollies, which, from the position of their line, was almost totally
thrown to the right of the Canadians, and of no effect whatever. They,
however, soon changed their front parallel to their adversaries, by
facing to the right, and filing up with speed, when the engagement
became general.
The retirement of the few skirmishers, rather advanced in the centre of
the line, being mistaken by the enemy for a flight, an universal shout
ensued, which was re-echoed by the Canadians, and the reinforcements in
reserve under Lieutenant-Colonel M'Donnell, while Lieutenant-Colonel De
Salaberry as a _ruse de guerre_ (like Gideon with his trumpets and 300
men, Judges, vii.), ordered the bugles placed at intervals, in the
abatis, to sound an advance; this had the desired effect, and checked
the ardour of the enemy, who suspected that the Canadians were advancing
in great numbers to circumvent them. The noise of the engagement brought
Colonel Purdy's division on the opposite side of the river, which,
having driven in the picket of the sedentary militia under Captain
Bruguier, were pressing on for the ford at which Lieutenant-Colonel De
Salaberry ordered the light company of the 3rd Battalion embodied
militia, under Captain Daly, to cross and take up the ground abandoned
by the picquet, Captain Daly with his company crossed the ford, and
having advanced fell in with and drove back the advanced guard of the
Americans on the main body, which still pressed forward and compelled
him in his turn to fall back. Having repulsed Captain Daly's company,
they were moving on in overwhelming numbers with eagerness and speed
close to the bank of the river, until opposite to Captain L. Jucheseau
Duchesnay's company, which hitherto lay concealed, and now at the word
of command from Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry, opened so unexpected
and effectual a fire upon the enemy, as to throw him into the utmost
disorder, and to occasion a tumultuous and precipitate retreat.
General Hampton finding his arrangements disconcerted by the total route
of the division on the right bank, withdrew his forces in good order at
half-past two in the afternoon, without having made a single effort to
carry the abatis and entrenchments at the point of the bayonet, leaving
Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry, with scarcely 300 Canadians, masters
of the field of action.
Towards the close of the engagement, Sir George Prevost, with
Major-General De Watteville, arrived on the ground, and witnessed in
person the judicious arrangements and successful exertions of
Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry and his gallant comrades and countrymen,
whose prowess on the occasion called forth the warmest encomiums of the
commander of the forces, and gave them a just claim to the disinterested
and impartial applause of history.
The fatigues and privations experienced by General Hampton's troops,
exposed for several weeks to the inclemency of the season, demoralized
them to the native rawness of new recruits, and rendered them no more
capable of co-operating with General Wilkinson's division in the
combined movement against Montreal. They shortly after fell back on
Plattsburg and retired to winter quarters.
_The Canadian Victory of "Chrystler's Farm."_--The next expedition
against Montreal was to proceed down the St. Lawrence, under the command
of General Wilkinson.[216] The American forces to about 10,000 men
rendezvoused towards the end of October on Grenadier Island, near
Kingston, where General De Rottenburgh confidently expected an attack,
and was prepared for it; but General Wilkinson was not so disposed, and,
after experiencing much foul weather, commenced his movement under cover
of the American fleet, and on the 3rd of November slipt into the St.
Lawrence with a flotilla of upwards of _three hundred_ boats of various
sizes, escorted by a division of gun-boats. He proceeded to within three
miles of Prescott and landed his troops on the American shore, who
proceeded downwards by land to a bay or cove, two miles below
Ogdensburg, in order to avoid the British batteries at Prescott, while
the flotilla passed them in the night of the 6th, with little injury
from the cannonade of the British batteries.
The movements of the flotilla down the St. Lawrence having been
ascertained at Kingston, General De Rottenburgh detached a small force
from that port, consisting of the 49th Regiment, commanded by
Lieutenant-Colonel Plenderleath, of the 89th Regiment, and some
Voltigeurs, which, when reinforced by Lieutenant-Colonel Pearson with a
party of the Canadian Fencibles from Prescott, amounted to about 800
rank and file, the whole commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Morrison, of
the 89th Regiment, and accompanied by the Deputy-Adjutant-General.
This corps of observation proceeded under the escort of a small division
of gun-boats, commanded by Captain Mulcaster, R.N., in pursuit of the
enemy; and on the 8th came up with them at Point Iroquois. General
Wilkinson had on the preceding day directed Colonel Macomb to land on
the British shore with 1,200 men, in order to clear the coast to the
head of the Long Sault, of the militia along the shore, from various
parts of the country. On the 18th this division was reinforced by
Brigadier-General Brown's Brigade, with a body of dragoons from the
American shore. On arriving at the head of the Long Sault, the whole of
the effective men, except such as were required to navigate the boats
down the Rapids, were landed under the orders of Brigadier-General Boyd,
who was to proceed down the land in the rear of General Brown's division
to the foot of the Long Sault.
On the 10th Lieutenant-Colonel Morrison, with his gun-boats, visited the
American post at Hamilton, where he landed and took possession of a
considerable quantity of provisions and stores belonging to the American
army, with two pieces of ordnance. Lieutenant-Colonel Harvey, in the
meantime, followed up the enemy, who in the evening were observed
advancing from the woods in considerable numbers, with a body of
cavalry; but upon receiving a few rounds from three field-pieces fell
back for the night. (Some smart cannonading took place in the meantime
between the British and American gun-boats.)
_Battle of Chrystler's Farm._--On the ensuing day, Lieutenant-Colonel
Morrison pressed so closely upon the rear of General Boyd's division as
to compel him to concentrate his forces and give battle. The enemy's
force, consisting of two brigades of infantry and a regiment of cavalry,
amounting to _between three and four thousand men_, moved forward about
two o'clock in the afternoon from Chrystler's Point, and attacked the
British advance, which gradually fell back to the position which had
been selected for the detachment to occupy--the right resting on the
river, and the left on a pine wood, between which there were about 700
yards of open ground, the troops on which were thus disposed:
The flank companies of the 49th Regiment, the detachment from the
Canadian regiment, with one field-piece, under Lieutenant-Colonel
Pearson, on the right, a little advanced on the road. Three companies of
the 89th Regiment, under Captain Barnes, with a gun, formed in echelon,
with the advance on its left supporting it. The 49th and the 89th,
thrown more to the rear, with a gun, formed the main body and reserve,
extending to the woods on the left, which were occupied by the
Voltigeurs under Major Herriot, and the Indians under Lieutenant
Anderson.
At about half past two the action became general, and the enemy
endeavoured, by moving forward a brigade from his right, to turn the
British left, but was repulsed by the 89th Regiment forming _en potence_
with the 49th Regiment, and moving forward in that direction, in
echelon, followed by the 89th. When within half musket shot, the line
was formed under a heavy but irregular fire from the enemy. The 49th was
directed to charge the American guns, posted opposite the Canadian guns,
but it became necessary, when within a short distance of them, to check
this forward movement in consequence of a charge from the American
cavalry on the right, lest they should wheel about and fall upon the
rear; but they were received in so gallant a manner by the companies of
the 89th under Captain Barnes, and the well-directed fire of the
artillery, that they quickly retreated; and by a charge from those
companies one gun was gained. The enemy immediately concentrated their
force to check the British advance, but such was the steady continuance
and well-directed fire of the troops and artillery that about half-past
four they gave way at all points from an exceeding strong position,
endeavouring by their light infantry to cover their retreat, who were
soon driven away by a judicious movement made by Lieutenant-Colonel
Pearson.
The British detachment for the night occupied the ground from which the
enemy had been driven.
This (called the Battle of Chrystler's Farm, from the ground on which it
occurred) is, in the estimation of military men, considered the
handsomest affair during the war, from the professional skill displayed
in the course of the action by the adverse commanders; and when we
consider the prodigious preparations of the American Government for that
expedition, with the failure of which their hopes of conquest banished,
the battle of Chrystler's Farm may be classed as an event of the first
importance in the defence of the Canadas.
The American division, after leaving the field, re-embarked in haste,
while the dragoons, with five field-pieces of light artillery, proceeded
down towards Cornwall, in the rear of General Brown's division, who,
unaware of the battle of Chrystler's Farm, had continued his march for
that place.
The loss of the enemy, by their own statements, amounted to three
officers and ninety-nine men killed, and sixteen officers and one
hundred and twenty-one men wounded. The loss of the British amounted to
three officers (Captain Nairne of the 49th Regiment, and Lieutenants
Lorimier and Armstrong), and twenty-one men killed, and one hundred and
thirty-seven wounded, and twelve missing.
General Wilkinson, who, during the action, lay confined to his barge
from a protracted illness, in his official despatch to his Government,
bears strong testimony to the loyalty of the inhabitants on the Canada
side of the St. Lawrence, and to the bravery and discipline of the
troops he had to contend with at Chrystler's Farm.
The day after the engagement, the American flotilla proceeded down the
Long Sault, and joined near Cornwall the division which had moved
towards that place, where General Wilkinson confidently expected to hear
of the arrival of General Hampton on the opposite shore, to whom he had
written on the 6th, to that effect, not being then acquainted with his
late defeat. Here, to his unspeakable mortification and surprise, he
received a letter from General Hampton, informing him that the division
under his command was falling back upon Lake Champlain.[217]
This information, with the countless difficulties momentarily crowding
upon the American army, effectually blasted every prospect of further
success. So circumstanced, the American commander immediately held a
Council of War, in which it was unanimously resolved, "That the attack
upon Montreal should be abandoned for the present season, and that the
army near Cornwall should immediately cross to the American shore, in
order to take up winter quarters," a resolution which was carried into
effect the following day, by their proceeding for Salmon river, where
their boats and batteaux were scuttled, and extensive barracks for the
whole army were erected with extraordinary celerity, surrounded on all
sides by abatis, so as to render a surprise unpracticable.
Every appearance of danger having subsided, the commander of the
Canadian forces dismissed the sedentary militia, by a General Order of
the 17th of November, with acknowledgments of the cheerful alacrity with
which they had repaired to their posts, and the loyalty and zeal they
had manifested at the prospect of encountering the enemy.
With these operations terminated the campaigns of 1813 in Lower Canada;
but new triumphs still awaited the British arms in the Province of
Upper Canada before the end of the year.[218]
PART XIII.
GENERAL DRUMMOND ARRIVES IN UPPER CANADA--COLONEL MURRAY SENT TO ARREST
THE PREDATORY INCURSIONS OF THE BRUTAL GENERAL McCLURE UPON THE
INHABITANTS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF FORT GEORGE--McCLURE'S BARBAROUS
BURNING OF THE TOWN OF NEWARK (NIAGARA), EXPOSING 400 WOMEN AND CHILDREN
TO THE INTENSE COLD OF THE 10TH OF DECEMBER--McCLURE'S FLIGHT TO FORT
NIAGARA ON THE AMERICAN SIDE OF THE RIVER--COLONEL MURRAY, BY SURPRISING
FORT NIAGARA, TAKES THE WHOLE GARRISON PRISONERS, AND SEIZES LARGE
QUANTITIES OF MILITARY STORES--GENERAL RIALL RETALIATES IN THE SAME WAY,
IN REGARD TO LEWISTON, BLACK ROCK, AND BUFFALO--GENERAL DRUMMOND ISSUES
A PROCLAMATION DEPRECATING SUCH SAVAGE POLICY AS INITIALED BY THE
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.
Early in December, Major General De Rottenburgh was relieved in the
command of Upper Canada by Lieutenant-General Drummond, who proceeded
from Kingston to York, and from thence to the head of the lake, where
the army again resumed an offensive position. The country along the St.
Lawrence, being freed from the incursions of the enemy, Colonel Murray,
of the 100th Regiment, was ordered to advance from Burlington Heights
towards Fort George, with a view at that time to prevent predatory
incursions of the enemy under General McClure (then in possession of
that fort) on the defenceless inhabitants of the surrounding country.
But General McClure, having heard of the disasters which had befallen
the army destined for Montreal, and conscious that a like fate might
probably await him and his army, with that dastardly cowardice peculiar
to himself and a few of his compatriots and traitors who joined
themselves to his train, and against the very spirit of the law of
nations and of civilized warfare, immersed the flourishing town of
Newark (Niagara) in one continued sheet of flame, and ignobly fled with
his followers into his territory. The historian laments that it is not
in his power to record one magnanimous act of that recreant General, to
rescue his name from that gulf of infamy to which his nefarious conduct
has forever doomed it.[219]
But retaliation was only delayed a week. On the evening of the 18th of
December, preparations were made for taking Fort Niagara from the enemy,
for which service Colonel Murray, of the 100th Regiment, was selected to
take the command; and long before daylight next morning this gallant
officer, at the head of the grenadier company of the Royal Scots, the
grenadier and light companies of the 41st Regiment, and a detachment of
his own corps, crossed the river about two miles above the fort, upon
which they immediately advanced. On approaching the fortress, sentries,
planted on the outer works, were surprised and taken, the countersign
obtained, and in a few minutes the fort was carried at the point of the
bayonet.
The loss on the part of the British in this affair was only six killed
and five wounded: that of the enemy amounted to sixty-five killed and
fourteen wounded (all with the bayonet), and the whole garrison was made
prisoners, consisting of nearly 350. There were in the fort, at the time
of its capture, twenty-seven pieces of ordnance of weighty calibre,
3,000 muskets with apparatus, besides large magazines of camp equipage
and military clothing, which of course fell into the hands of the
victors.
On the same day on which Fort Niagara was captured, the town of
Lewiston, about eight miles above Fort Niagara, was taken possession of
by a British force under Major-General Riall, without opposition; in
which place the public magazines were well filled with provisions and
other military stores.
Towards the latter end of the same month, General Riall crowed the
Niagara river at Black Rock, at the head of a force consisting of about
600 men, detachments from the 8th or the King's Regiment, 41st, 89th,
and 100th Regiments, with a few Militia volunteers, exclusive of six or
seven companies of the Royal Scots, under the command of
Lieutenant-Colonel Gordon, who were directed to land between the
villages of Buffalo and Black Rock, about two miles distant from each
other, with a view to divert the garrison of Black Rock, while the other
troops were landing in front of that port; but in consequence of the
severity of the weather, a number of the boats were stranded; by which
means the troops were unable to land in time to effect the object for
which they had been intended; however, the enemy was driven from both
positions in a short time.
The American loss in this affair was upwards of five hundred, 130 of
whom were prisoners of war; the loss of the British was inconsiderable
compared with that of the enemy.
The state of exasperation to which the mind of every British subject had
been wrought by the conduct of McClure in burning the town of Newark,
and exposing all to the inclemency of a Canadian winter, both the
helpless infant and infirm old age, was such that nothing but a similar
retaliation could assuage; the whole line of frontier, from Buffalo to
Fort Niagara, was therefore burnt to ashes.
Ample vengeance having thus been taken for the wanton conflagration and
cruel outrages committed upon the defenceless inhabitants of Newark and
neighbourhood, Lieutenant-General Drummond, on the 12th of January,
1814, issued a proclamation, in which he strongly deprecated the savage
mode of warfare to which the enemy, by a departure from the established
usages of war, had compelled him to resort. He traced with faithful
precision and correctness the conduct that had marked the progress of
the war on the part of the enemy, and concluded by lamenting the
necessity imposed upon him of retaliating upon the subjects of America
the miseries inflicted upon the inhabitants of Newark, but at the same
time declared it not to be his intention further to pursue a system so
revolting to his own feelings, and so little congenial to the British
character, unless he should be compelled by the future measures of the
enemy.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 204: Thompson's History of the War of 1812, Chap. xxii., pp.
179-181.
"Terms of capitulation were agreed upon, by which the whole of General
Winchester's command that had survived the fury of the battle were
surrendered prisoners of war, amounting to upwards of 600. In this
sanguinary engagement, the loss of the Americans, in killed and wounded,
was nearly 500; while that of the British was only twenty-four killed
and 161 wounded."--_Ib._, pp. 176, 177.]
[Footnote 205: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. v., pp. 100,
101.]
[Footnote 206: Tuttle, Chap. xxxviii., p. 396.
"The 104th (or New Brunswick Regiment) marched through from Fredericton
to Upper Canada, several hundreds of miles, with extraordinary celerity,
in the month of March, though their route from Fredericton to the River
St. Lawrence lay through an uninhabited wilderness buried in snow, and
never before traversed by troops." (Christie's History of the War of
1812, p. 103.)]
[Footnote 207: Tuttle, Chap. xxxviii., pp. 396, 397.]
[Footnote 208: "The American troops had been preparing for this
expedition the whole winter; and no pains had been spared in their
discipline."]
[Footnote 209: "The people, hitherto unaccustomed to hear of reverses,
were irritated at this success of the enemy, and, as usual upon such
occasions, clamoured against the General [Sheaffe], who a few weeks
afterwards was succeeded in the administration of the civil government
by Major-General De Rottenburgh, and on his return to the Lower Province
assumed the command of the forces in the district of Montreal. It is not
ascertained whether his removal was the result of the displeasure of the
commander of the forces [Sir George Prevost]; but upon a cool survey of
the battle of York, it must be owned that the honour of the British arms
was strenuously and ably maintained by the small party of men under his
command, who, including regulars, militia, and Indians, did not exceed
600." (Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. v., p. 105.)]
[Footnote 210: Among the killed of the British party was Mr. Allan
MacLean, Clerk of the House of Assembly of Upper Canada, who volunteered
his services with a musket.
"The Americans moved forward in three strong brigades, under Generals
Chandler, Winder, and Boyd, with an advance of light troops and
riflemen, under Colonels Scott and Forsyth, the whole commanded by
General Lewis, the next in command to General Dearborn, whose low state
of health compelled him to keep his bed, from whence he issued his
orders." (Thompson's History of the War of 1812, Chap, xxiii., p. 185.)]
[Footnote 211: Thompson's War of 1812, Chap. xxiii.
In General Vincent's official despatch relating to this brilliant and
intrepid action, he gives the credit of it to Lieutenant-Colonel Harvey.
He says: "To Lieutenant-Colonel Harvey, the Deputy-Adjutant-General, my
obligations are particularly due. From the first moment the enemy's
approach was known, he watched his movements, and afforded me the
earliest information. To him, indeed, I am indebted for the suggestion
and plan of operations; nothing could have been more clear than his
arrangements, nor more completely successful in the result." (Christie,
Chap. v.)]
[Footnote 212: Christie's History of the War of 1812, Chap. v.]
[Footnote 213: The following graphic account of the manoeuvres and
conflicts of the two fleets is given by the American historian,
Brackenridge, in his War of 1812:
"On Lake Ontario, a naval armament, which might be termed formidable for
this inland sea, was arrayed on either side; and an interesting contest
ensued between two skilful officers for the superiority. The _General
Pike_, of twenty-two guns, having been launched, and proving to be an
excellent sailer, Commodore Chauncey was now fully equal, in point of
strength, to his antagonist. Sir James Yeo, though somewhat inferior in
force, had the advantage in an important particular: his ships sailed
better in squadron, and he could therefore avoid or come to an
engagement as he thought proper. It being a matter all-important to the
British, to prevent the Americans from becoming masters of the lake, Sir
James prudently avoided a general action; while, on the other hand, to
bring him to action was the great object of Commodore Chauncey. On the
7th of August the two fleets came in sight of each other. Commodore
Chauncey manoeuvred to gain the wind. Having passed to the leeward of
the enemy's line, and being abreast of his warship, the _Wolfe_, he
fired a few guns to ascertain whether he could reach the hostile fleet.
The shot falling short, he wore, and hauled upon a wind to the starboard
tack; the rear of his schooners being six miles astern. Sir James wore
also, and hauled upon a wind on the same tack; but observing that the
American fleet would be able to weather him in the next tack, he tacked
again and made sail to the northward. Commodore Chauncey pursued him. He
continued the chase until night; but the schooners not being able to
keep up, a signal was made to relinquish the pursuit, and to form in
close order. The wind now blew heavily; and at midnight two of the
schooners, the _Scourge_ and the _Hamilton_, were found to have upset in
the squall. Lieutenants Winter and Osgood, two valuable officers, were
lost, and only sixteen men of the crews saved [picked up by the
British]. The next morning, the enemy discovering this misfortune, and
having now the superiority, manifested a disposition to engage the
Americans, and bore up for the purpose. Two schooners were ordered to
engage him; but when they were within a mile and a-half of him, he
attempted to cut them off. Failing in this, he hauled his wind, and hove
to. A squall coming on, Commodore Chauncey was fearful of being
separated from his dull sailing schooners, and ran in towards Niagara
and anchored. Here he received on board, from Fort George, 150 men to
act as marines, and distributed them through his fleet. On the morning
of the 9th he again sailed. At eleven o'clock, after much manoeuvring
on both sides, the rear of the enemy's line opened its fire; and in
fifteen minutes the action became general on both sides. At half-past
eleven, the American weather line bore up and passed to the leeward, the
_Growler_ and _Julia_ excepted, which soon after tacking to the
southward, brought the British between them and the remainder of the
American fleet. Sir James, after exchanging a few shots with the
American commodore's ship, pursued the _Growler_ and _Julia_. A fire
commenced between them, which continued until one o'clock in the morning
of the 10th, when, after a desperate resistance, the two schooners were
compelled to yield. The fleets had lost sight of each other in the
night; but as Sir James, on the next day, when they were again visible,
showed no disposition to renew the action, Commodore Chauncey returned
to Sackett's Harbour. A victory for this affair was claimed for the
British commander." (Brackenridge's History of the War of 1812, etc.,
Chap, viii., pp. 121, 122.)]
[Footnote 214: Christie, Chap, v., pp. 126--130.]
[Footnote 215: It was this episode in Captain Barclay's proceedings
which resulted in the loss of British supremacy on Lake Erie, the loss
of his fleet, his own wounding, the death of most of his officers and
sailors, General Proctor's compulsory evacuation of Detroit and the
Michigan territory, his retreat into Canada, his defeat on the Thames at
the Moravian village, involving the loss of many of his men, with
upwards of 100 Indians, including famous Chief Tecumseh. We do not
desire to dwell upon this dark spot in the life of Captain Barclay; but
the whole mystery is explained in Mrs. Amelia Harris's Memoirs of her
father and the early settlement of Long Point (and her authority cannot
be questioned.) See Chapter XLI. of this History, pp. 254.]
[Footnote 216: "General Wilkinson was called from the South to assume
the command of the American forces in the North, in the room of General
Dearborn, which now with General Hampton's division, amounted to about
18,000, to which General Harrison's division was ordered to be added.
Such were the gigantic and formidable preparations for the capture of
Montreal, where the American soldiers were promised, as an additional
inducement, good winter quarters." (Thompson's History of the War of
1812, Chap. xxvi., p. 209.)]
[Footnote 217: "General Wilkinson had, at an early stage of the
expedition, transmitted an order to General Hampton to join him at St.
Regis; but that officer having learned the low state of General
Wilkinson's supplies of provisions, and considering the state of the
roads, conceived it the most prudent method to disobey the order, and
not to place himself at too great a distance from his own magazines; he
therefore availed himself of the nearest route to Montreal, the
unsuccessful result of which manoeuvre has just been detailed.
"The American army was again ordered to cross the line and take up their
winter quarters in their own territory, after repeatedly suffering
themselves to be defeated under the most mortifying and humiliating
circumstances; with the blame of which the commander-in-chief (General
Wilkinson) charged General Hampton, in consequence of his disobedience
of orders, but with which the American Secretary of War more properly
charged both. However, it had the effect of checking the military zeal
which appeared to manifest itself in the American ranks at a distance
from the theatre of hostile operations, and completely to extinguish the
ardour of the American troops on the lines." (Thompson, Chap. xxvii., p.
215.)]
[Footnote 218: The foregoing account of the transactions in Lower Canada
is chiefly extracted from Mr. Christie's History of the War of 1812, and
mostly in his words. What follows is mostly taken from Thompson's War of
1812.]
[Footnote 219: The barbarous act of General McClure in burning Niagara
is ascribed to directions from the American Secretary at War; but the
many nefarious acts committed by McClure could hardly be owing to
directions from Washington. Mr. Christie says that McClure "having,
pursuant to the directions of the American Secretary at War, most
inhumanly, on the 10th of December, set fire to the flourishing village
of Newark, containing about 150 houses, which Were reduced to ashes,
leaving the wretched and forlorn inhabitants, with upwards of 400 women
and children, exposed to the accumulated horrors of famine and the
inclemency of a Canadian winter."
The British, under the command of Colonel Murray, scarcely amounting to
500 men, including Indians and militia, immediately occupied Fort
George. The barbarous policy of the American Government in destroying
Newark, exasperated the army as well as the inhabitants on the frontier,
of whose impatience for retaliation General Drummond promptly availed
himself after the occupation of Fort George, by adopting the resolution
of carrying the American Fort Niagara by surprise. (Chap. vii., p.
156.)
Mr. Thompson remarks on the conduct of McClure and his soldiers, even
before the burning of the town of Newark: "The American army had no
sooner taken up a position in front of Fort George, than the foraging
parties, or rather marauders, commenced a systematic course of plunder
upon the defenceless inhabitants within the vicinity of their camp, most
of whom, at the time, consisted of women and children; even amongst the
general officers acts of pillage were perpetrated, that, had such
occurred with private soldiers in the British army, would have stamped a
stigma on the character of the British, in the eyes of America, for
which no course of conduct which they could ever after have pursued
would have sufficiently atoned." (War of 1812, Chap. xxix., pp. 227,
228.)]
CHAPTER LVII.
MOVEMENTS AND CAMPAIGNS OF 1814--THE THIRD AND LAST YEAR OF THE WAR.
PART I.
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CAMPAIGN--REINFORCEMENTS FROM NEW BRUNSWICK--ROYAL
APPROBATION OF CANADIAN LOYALTY AND COURAGE--AMERICAN INVASION OF THE
DISTRICT OF MONTREAL UNDER GENERAL WILKINSON--THE LARGE FORCE OF
AMERICANS DEFEATED AT LE COLLE BY A SMALL FORCE OF CANADIANS--RETURN TO
PLATTSBURG, WHERE GENERAL WILKINSON, DISAPPOINTED AND MORTIFIED, RETIRES
FROM THE ARMY.
The total failure for two years of the expeditions which had been fitted
out at so much expense by the United States Government for the invasion
of Canada, had considerably subdued that ardour for military renown
which, at the commencement of the war--from the defenceless state of
Canada, and the absorption of British strength in the European war--had
promised so rich a harvest of laurels and territory to the United
States. Nevertheless the most active exertions were made on both sides
during the winter for the ensuing campaign. Stores of all descriptions
were forwarded to Kingston from Quebec and Montreal on sleighs, at
prodigious expense. The inhabitants of New Brunswick again evinced their
loyalty and patriotism. Lieutenant-Colonel Robinson, with a regiment,
marched through the woods from Fredericton to the St. Lawrence, in the
month of February. A reinforcement of 220 seamen for the lakes came by
the same route. To expedite the progress of these reinforcements, the
Legislature of New Brunswick voted £300, and the city of St. John gave
a similar sum to defray the expense of conveying the troops and sailors
on sleighs as far as the nature of the roads would permit.
On the 26th of March, His Excellency Sir George Prevost issued a General
Order expressing the approbation of the Prince Regent of the affair of
Chateauguay, and his "peculiar pleasure at finding that His Majesty's
Canadian subjects had at length the opportunity of refuting, by their
own brilliant exertions in defence of their country, the calumnious
charges of disaffection and disloyalty with which the enemy had prefaced
his first invasion of the province, to Lieutenant-Colonel De Salaberry
in particular, and to all the officers and men under his command, the
sense entertained by his Royal Highness of their meritorious and
distinguished services, was made known."
The first movement of the Americans in the neighbourhood of Lake
Champlain which gave room to expect an American invasion of the district
of Montreal, was towards the conclusion of March, 1814, when
Brigadier-General Macomb, with a division of American forces from
Plattsburg, crossed Lake Champlain upon the ice, and entered St. Armand,
where he remained some days, while General Wilkinson prepared for an
attack upon the outposts of Odletown and the Le Colle Mill, which had
been converted into a block-house. On the morning of the 13th of March
(General Macomb having suddenly withdrawn his division from St.
Armand's, and rejoined the main body), the American forces, consisting
of 5,000 men, commanded by General Wilkinson in person, entered
Odletown. The Americans repeated their attacks upon the coveted Le Colle
Mill frontier; and the Canadian Fencibles, Frontier Light Infantry, and
the Voltigeurs, repeated their deeds of bravery and heroism, and
repelled the multitudinous invaders. "The Americans," says Mr. Christie,
"exhausted with cold and fatigue, and finding it impossible to carry the
place without heavy artillery, which, from the state of the roads, could
not be brought forward, withdrew their forces in good order from the
contest, at five o'clock in the afternoon, without being pursued in the
retreat."
The British loss amounted to only ten men killed and four men missing,
and two officers and forty-four men wounded. The American loss, though
considerable, could not be precisely ascertained.
Having failed in the attempt to carry the block-house (Le Colle Mill),
scarcely deserving the appellation of a military post, the enemy fell
back upon Champlain Town, from whence they returned to Plattsburg.
General Wilkinson, after this abortive attempt to retrieve his military
fame, seems to have been removed from his command, or to have sought
voluntary retirement from a service in which he had experienced nothing
but disappointment and reverses.
PART II.
TAKING OF PRAIRIE DU CHIEN--DEFENCE OF MACKINAC--SUCCESS IN THE MARITIME
PROVINCES.
Before noticing the military campaign of Upper Canada, we will complete
the summary view of those which relate to the Maritime Provinces and
Lower Canada.
During the occurrences of the taking of the post of _Prairie du Chién_,
on the Mississippi, and the triumphant defence of _Michilimackinac_,
Lieutenant-General Sir John C. Sherbrook, the Lieutenant-Governor of
Nova Scotia, was successful in reducing a very populous and extensive
portion of the enemy's territories adjacent to the Provinces of New
Brunswick. He detached a small force from Halifax under Colonel
Pilkington, while the _Ramilies_, commanded by Sir Thomas Hardie, took
possession, on the 10th of July, of Mosé Island, in Passamaquoddy Bay;
the garrison at Fort Sullivan, consisting of six officers and eighty
men, under the command of Major Putman, surrendering themselves
prisoners of war.
On the 26th of August, Sir John C. Sherbrook, having embarked at Halifax
the whole of his disposable forces on board of ten transports, set sail,
accompanied by a small squadron under Rear-Admiral Griffith, for
Castine, on the Penobscot river, where he arrived on the 1st of
September, and took possession of the batteries at that place; the enemy
finding it impossible to retain the post--having previously blown up the
magazine, and retreated with the field-pieces.
The United States frigate _Adams_ had, some days previous to the arrival
of the British at Castine, run into the Penobscot river, and for
security had gone up as far as Hampden, where her guns had been landed
and a position taken, with a view of protecting her. Captain Barrie, of
the _Dragon_, with a suitable naval force, and 600 picked men under the
command of Colonel John, of the 6th Regiment, were detached up the river
for the purpose of possessing or destroying the _Adams_. The enemy, who
at first offered a spirited resistance, after setting fire to the
frigate, fled in all directions, upon finding the British resolutely
advancing against their positions. Several pieces of ordnance and three
stands of colours fell into the hands of the British, whose loss
amounted to no more than one man killed, and one officer and seven men
wounded.
After the capture of Castine, Lieutenant-Colonel Pilkington was
despatched with a brigade of troops for Madrias, which was taken
possession of on the 11th of September by that officer--the detachment
in Fort O'Brien having, on the approach of the British, precipitately
retreated from the fort, leaving twenty-six pieces of ordnance, with a
quantity of small arms and ammunition.
Lieutenant-Colonel Pilkington was on the point of marching into the
interior of the country when he received a communication from
Lieutenant-General Brewer, commander of the district, engaging that the
militia forces within the County of Washington should not bear arms, or
serve against his Britannic Majesty during the war. This, with a similar
offer made by the civil officers and principal inhabitants of the
county, brought on a cessation of arms.
By these judicious measures a populous extent of territory, stretching
one hundred miles along the sea coast, including a valuable tract of
country partly separating New Brunswick from Lower Canada, passed under
the dominion of the British arms, without effusion of blood or the least
waste of treasure.
PART III.
ENGLAND, FREE FROM THE EUROPEAN WAR, DETERMINES TO PUNISH THE UNITED
STATES FOR THEIR JUNCTION WITH NAPOLEON AND INVASION OF CANADA--SWEEPS
THE AMERICAN COASTS WITH HER FLEET, AND SENDS REINFORCEMENTS OF 16,000
MEN TO CANADA--FAILURE OF SIR GEORGE PREVOST'S ATTACK ON PLATTSBURG--HIS
RECALL, AND SUMMONED TO BE TRIED BY COURT-MARTIAL--DIES BEFORE THE
APPOINTED DAY OF TRIAL--ESTIMATE OF HIS CHARACTER.
Hitherto, for more than two years, the colonies had been thrown almost
entirely upon their own prowess and resources, with the assistance of a
few British soldiers, for their own defence against an invading enemy
fifty times more populous than themselves. Up to this time England had
been struggling against Napoleon for the liberties of Europe; but now
the Corsican tiger was chained up in Elba; peace once more reigned in
Europe, and England was now free to throw the whole weight of her
victorious armies and unconquerable navy against the United States,
whose treasury was bankrupt, whose people were disheartened at the
reverses inflicted on their armies by handfuls of British and Canadians
opposed to them, and whose loudest cry now was for peace; but the United
States had refused peace when she could have had it, and Great Britain
was now determined to punish her for her attacks on a peaceful colony,
when the mother country was so thoroughly engaged elsewhere as to be
almost forced to leave it to its own resources. Of the vigorous blockade
of the American seaports, of the capture of Washington and burning of
the capitol, etc., it is not necessary to speak in this place; we have
only to do at present with the operations which took place in Canada
during the summer of 1814.
During the summer about 16,000 British troops arrived at Quebec; but
only 4,000 were sent to Upper Canada, under the command of General
Kempt; and the Governor-General, Prevost, concentrated nearly the whole
of the remainder of the reinforcements in the Richelieu district, with a
view to a descent on the State of New York by way of Lake Champlain, at
Plattsburg. In order to do this, the co-operation of the flotilla on the
lake was considered necessary, and orders were given to put it in an
efficient condition; but the flotilla was defeated and its vessels
taken by the enemy; and the land forces, though they could have easily
taken Plattsburg, did nothing, and were ordered to retreat within the
British lines. The conduct of Sir George Prevost in this
affair--undertaken for his own ambition, and without any public
necessity--lost him all his military prestige; both officers and men
felt the disgrace of retreating before an inferior force of militia; the
valiant Colonel Murray and other officers protested against the retreat,
and some of them indignantly broke their swords, declaring that they
would never serve under him again. He was recalled to England, and under
charges by Commodore Sir James Yeo, was arraigned before a
court-martial, but died a week before the day appointed for his trial.
Though Sir George Prevost was unsuccessful as a military
commander--having disgracefully failed in the only two expeditions which
he planned and personally superintended--the one against Sackett's
Harbour and the other against Plattsburg--he was an excellent civil
governor for Lower Canada, and an amiable and upright man.
It is alleged, however, that the Duke of Wellington and other high
authorities approved of his conduct, and the Prince Regent showed marks
of kindness to his family after his death. His health, which was never
strong, suffered much, not only from mortification and mental anxiety in
regard to his approaching trial (which he demanded at the earliest
possible period), but by a winter's journey across the open country
between the St. Lawrence and St. John, on his way home, that he died on
the 5th of January, 1816, just one week before the court-martial
appointed to examine into his conduct was to have been convened.
Mr. Christie, who was an English member of the Legislative Assembly of
Lower Canada, and the author of an elaborate History of Canada, in six
volumes, beside his excellent "History of the War of 1812," gives the
following estimate of the character and Administration of Sir George
Prevost:
"A warm and unswerving friend of the Canadian population, of French
origin, he confided in and liberally patronized them from the
commencement to the close of his administration; and they, it must be
acknowledged, as generously responded to his confidence in them. No
country or people ever exhibited greater unanimity or patriotism than
did the people of Lower Canada of both origins, in the war of 1812 by
the United States against Great Britain--a stand the more to be
remembered by her Government, as these colonies, almost destitute of
troops, wholly so of money, and scarcely possessing even a sufficiency
of arms and other munitions of defence, owing to the more imperious
calls from other quarters upon the Home Government, were, at the outset
of the war, in a manner left to their own action and resources, and
which they nobly exemplified, single-handed, as it were, throughout the
first two campaigns. The principles of loyalty and duty, no doubt, were
deeply implanted in the bosom of the people; but he it was who exalted
them into enthusiasm and inspired the mass with a confidence in their
own exertions and a reliance upon his wisdom, fitting them for the
emergency, and that bore them successfully through the contest. Whatever
may be the opinion now established of his talents, by the military
world, the impression which the inhabitants of French origin in Lower
Canada universally retain of him, is that of a conciliatory, wise, and
able civil governor, and in all the relations of private life, an
amiable and estimable man."[220]
PART IV.
UPPER CANADA--PREPARATIONS FOR THE CAMPAIGN--THE BRITISH FLEET INFERIOR
ON LAKE ONTARIO--SUCCESSFUL EXPEDITION AGAINST OSWEGO--DESTRUCTION OF
FORTIFICATIONS AND SEIZURE OF MUNITIONS OF WAR--BLOCKADES SACKETT'S
HARBOUR--UNSUCCESSFUL ASCENT OF SANDY CREEK.
In Upper Canada the occurrences during the winter of 1814 were
principally confined to incursions reciprocally practised by troops in
advance along the frontiers with various successes, but with no
important results on either side. After the winter's preparations, the
campaign was opened in Upper Canada by Sir Gordon Drummond and Sir James
L. Yeo, under most cheering circumstances. The American forces along the
Lake Champlain, after leaving small garrisons at Plattsburg, Burlington,
and Vergennes, moved early in the spring towards Lake Ontario and the
Niagara frontier, with a view of assuming offensive operations against
Upper Canada, as soon as the fleet in Sackett's Harbour (considerably
augmented during the winter) should be in a state to co-operate with the
land forces. The principal naval stores for the equipment of the fleet
were forwarded to Sackett's Harbour by the way of Oswego; and as the
British naval force at Kingston, strengthened by two additional ships,
the _Prince Regent_ and the _Princess Charlotte_, were ready to appear
on the lake early in the season, it became an object of importance to
intercept the enemy's supplies, and by that means retard his
preparations for invasion. An _expedition against Oswego_ was therefore
determined upon, and General Drummond having embarked a considerable
force, consisting of six companies of De Watteville's Regiment, the
Light Company of Glengarries, the 2nd Battalion of Royal Marines, with a
detachment of Royal Artillery, and two field-pieces, a detachment of the
Rocket Company, with a few Sappers and Miners, set sail from Kingston
the 4th of May, and at noon on the following day made the port of
Oswego, when a heavy gale from the north-west sprung up and obliged the
squadron to gain the offing. On the morning of the 6th, a landing was
effected by about 140 of the troops, under Lieutenant-Colonel Fisher,
and 200 seamen, armed with pikes, under the command of Captain
Mulcaster, R.N., in front of a heavy discharge of round and grape from
the battery, and of musketry from a detachment of about 300 men of the
American army, posted on the brow of the hill, and in the skirts of the
neighbouring wood. The British, on landing, pressed up the hill towards
the enemy's battery, which the Americans (upon finding the British
determined to carry it by storm) relinquished, leaving about sixty men,
principally wounded.
The land and naval commanders having taken possession of the stores
found in the fort and its neighbourhood, and having dismantled the
fortifications and destroyed the barracks, re-embarked on the 7th of
May, and returned to Kingston.
The loss of the British troops amounted to one captain (Holtaway, of the
Marines) and eighteen men killed, and two officers and sixty men
wounded. That of the navy amounted to three men killed, and four
officers and seven men wounded. Captain Mulcaster, while entering the
fort at the head of his men, received a very severe and dangerous
wound. Captain Popham was also severely wounded.
Although the service derived much benefit from this expedition, the main
object contemplated was not accomplished, the principal part of the
naval stores being saved by the enemy, who had taken the precaution of
depositing them at the Falls, some miles from Oswego, up the river.
The British squadron having, for the present, a decided ascendency on
Lake Ontario, blockaded Sackett's Harbour, in order to intercept the
supplies which might, from time to time, be forwarded from Oswego for
the equipment of the American fleet. On the 29th of May, they captured a
boat laden with two twenty-four-pounders, and a large cable for one of
the American ships of war, and, with two gun-boats and five barges,
pursued fifteen other boats, loaded with naval and military stores, and
which took shelter in Sandy Creek; but they were met in the Creek by an
American force, consisting of 150 riflemen, nearly 200 Indians, and a
strong body of militia and cavalry, which overpowered the British party,
of whom eighteen were killed and fifty wounded--the rest being taken
prisoners. Captain Popham, in his official dispatch to Sir James L. Yeo,
on this affair, acknowledged with warmest gratitude the humane exertions
of the American officers of the Rifle Corps, commanded by Major Appling,
in saving the lives of many of the officers and men, whom the American
soldiers and Indians were devoting to slaughter.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 220: History of the War of 1812.]
CHAPTER LVIII.
LAST INVASIONS AND LAST BATTLES OF THE WAR.
PART I.
GENERAL BROWN TAKES FORT ERIE--DEFEATS GENERAL RIALL ON THE PLAINS OF
CHIPPEWA--ADVANCES TO FORT GEORGE--HIS OFFICERS AND ARMY PLUNDER THE
INHABITANTS--RETREATS BACK TO CHIPPEWA--BURNS THE VILLAGE OF ST. DAVID'S
ON THE WAY.
On the Niagara frontier, the American army commanded by General Brown,
and consisting of about 7,000 men, began early in the summer to
concentrate at Buffalo, Black Rock, and other points, and on the 3rd of
July invaded Canada in two brigades, under the command of
Brigadier-Generals Scott and Ripley. They embarked in boats and
batteaux, and effected a landing on the Canada side of the river without
opposition--one brigade landing about a mile above, and the other
brigade a mile below Fort Erie. The fort was under the command of Major
Buck, of the 8th Regiment, with about seventy men of his regiment; it
had been put in a state of defence by that officer, with a view of
causing a temporary check to an invading force, rather than for the
purpose of defending it against a regular siege. But Major Buck was so
careful of himself and his men as to abandon the fort without firing a
shot--an error fatal to the British--for although Fort Erie could not
have been held for any length of time against the overwhelming strength
of the enemy, still a few hours' defence would have enabled General
Riall to concentrate his forces and attack the Americans before they
were firmly established on Canadian soil. The able dispositions which
General Riall had made of the forces under his command along the
Niagara line by the direction of General Drummond, who had anticipated
an invasion at that point where it commenced, were such, that the least
impediment to the progress of the invaders would have enabled General
Riall to have concentrated his troops, and to have fallen upon and
dispersed the enemy before they could have time to be prepared for an
effectual resistance. As it was, the Americans were permitted to occupy
this important post without resistance, and transfer, unmolested, to the
Canadian side all the troops they pleased.
On the following day, General Brown advanced with his whole force, of
over 4,000 men, down the river to the plains of Chippewa, with the
intention of taking possession of the British post at the mouth of the
Chippewa or Welland river. General Riall, having collected what forces
he could, consisting of five companies of the Royal Scots, a part of the
8th or King's Regiment, a part of the 100th Regiment, and the 2nd
Lincoln Militia, amounting in all to about 1,500 men, determined to
check him, until further assistance should arrive. A series of
manoeuvres ensued on both sides, and the most furious battle hitherto
occurring during the war, followed, when General Riall, finding himself
no longer able to sustain the fight against a force so unequal in
universal strength, gave orders to abandon the field--his troops
retiring in the rear of the works at Chippewa and destroying the bridge
across the river, which they had previously repaired.
The loss on both sides is said to have been nearly equal--amounting to
between 400 and 500 on each side.
"The 2nd Lincoln Militia, under Major David Secord, distinguished
themselves in this action by feats of genuine bravery and heroism,
animated by the example of their gallant leader, which are seldom
surpassed even by the most experienced veterans. Their loss was
proportionate with that of the regular army.
"Three or four days subsequent to this sanguinary battle on the plains
of Chippewa were mostly employed in burying their own dead, and in
burning those of the British, after which several ineffectual efforts
were made by General Brown to cross the Chippewa river, contemplating an
advance on Fort George; but at each of his attempts he was promptly met
by picket guards of the British, posted along the margin of the river
for that purpose."
General Riall, however, in a few days gave orders that the remnant of
his army should retire under the shelter of Fort George and Mississagua
until reinforcements could be collected to place him on more equal
ground with the enemy; after which General Brown moved his army towards
those posts within a mile and a half of the British--his army forming a
crescent; his right resting on Niagara river, his left on Lake Ontario.
The American army had no sooner taken up a position in front of Fort
George than their foraging parties, or rather marauders, commenced a
systematic course of plunder upon the defenceless inhabitants within the
vicinity of their camp, most of whom, at the time, consisted of women
and children. Even amongst general officers were acts of pillage
perpetrated, that, had such occurred with private soldiers in the
British army, would have stamped on the character of the British, in the
eyes of America, for which no course of conduct which they could ever
after have pursued, would have sufficiently atoned.
During the interval in which General Riall was receiving reinforcements
from York and other military posts on that side of Lake Ontario, General
Brown also received a strong reinforcement under General Izard, after
which he made a few ineffectual assaults on Fort George; but, finding
all his efforts to carry that fort fruitless, and the British army
receiving fresh acquisitions of strength, all seemed to conspire to
render the case of General Brown hopeless; who, now perceiving the
situation in which he was placed--the forts in his front to him
completely impregnable, and an army in his rear in full flow of spirits,
and every day gathering new strength (though by no means equal to his as
regarded numbers), a Canadian Militia, and unexpectedly to him, fervent
beyond a parallel in the cause of their King and country--began now to
think of a safe retreat, in pursuance of which, on the morning of the
25th of July, he commenced his retrograde movement; he retreated towards
Chippewa, after burning the village of St. David's. Riall pushed on in
pursuit, when the Americans halted at Lundy's Lane (called Bridgewater
by the Americans), where took place the most stubborn fight of the
war--known as _the Battle of Lundy's Lane_--which may be regarded as
terminating the American invasions of Canada, and the last field battle
of the war.
We will here give a brief account of this celebrated battle, from
Thompson's History of the War of 1812, and the events which followed at
Fort Erie, and afterwards we will review the transactions of this
battle, together with the true principles of loyalty, the causes and
character of the war, and the reciprocal relations between Great
Britain, Canada and the United States.
PART II.
BATTLE OF LUNDY'S LANE--PRELIMINARIES.
"The British army, at the time General Brown commenced his retreat from
Fort George and Queenston to Chippewa, was scattered in small
cantonments over twenty or thirty miles of country; but like a
well-ordered and systematic machine, every part was in a moment
simultaneously in motion, to concentrate their united strength at a
point where they would be likely to intercept the enemy.
"Detachments of the Royal Scots and 41st Regiments, and a small body of
Indians, amounting in all to about 500 men, under the command of Colonel
Tucker (supported on the river by a party of seamen and marines under
the direction of Captain Dobbs, of the Royal Navy), passed over to the
American side of the River Niagara, with a view to disperse or capture a
body of the enemy stationed at Lewiston. The object of this movement
being accomplished, the troops were again withdrawn at Queenston. The
41st and 100th Regiments, under Colonel Tucker, were sent back to
garrison Fort George, Mississagua, and Niagara; General Drummond moving
on towards the falls, with a force of about 800 strong, consisting of
detachments of the Royal Scots, 89th, and King's, with the light company
of the 41st Regiment, to join General Riall's division of the army as
soon as it could arrive from the several bivouacs at which it had been
stationed.
"As soon as the column of the British army under the command of
Lieutenant-Colonel Morrison had arrived at the rising ground near the
end of Lundy's Lane, on the main road leading from Queenston to
Chippewa, the enemy was just taking possession of that position. Without
a moment's delay, the troops which had arrived on the ground were formed
in line on the north-east side of the height, their left resting on the
Queenston road.
"The troops from the Twelve and Twenty Mile Creeks, together with a
detachment of the King's Regiment, as they arrived, were formed on each
side of Lundy's Lane. This line was supported in front by two
twenty-four-pounders [field-guns], which were covered by a small
squadron of the 19th Light Dragoons and a detachment of the infantry.
"_The battle itself._--The troops of the line being thus disposed,
notwithstanding the superior strength of the enemy, in about ten minutes
dislodged him from the position he had first taken, at the point of the
bayonet.
"The sun was now fast descending towards the western horizon; and
detachments of the 1st and 2nd Lincoln Militia continued to arrive from
the different outposts they had been occupying, who joined in
maintaining the summit of the hill until the whole of General Riall's
division should come up.
"General Drummond, after dislodging the enemy from the partial
possession he had gained on the hill, again formed his line with as much
despatch as existing circumstances would admit, placing his artillery,
which consisted of two twenty-pounders, two six-pounders [brass
field-pieces], and a rocket party, in front of the centre of his
position, near the right side of Lundy's Lane, leading down the hill to
the Queenston road, supported by the 2nd battalion of the 89th Regiment,
under Colonel Morrison. Scarcely had this arrangement been completed
before the position was furiously assailed by General Winfield Scott's
brigade at the point of the bayonet; but the enemy was repulsed with
great slaughter. A tremendous fire was then commenced on the crest of
the British position, by the first brigade of the enemy, stationed near
the copse between Lundy's Lane and the Falls of Niagara, and the 9th and
22nd Regiments and Captain Lawson's brigade of artillery, stationed on
the Queenston road.
"During this stage of the engagement, the Light Company of Royal Scots
arrived on the ground from the Twenty Mile Creek; and a courier was
despatched to countermand the route of the 103rd Regiment, and the
detachment of the King's and 104th Regiments, who had, in a mistake,
taken the road to Queenston from the Beach Woods, and to hasten their
movement to the field of action.
"On the brow of the hill, at the east end of Lundy's Lane, for the
possession of which the armies hitherto had principally contended,
General Drummond had now planted his artillery, as it appeared to form
the key to the position. On this quarter, therefore, the enemy for a
length of time directed his whole efforts; and notwithstanding the
carnage was truly appalling, no visible impression had yet been made.
Still on this part of the field did the whirlwind of the conflict rage
with awful and destructive fury; columns of the enemy, not unlike the
undulating surge of the adjacent cataract, rushed to the charge in close
and impetuous succession.
"In this fearful and tremendous stage of the contest, the British
forces, both regulars and militia, finding themselves pressed by an
overwhelming force, simultaneously closed round the guns, apparently
determined to contest their possession with the last drop of British
blood on the ground, fully assured of their importance to a favourable
termination of the engagement--in short both armies appeared to be
roused to a state of desperation for victory.
"The enemy at length succeeded to make a slight turn on the left of the
British position; at which period, General Riall, who commanded that
division of the army, was severely wounded in the arm, and having passed
to the rear for the purpose of having his wound dressed, on his return
to resume the command, was intercepted by a column of the enemy and made
prisoner of war.
"It was long before this crisis of the engagement that the curtain of
night had enveloped the scene; but instead of this circumstance abating
the fury of war, which had now completely drenched the field with the
blood of the combatants, the rage of battle appeared only to increase as
the night advanced. Still did the enemy continue to direct his strongest
force against the crest of the British position; but his repeated
charges were as often received and repelled by the regular, fencible,
and militia forces engaged, with that intrepid gallantry for which the
British army was ever characterized. Charges were made in such rapid
succession and with such determined vigour that often were the British
artillerymen assailed in the very act of springing and charging their
guns; and often were the muzzles of the guns of the contending armies
hauled up and levelled within a few yards of each other. The havoc of
lives on both sides, under such circumstances, may be better conceived
than described.
"The battle having raged with almost unprecedented fury for upwards of
three hours, both sides appeared for a time mutually to suspend
hostilities; during which the British troops were supplied with fresh
ammunition, and the enemy employed himself actively in bringing up his
reserve columns; after which, the fire was recommenced from the
Queenston road, on the left of the British column; however, it was
discovered that this was only a diversion to mask the intention of a
large body of the enemy's fresh troops, which was actually moving on the
right of the British position, to outflank it. General Drummond
commenced immediately to draw his strength towards this flank of the
army, forming a line in a field of grain, upon which the enemy were seen
to advance in slow and silent pace. The British line formed to repel
this new attack was directed to kneel sufficiently low to prevent being
perceived by the enemy; but scarcely had General Drummond completed this
order of arrangement, before the enemy's column made its appearance and
advanced within a few yards of the British line, when the signal was
made to fire a volley and charge. The effect of that single fire upon
the enemy's ranks was awful in the extreme--those of the enemy who were
able made a precipitate retreat.
"'The enemy's efforts to carry the hill,' says General Drummond, in his
official report, 'were continued until midnight, when he had suffered so
severely from the superior steadiness and discipline of his Majesty's
troops, that he gave up the contest and retreated with great
precipitation to his camp beyond the Chippewa, burning, as he passed the
(Street) flour mills at Bridgewater. On the following day he abandoned
his camp, threw the greatest part of his baggage, camp equipage, and
provisions into the rapids above the falls; and destroying the bridge
at Chippewa, he continued his retreat in great disorder towards Fort
Erie.
"'The loss sustained by the enemy,' adds General Drummond, 'in this
severe action, cannot be estimated at less than 1,500 men, including
several prisoners left in our hands. Generals Brown and Scott were among
the wounded. His whole force, which was never rated at less than 5,000
men, were all engaged.'
"In General Drummond's report of this action, the total number of
killed, wounded, and missing of the British army was 878.
"By the regimental returns of the British army, including those of the
militia, both before and after this engagement, the whole British force
consisted of 2,800; but before the arrival of the troops under Colonel
Scott, of the 103rd Regiment, it did not exceed 1,600.
"Of all the battles (says a writer on this subject) fought in America,
the action of Lundy's Lane was unquestionably the best sustained and by
far the most sanguinary. The rapid charges and real contest with the
bayonet were themselves sufficient to render this engagement
conspicuous. Traits of real bravery and heroic devotion were that night
displayed by those engaged, which would not suffer in comparison with
those exhibited at the storming of St. Sebastian, or the conflict of
Quatre Bras.
"Both the belligerent armies have offered their claims for victory in
this engagement. Upon what grounds the American general could propose
such a claim are best known to himself--General Brown not only abandoned
the plans of operations which he had formed previous to the action at
Lundy's Lane [of advancing to Queenston, Fort George, and Burlington
Heights], but 'retreated in great disorder towards Fort Erie,' where his
egress from the territory might be more easy; and in his way destroyed
the bridge at Chippewa, in order to retard the advance of the British
light troops in his rear."[221]
PART III.
AMERICAN ARMY RETREATS TO FORT ERIE, PURSUED BY GENERAL DRUMMOND, WHO
INVESTS THE FORT--UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO STORM IT--SORTIE OF THE WHOLE
AMERICAN FORCE, TWICE THAT OF GENERAL DRUMMOND, BUT DEFEATED--RAIN
COMPELS THE RAISING OF THE SIEGE--GENERAL BROWN EVACUATES THE FORT AND
CROSSES THE RIVER TO THE AMERICAN SIDE, AND THIS ENDS THE THREE YEARS'
INVASIONS OF CANADA, WITHOUT ACQUIRING AN INCH OF ITS TERRITORY.
On the American army reaching Fort Erie, they entrenched and
strengthened the fortifications of the fort. Thither General Drummond
pursued, and immediately invested the fort, although his army was not
half the strength of the American army. General Drummond having
reconnoitred the enemy's position, determined to storm his
entrenchments. On the 13th of August, General Drummond, having completed
his batteries, commenced a brisk cannonade on the position of the enemy,
which, with few interruptions, was continued for two days with great
effect; after which he was determined to carry the fort and outworks by
nocturnal assault. In pursuance of this purpose, he formed his troops
into three divisions: the first, under Lieutenant-Colonel Fischer, of De
Watteville's, consisting of the King's Regiment, the regiment of De
Watteville, and flank companies of the 89th and 100th Regiments,
directed against the enemy's entrenchments at and near Snake Hill; the
second, under Lieutenant-Colonel Drummond, of the 104th Regiment,
consisting of the 41st and 104th Regiments, and a body of seamen and
marines under the direction of Captain Dobbs, of the Royal Navy, against
the fort; and the third, under Colonel Scott, consisting of his own
regiment, supported by two companies of the Royals, against the
entrenchments adjoining the fort.
About two o'clock on the morning of the 15th, the several divisions of
the British army moved towards the enemy's entrenchments; but as soon as
the column against Snake Hill had emerged from the woods, it came in
contact with an abatis within twelve or fifteen yards of the enemy's
entrenchments, defended by a heavy column of infantry, under the command
of Major Wood, and the artillery under Captain Towson. This for a time
completely checked his advance.
However, it was soon announced by a tremendous fire from the guns in the
fort, and from the columns of infantry defending the entrenchments near
the shore of the lake, that the other two columns, under
Lieutenant-Colonels Scott and Drummond, had commenced an assault upon
the enemy's works.
At the first outset of the two last columns, the enemy succeeded in
turning the column on the left, under Colonel Scott; but that under
Colonel Drummond penetrated the enemy's works and charged through his
ranks with such irresistible impetuosity that nothing seemed
sufficiently impregnable to arrest its progress. Lieutenant-Colonel
Scott in the meantime rallied his column, which had been partially
turned on one flank, and the fort was assailed in almost every quarter
by the besiegers; an escalade was effected, the enemy driven from the
ramparts at the point of the bayonet, and the guns of the fort turned
upon the garrison; all of which preludes to victory had actually been
gained a few minutes after the first alarm.
The battle raged with a fury seldom equalled. The British troops, in
pursuance of an order to that effect, having previously divested their
muskets of the flints, every foot of ground was contested at the point
of the bayonet, which rendered the carnage more dreadful and appalling.
Lieutenant-Colonel Drummond (brother of General Drummond), during the
conflict within the fort, performed extraordinary acts of valour. In the
hottest of the battle he presented himself, encouraging his men, both by
example and precept. But at the very moment when victory was declaring
in favour of the British arms, some ammunition which had been placed
under the platform ignited, and a dreadful explosion was the result, by
which the greater part of the British forces, which had entered the
fort, were literally blown into the air.[222] All exertions of the few
British troops who survived the explosion were found ineffectual to
maintain their ground, in the panic of the moment, against such an
unequal force as the enemy was enabled to bring up against them, and the
British forces were compelled to retire.
In this assault the loss of the British was severe. Colonels Scott and
Drummond fell, while storming the works, at the head of their respective
columns. General Drummond reported the killed, wounded, and missing,
officers and men, as 904. The missing were reported at nine officers and
530 men--afterwards ascertained to have been principally killed. The
American statement of their own loss made it 84 in killed, wounded, and
missing.
A day or two after this assault, General Drummond was reinforced by the
arrival of the 6th and 82nd Regiments from Lower Canada; but this
reinforcement was barely sufficient to supply recent losses. He deemed
it unadvisable to attempt a second storming of the fort against a force
twice as numerous as his own; but by continuing the investment, he cut
off all communication of the enemy with the surrounding country, cooped
him up in the fort, compelled him to draw his provisions and other
resources from his own country, and thus rendered his occupation of that
fort for the remainder of the campaign of no service to the invaders.
At about the expiration of a month, General Brown, having recovered of
his wounds, again resumed command of the army on the Niagara frontier,
and brought with him a strong reinforcement, resolving to attempt the
destruction of the British batteries in front of Fort Erie. Pursuant to
this determination, General Brown, on the 17th of September, at about
noon, ordered a sortie of the whole American force, including both
regulars and militia, in three divisions, under Generals Porter, Miller,
and Ripley; and before the ready and reserved columns of the British
could be brought from the camp (about a mile in the rear), the enemy had
succeeded in penetrating the batteries, destroying the works with one
magazine of ammunition, and spiking the guns. But ere he could effect
his retreat, the ready and reserve columns arrived, and immediately
commenced a determined attack upon his columns, and after about half an
hour's desperate fighting, notwithstanding his great superiority of
numbers, he retired before the bayonets of the British line, in great
precipitation, under the cover of his works, after losing nearly 600 of
his force.
The incessant rains which had fallen that season rendered it impossible
for General Drummond to repair his batteries, or, indeed, to keep the
field, on account of the exposure and increased sickness of the troops;
he therefore, on the 21st of September, raised the siege and retired
into winter quarters, in rear of his works at the mouth of the Chippewa.
General Brown affected some inclination to follow on the rear of the
British army; yet, notwithstanding all the efforts which could possibly
be exercised by a general were called into contribution by General
Drummond to bring General Brown into action, it all proved unavailing.
The American general, "as soon as the coast was clear," having blown up
the works, evacuated Fort Erie, and retreated across the river into his
own country.
Thus terminated the campaign of 1814 on the Niagara frontier; and
whatever might have been the object of the American Government when they
sent that last army to invade Canada, it is certain that nothing was
acquired, if we except a fresh proof (if such had been now necessary) of
the loyalty of the Canadian people to their Sovereign, and their
unshaken zeal to defend their country from the grip of its enemy, at
whatever time he might think proper to invade it.[223]
PART IV.
REVIEW.
The author cannot better present a summary review of the true principles
of loyalty, the origin, causes, characteristics, and results of the war
of 1812-15, together with the conduct of the inhabitants of Canada in
respect to it, than in the words of an address which he delivered to the
York Pioneers at Queenston, in July, 1875, on the occasion of the
anniversary celebration of the battle of Lundy's Lane. The address
(which was entirely extemporaneous in the delivery) is here reproduced,
as reported in the newspapers at the time:
"CAUSES OF THE WAR DECLARED BY THE UNITED STATES AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN,
JUNE 18, 1812--CANADIAN DEFENCE--BATTLE OF LUNDY'S LANE, FOUGHT JULY 25,
1814.
"Address delivered by the Rev. Dr. Ryerson before the York Pioneers and
other Associations assembled on Queenston Heights, near Brock's
Monument, met at a pic-nic on Monday, July 26th, 1875, to celebrate the
battle of Lundy's Lane.
"The Chairman, Colonel R. Denison, called upon Dr. Ryerson, who was
warmly received.
"After a few preliminary observations, he said that he felt it a great
privilege to be called on to address a number of those Canadians who had
laid the foundation of our country, who had given Canada a name that was
honoured throughout the world, and whose hearts beat responsive to those
noble principles that made England the glory of all nations, and British
institutions the honour of mankind. (Loud applause.) He thought the York
Pioneers might well be called the Canadian Pioneers--the pioneers of
Canadian industry enterprise, freedom, and civilization. The object of
the Society in giving an intelligent intensity to those principles that
constituted the loyalty of the people of Canada, in preserving the
traditions of the country, and in uniting in one centre the various
elements of scattered light which were connected with the earliest rays
of its opening history, were works well worthy of the defenders of the
liberties of this country. The very foundation of the York Pioneers was
a spirit of loyalty. What was that loyalty itself? It was no other than
an attachment to the institutions and laws of the land in which we live,
and to the history of the nation to which we belong. It was not merely a
sentiment of respect of the country to an individual, or even to the
Sovereign. If it gathered round the person of the Sovereign, it was
because that Sovereign represented the institutions of the people, the
overshadowing laws of the people, the real and essential freedom, and
the noblest development of the spirit of the people. Loyalty in its true
essence and meaning was the principle of respect to our Sovereign, the
freedom of our institutions, and the excellencies of our civilization,
and it was therefore a feeling worthy to be perpetuated by the people.
Shakespeare--that great apostle of human nature--has said:
"'Though _loyalty_, well held, to fools does make
Our faith mere folly; yet he that can endure
To follow with allegiance a fallen lord,
Does conquer him that did his master conquer.'
"Loyalty is, therefore, faithful to its own principles, whether the
personal object of it is in prosperity or adversity.
"'Loyalty is still the same,
Whether it win or lose the game;
True as the dial to the sun,
Though it be not shone upon.'
"Hence, says Lord Clarendon, of a statesman of his time, 'He had no
veneration for the Court, but only such loyalty to the King as the law
required.' True loyalty is, therefore, fidelity to the Constitution,
laws, and institutions of the land, and, of course, to the sovereign
power representing them.
"Thus was it with our Loyalist forefathers. There was no class of
inhabitants of the old British-American Colonies more decided and
earnest than they in claiming the rights of British subjects when
invaded; yet when, instead of maintaining the rights of British
subjects, it was proposed to renounce the allegiance of British subjects
and destroy the unity of the empire, or 'the life of the nation' (as our
American neighbours expressed it, in their recent civil war to maintain
the unity of their republic), then were our forefathers true to their
loyalty, and adhered to the unity of the empire at the sacrifice of
property and home, and often of life itself. Of them might be said, what
Milton says of Abdiel, amid the revolting hosts:
"'Abdiel, faithful found;
Unshaken, unseduced, unterrified,
His loyalty he kept.'
"Our United Empire Loyalist forefathers 'kept their loyalty unshaken,
unseduced, unterrified,' during seven long years of conflicts and
sufferings; and that loyalty, with a courage and enterprise, and under
privations and toils unsurpassed in human history, sought a refuge and
a home in the wilderness of Canada, felled the forests of our country,
and laid the foundation of its institutions, freedom, and prosperity.
(Loud applause.)
"Canadian loyalty is the perpetuation of that British national life
which has constituted the strength and glory of Great Britain since the
morning of the Protestant Reformation, and placed her at the head of the
freedom and civilization of mankind. This loyalty maintains the
characteristic traditions of the nation--the mysterious links of
connection between grandfather and grandson--traditions of strength and
glory for a people, and the violations of which are a source of weakness
and disorganization. Canadian loyalty, therefore, is not a mere
sentiment, or mere affection for the representative or person of the
Sovereign; it is a reverence for, and attachment to, the laws, order,
institutions and freedom of the country. As Christianity is not a mere
attachment to a bishop, or ecclesiastic, or form of church polity, but a
deep love of divine truth; so Canadian loyalty is a firm attachment to
that British Constitution and those British laws, adopted or enacted by
ourselves, which best secure life, liberty, and prosperity, and which
prompt us to Christian and patriotic deeds by linking us with all that
is grand and noble in the traditions of our national history.
"In the war of 1812 to 1815--one of the last and hardest-fought battles
was that of Lundy's Lane, which we meet this day, on this historic
ground, to celebrate--both the loyalty and courage of the Canadian
people were put to the severest test, and both came out of the fiery
ordeal as refined gold. Nothing could be more disgraceful and
unprincipled than the Madison (I will not say American) declaration of
war against Great Britain, which was at that moment employing her utmost
strength and resources in defence of European nations and the liberties
of mankind. That scourge of modern Europe--the heartless tyrant, but
great soldier, Napoleon--had laid prostrate at his feet all the
Governments of Western and Central Europe, England alone excepted. To
destroy British power, he issued decrees first at Berlin, in 1806, and
afterwards at Milan, excluding all British merchandize from French
ports, and prohibiting the use of British commodities throughout France
and her dependencies, under severe penalties; searching neutral vessels
for British goods, and confiscating them when found, with the vessels
carrying them; interdicting all neutral vessels from trading with any
British port; declaring all the ports of Great Britain and of her
dependencies to be in a state of blockade, though at the very moment the
English fleet commanded the seas. These Napoleon decrees violated the
laws of nations, and affected the national rights and independence of
the United States, as well as of the European nations; and had not
President Madison and his war faction been in league with Napoleon, they
would have resented it, instead of silently submitting, and thus
becoming a party to it. In self-defence and retaliation upon the tyrant
Napoleon, Great Britain, in January, 1807, issued Decrees of Council,
declaring all French ports in a state of blockade, and declaring all
vessels of neutrals liable to seizure which should engage in trade with
France; and as the Napoleon decrees had declared all vessels of any
nation liable to seizure which had touched at any British port, the
English Orders of Council, to counteract this decree, declared, on the
other hand, that only such ships as had touched at a British port should
be permitted to sail for a port of France. The American President,
Madison, being in league with the French usurper against Great Britain,
made no remonstrance against the Napoleon decrees of Berlin and Milan,
but raised a great outcry against the counter English Orders in Council,
and made them a pretext for declaring war against Great Britain. But
President Madison not only thus leagued with Napoleon to destroy British
commerce, but also to weaken the British army and navy by seducing some
10,000 British sailors and soldiers to desert on board of American
vessels, where they were claimed as American citizen sailors.
"England had always claimed the right to search and claim her deserting
sailors on board foreign vessels, and that right had never been disputed
by the United States, until now, under the teachings of Napoleon. But
though there was no occasion for the exercise of such a right in a time
of general peace, the exercise of it then was a matter vital to the
existence and strength of the British navy; but, under the promptings of
Napoleon, President Madison made it not only a subject of loud
complaint, but also an additional pretext for war. Yet, to keep up some
appearance of fairness, but in secret intrigue with Napoleon, the
Madison Administration issued a declaration to open commercial relations
with either of the belligerent powers that should first rescind the
prohibitory decrees or orders. In May, 1812, Napoleon rescinded the
Berlin and Milan decrees so far as concerned the United States, but had
the unparalleled meanness to antedate them _thirteen_ months, and even
apply them to 1810, dating them April, 1811, in order to play into the
hands of his American confederates. Within a month after Napoleon had
rescinded the Berlin and Milan decrees--June 23rd, 1812--the British
Government cancelled the Orders in Council so far as related to the
United States; but five days before that, the 18th of June, President
Madison declared war against Britain, and then when, six weeks
afterwards, he was duly informed of the cancelling of these Orders in
Council, on which he had professed to declare war, he refused to ratify
an armistice agreed upon between Sir George Prevost and General
Dearborn, until the British and American Governments could confer with a
view to prevent any further prosecution of the war. Madison and his
faction of British haters and war adventurers naturally supposed, that
as Upper Canada consisted of 70,000 inhabitants, and as the British
troops were all engaged in the deadly war with France, except guards of
regular soldiers in the Canadian garrisons, our country would fall an
easy prey to his ambition; Great Britain would be humbled at the feet of
Napoleon, and France and the United States would then divide the power
and commerce of Europe and America. But British and Canadian loyalty,
patriotism, and courage defeated their dark designs against the
liberties of mankind. Even the patriotic and intellectual part of the
American people denounced this unholy intrigue between their own
President and the bloody ursurper of Europe, and this causeless war
against Great Britain. The Legislative Assemblies of Massachusetts,
Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Maryland condemned the war
policy of President Madison, and some of them declared it to be but a
party proceeding of the President and his minions to keep themselves in
power and subsidize their hungry partizans. Only a small majority of
Congress approved the declaration of war. A convention of the great
State of New York, held at Albany, September, 1812, consisting of
delegates from the several counties of the State, embodied, in
elaborate resolutions, the intelligent American sentiment on the subject
of the war. That convention declared: 'That, without insisting on the
injustice of the present war, taking solely into consideration the time
and circumstances of its declaration, the condition of the country, and
the state of the public mind, we are constrained to consider and feel it
our duty to pronounce it a most rash, unwise and inexpedient measure,
the adoption of which ought forever to deprive its authors of the esteem
and confidence of an enlightened people; because, as the injuries we
have received from France are at least equal in amount to those we have
sustained from England, and have been attended with circumstances of
still greater insult and aggravation; if war were necessary to vindicate
the honour of the country, consistency and impartiality required that
both nations should have been included in the declaration; because, if
it were deemed expedient to exercise our right of selecting our
adversary, prudence and common sense dictated the choice of an enemy
from whose hostility we had nothing to dread. A war with France would
equally have satisfied our insulted honour, and, at the same time,
instead of annihilating, would have revived and extended our commerce;
and even the evils of such a contest would have been mitigated by the
sublime consolation, that by our efforts we were contributing to arrest
the progress of despotism in Europe, and effectually serving the great
interests of freedom and humanity throughout the world.' 'That we
contemplate with abhorrence, even the probability of an alliance with
the present Emperor of France, every action of whose life has
demonstrated, that the attainment, by any means, of universal empire,
and the consequent extinction of every vestige of freedom, are the sole
objects of his incessant, unbounded and remorseless ambition.' 'Whereas
the late revocation of the British Orders in Council has removed the
great and ostensible cause of the present war, and prepared the way for
an immediate accommodation of all existing differences, inasmuch as, by
the confession of the present Secretary of State, satisfactory and
honourable arrangements might easily be made, by which the abuse
resulting from the impressment of our seamen might, in future, be
effectually prevented.'
"Such were the sentiments of the most intelligent and patriotic
American citizens in regard to the war of 1812-15; they had no more
sympathy with the Madison-Napoleon war than with the recent Fenian
invasion of our shores. And when the war was declared, our fathers knew
their duty, and knew the worthlessness of the pompous proclamations and
promises of President Madison's generals and agents. The blood of our
United Empire Loyalist forefathers warmed again in their own bosoms, and
pulsated in the hearts of their sons and grandsons, and in the hearts of
hundreds of others who had adopted Canada, under the flag of British law
and liberty, as their home. Our Legislative Assembly--specially called
together by General Brock, on the declaration of war--struck the keynote
for Canadian loyalty, sacrifice and action, in a calm, expository and
earnest address to the people of Upper Canada, and truly represented the
already roused spirit of the country. Some of the words of that noble
address are as follows:
"'This war, on the part of the United States, includes an alliance with
the French usurper, whose dreadful policy has destroyed all that is
great and grand, venerable and holy, on the continent of Europe. The
government of this bloody tyrant penetrates into everything--it crushes
individuals as well as nations, fetters thoughts as well as motives, and
delights in destroying forever all that is fair and just in opinion and
sentiment. It is evidently this tyrant who now directs the rulers of
America, and they show themselves worthy disciples of such a master.'
"After noting the juncture selected for declaring war, the address
proceeds: 'It is certainly not the least wonderful among the occurrences
of this astonishing age, that we should find a nation descended from
Englishmen, connected still by the same language and laws, by
consanguinity and many similar habits, not merely eulogizing the
implacable enemy of their parent state, but joining him in the war;
while pretending to nourish the purest principles of liberty, bowing the
knee before the foe of all just and rational freedom, and supplicating
his acceptance of tribute and adulation.' After sketching the origin and
sustained loyalty of the first inhabitants of the country, the Assembly
said: 'Already have we the joy to remark, that the spirit of loyalty has
burst forth in all its ancient splendour. The militia in all parts of
the Province have volunteered their services with acclamation, and
displayed a degree of energy worthy of the British name. When men are
called upon to defend everything they hold precious, their wives and
children, their friends and possessions, they ought to be inspired with
the noblest resolutions, and they will not be easily frightened by
menaces, or conquered by force. And beholding, as we do, the flame of
patriotism burning from end to end of the Canadas, we cannot but
entertain the most pleasing anticipations. Our enemies have indeed said,
that they can subdue this country by a proclamation; but it is our part
to prove that they are sadly mistaken.' 'If the real foundations of true
liberty, and consequently of solid happiness, consist in being amenable
only to such laws as we or our representatives ordain, then are we in
possession of that liberty and that happiness, for this principle was
fully recognized in our excellent constitution.' 'It is not necessary
for us to examine the causes alleged by our enemies for this unjust and
unnatural war, because an address from the House of Representatives of
Massachusetts, the most respectable in the Union, proves in the most
satisfactory manner, that it is wanton and unprovoked, and is the climax
of the various outrages previously committed against Great Britain. In
this statement they have been joined by the minority in Congress, whose
expositions of the secret reasons of the war, and the falsehood of those
alleged by the President and his friends, is unanswerable, and must hand
down the promoters of this diabolical measure to the execration of
posterity.' 'Your representatives finished their labours with placing in
the hands of His Honour the President (Sir Isaac Brock), all the public
money they could collect, in order to contribute as much as possible to
the extraordinary expenses which the war renders necessary, and they
have the fullest confidence that it will be most faithfully applied.
Having thus endeavoured, to the best of their abilities, to provide for
the welfare and safety of the Province, your representatives take the
liberty of reminding you that the best laws are useless without the
zealous co-operation of the people. Unless you are prepared to endure
the greatest privations and to make the severest sacrifices, all that
your representatives have done will be of no avail. Be ready, then, at
all times to rally round the Royal Standard, and let those who are not
called into the service assist the families of those who are called into
the field.' 'Remember, when you go forth to the combat, that you fight
not for yourselves alone, but for the whole world. You are defeating the
most formidable conspiracy against the civilization of man that ever was
contrived; a conspiracy threatening a greater barbarism and misery than
followed the downfall of the Roman Empire--that now you have an
opportunity of proving your attachment to the parent State which
contends for the relief of the oppressed nations--the last pillar of
true liberty, and the last refuge of oppressed humanity.'
"Such were the views and spirit with which the 70,000 people of Upper
Canada, and their score of parliamentary representatives, engaged in the
unequal struggle against myriads of invaders--relying simply upon their
principles, their duty, and their God; and, in three months after the
declaration of war, they had, with the aid of a few hundred regular
soldiers and noble officers, driven back three invading armies,
capturing Hull and the territory of Michigan, driving the invaders
commanded by General Van Rensellaer down Queenston Heights, taking
hundreds of prisoners, driving 'proclamation' General Smyth, with his
8,000, from the Canadian side of the Niagara river, near Fort Erie, so
that he had to run away and retire from the army to escape popular
indignation and disgrace. It is not for me to dwell upon the incidents
and progress of the war; raids were made into our country, many battles
were fought, and much property destroyed and much suffering inflicted;
but those raids were severely retaliated, and at the end of three years
not a foot of Canadian territory was in possession of the invader, while
the key of the North-west, Fort Mackinaw, was in the hands of the
British.
"Of all the battles fought during the war, the most sanguinary and
obstinate was that of Lundy's Lane--the battle, the anniversary of which
we are this day assembled to commemorate--the battle fought the last few
months of the war, the 25th of July, 1814. It was the most formidable
and final effort of the American General Brown to get permanent footing
in Canada. The smallest number of American soldiers engaged in the
battle, according to General Brown's report, was upwards of 5,000; and
the largest number of British soldiers and Canadian militia engaged,
according to the British General Drummond's report, was 2,800, although
the greater part of the battle was fought with a force not exceeding
1,600. I shall not attempt to describe the order, or narrate the
incidents of the battle; I will only say, that the high ground, near the
east end of Lundy's Lane, was the centre of interest, and the position
contended for by both parties in deadly strife for several hours. In no
battle during the war did the Americans fight with such heroism and
obstinacy; and in no battle was the courage, steadiness and perseverance
of the British soldiers and Canadian volunteers put to so severe a test.
The enemy was drawn up in order of battle within 600 yards of the
coveted eminence, when General Drummond arrived on the ground, and he
had barely time to plant his artillery on the brow of the hill, when the
enemy concentrated all his power and efforts to obtain the key of the
battle-field. An eye-witness says: 'Columns of the enemy, not unlike the
surge of the adjacent cataract, rushed to the charge in close and
impetuous succession.' The curtain of night soon enveloped the scene,
now drenched with blood; but the darkness seemed to intensify the fury
of the combatants, and the rage of the battle increased as the night
advanced. An eye-witness truly observes, that 'nothing could have been
more awful than this midnight contest. The desperate charges of the
enemy were succeeded by a dead silence, interrupted only by the groans
of the dying, and the dull sounds of the stupendous Falls of Niagara,
while the adverse lines were now and then dimly discerned through the
moonlight, by the dismal gleam of their arms. These anxious pauses were
succeeded by a blaze of musketry along the lines, and by a repetition of
the most desperate charges from the enemy, which the British received
with the most unshaken firmness.' General Drummond, in his official
report of the battle, says:--'In so determined a manner were these
attacks directed against our guns, that our artillerymen were bayoneted
by the enemy in the act of loading, and the muzzles of the enemy's guns
were advanced within a few yards of ours. The darkness of the night,
during this extraordinary conflict, occasioned several uncommon
incidents; our troops having, for a moment, been pushed back, some of
our guns remained for a few minutes in the enemy's hands; they were,
however, not only quickly recovered, but the two pieces, a six-pounder
and a five-and-a-half-inch howitzer, which the enemy had brought up,
were captured by us, together with several tumbrils. About nine o'clock
(the action having commenced at six) there was a short intermission of
firing, during which it appears the enemy was employed in bringing up
the whole of his remaining force; and he shortly afterwards renewed the
attack with fresh troops, but was everywhere repelled with equal
gallantry and success. The enemy's efforts to carry the hill were
continued until about midnight, when he had suffered so severely from
the superior steadiness and discipline of his Majesty's troops, that he
gave up the contest, and retreated with great precipitation to his camp
beyond the Chippewa. On the following day he abandoned his camp, threw
the greatest part of his baggage, camp equipage and provisions into the
Rapids; and having set fire to Street's Mills, and destroyed the bridge
at Chippewa, he continued his retreat in great disorder towards Fort
Erie.'
"In this bloody battle, the Canadian militia fought side by side with
the regular soldiers; and General Drummond said, 'the bravery of the
militia on this occasion could not have been excelled by the most
resolute veterans.'
"Such was the loyalty of our grandfathers and fathers, and such their
self-devotion and courage in the darkest hour of our country's dangers
and sufferings, and though few in number in comparison of their
invaders, they had
"'Hearts resolved and hands prepared
The blessings they enjoyed to guard.'
"There was doubtless as much true courage among the descendants of Great
Britain and Ireland in the United States as in Canada; but the former
fought for the oppressor of Europe, the latter fought for the freedom of
Europe; the former fought to prostrate Great Britain in her death
struggle for the liberties of mankind, and to build up the United States
upon her ruin, the latter fought in the glorious cause of the mother
country, and to maintain our own unity with her; the former fought for
the conquest of Canada, the latter fought in her defence; the fire that
kindled the military ardour of the former was the blown-up embers of old
enmities against Great Britain, the gross misrepresentations of
President Madison, the ambition of adventure, and the lust of booty--the
fire that burned in the hearts of the latter, and animated them to
deeds of death or freedom, was the sacred love of hearth and home, the
patriotic love of liberty, and that hallowed principle of loyalty to
truth, and law, and liberty combined, which have constituted the life,
and development, and traditions, and strength, and unity, and glory of
British institutions, and of the British nation, from the resurrection
morn of the Protestant Reformation to the present day. A great writer
has truly observed: 'The most inviolable attachment to the laws of our
country is everywhere acknowledged a capital virtue;' and that virtue
has been nobly illustrated in the history of our United Empire Loyalist
forefathers, and of their descendants in Canada, and it grows with the
growth and increases with the strength of our country.
"I have said that loyalty, like Christianity itself, is an attachment to
principles and duties emanating from them, irrespective of rulers or
teachers; but if the qualities of our chief rulers were necessary to
give intensity to Canadian loyalty, those qualities we have in the
highest degree in our Sovereign and in her representative in Canada; for
never was a British Sovereign more worthy of our highest respect and
warmest affection than our glorious Queen Victoria--(loud cheers)--and
never was a British Sovereign more nobly represented in Canada than by
the patriotic, the learned, and the eloquent Lord Dufferin. (Loud
cheers.) And at no period were we more free or prosperous than now. The
feelings of his (the speaker's) heart went far beyond anything that his
tongue could express, and the language of his heart that day was, might
loyalty ever be the characteristic trait of the people of Canada, might
freedom ever be our possession, and might we ever have cause and heart
to say 'God save the Queen!'" (Loud cheering.)
_Note_ by the Author.--The Administration of President Madison, and his
Declaration of War against Great Britain, are dark spots in the
brilliant history of the United States of America, and the American
narratives of the war are rather fiction than history--compiled largely
from letters of officers and soldiers, who, in writing to their friends,
sought to magnify their own heroism, even when suffering disgraceful
defeats, and sometimes claiming victory when they were driven from the
field. The usual tales on these occasions were that the Canadian forces
were vastly superior in numbers and equipments, when it was known that
the American armies were ten to one in numbers to those of Canada, and
their invading forces were declared, by themselves, to be irresistible
in strength and equipments.
The American account of the battle of Lundy's Lane is an example, and is
repeated with exaggerations in the latest and most popular history of
the war, namely, Lossing's Pictorial Field Book of the War of 1812, page
1084. Lossing says:
"The number of troops engaged in the battle of Niagara Falls was little
over 7,000, the British having about 4,500, and the Americans a little
less than 2,600." (p. 824.)
The very reverse of this was the fact, as quoted in the foregoing
extract from the official report of General Drummond. When the American
invading army consisted of 10,000 men, it is absurd to suppose that all
but 2,600 would remain on the American side of the river, and the
American historian states that every available soldier on the British
side of the river was engaged in the battle.
Lossing likewise claims the battle for the Americans "because they drove
the enemy from the field and captured his cannon" (p. 824). It is not
true that the British were driven from the field at all; they were once
pushed back for a few minutes, and their cannon were for a few moments
in the hands of the Americans, who, however, were forthwith driven back,
the cannon retaken, with two pieces left by the Americans. And how could
there possibly be any American victory, when Lossing himself admits that
the American army retired from the field during the night to Chippewa
(p. 823), with the intention of returning next morning to bring off the
cannon and other booty. Is it the characteristic of a victorious army to
leave the conquered field and retire two miles from it? Lossing also
admits that the Americans did not return to the battle-field next
morning, but burnt the bridge which separated the British army from
them, and retreated up the Niagara river. Is this the conduct of a
conquering army, to flee from the enemy whom he pretends to have
conquered? Mr. Lossing's admissions of details contradict the pretence
of American victory at Lundy's Lane, and prove American defeat.
It is by such fictions of victories where there were defeats,
interspersed with fictitious incidents of individual heroism, that
American vanity is fed, and American children taught in the schools what
is purely apocryphal for history in regard to Great Britain and Canada.
But it is gratifying to observe a greatly improved feeling in the
educated American mind towards Great Britain, and even the causes of the
American Revolution, which were magnified in the American Declaration of
Independence, and which have been exaggerated in every possible way in
American histories and Fourth of July orations, are very much modified
in the productions of well-instructed and candid American writers and
public speakers. We observe on a late occasion in England, at the
Wesleyan Conference, Bishop Simpson, the Massillon of American pulpit
orators, said, "The triumph of America was England's triumph. Their
object was the same, and they were engaged in the same work. There were
more Englishmen who would go to America, than Americans who would come
to England (laughter), and while they in England had the wealth, the
power, and the elements of usefulness, they were bound to use it in the
interests of religion."
On the same occasion, the Rev. Dr. Curry, editor of the New York
_Christian Advocate_, the most widely circulated religious paper in
America, uttered the following noble sentiments:
"He was proud," he said, "of England (as the Fatherland of his), and, as
he had now gone up and down through that island, and had witnessed its
signs of substantial wealth, and of social order, he felt that both the
public institutions of the Government and the private virtues of the
people were of the most valuable. He did not wonder that Englishmen were
warmly attached to their own country, and he would say that were he not
an American he should wish to be an Englishman. He rejoiced, too, that
there now exists the most cordial good feeling between the two
countries, and trusted that this would never be interrupted. They had
very many interests in common, and should stand together in support of
them."
On the last Fourth of July, the Rev. Dr. Newman, pastor of President
Grant, who has finished a tour of the world, having been appointed to
examine and report upon all the American Consulships of the globe,
delivered a remarkable discourse on the progress of the nation, and also
of the enlightened ideas and liberal institutions in Europe. In an
allusion to the American Revolution, Dr. Newman says:
"Our forefathers were not slaves; they were English subjects--English
freemen, and we misrepresent them and the struggle through which they
fought, if we look upon them as bound with manacles. They had an
appreciation of what belonged to an English subject. And because the
mother country refused representation where she imposed taxation,
therefore those forefathers arose in their English manhood, protested
against the abuse of governmental power, and asserted that where there
is taxation, there should be representation; and had Patrick Henry been
admitted into the British Parliament to represent her American colonies,
the United States of America to-day would have been the grandest portion
of the empire of Great Britain."
In the same discourse the orator said:
"Behold England of to-day, in her rule at home, as well as in her policy
towards her colonies, pressing upon her colonial possessions practical
independence. She demands that they shall be so far free as to legislate
for themselves, and pay their own expenses. England is now gathering
together her representatives from Africa, and proposes under her benign
sway to form a republican government for long-despised and down-trodden
Africa. Whatever may be said of the Old East India Company under British
protection, let me say, from personal observation, that from the eternal
snows of the Himalayas to the spicy groves of Ceylon, India of to-day
has a wise and paternal government given her by Christian England."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 221: Thompson's History of the War of 1812, Chap. xxx.]
[Footnote 222: As in the storming of the fort at York, the explosion
which took place was and is a matter of dispute, and as to whether the
explosion was accidental, or caused by the British; so it is a matter of
unsettled dispute as to whether the explosion of Fort Erie was caused by
the Americans, or was accidental. General Pike was killed in the
explosion which took place in the fort at York, and Colonels Drummond
and Scott were killed at the explosion of Fort Erie: many of the British
and Canadians were killed in the explosion in the fort at York, but none
of the Americans were killed at the explosion in Fort Erie.]
[Footnote 223: The greater part of the foregoing accounts of the
campaign of 1814 are extracted and condensed from Thompson's and
Christie's Histories of the War of 1812, compared with other histories
of the same events.]
CHAPTER LIX.
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS, EXTRACTED FROM MANUSCRIPTS
RESPECTING THE U.E. LOYALISTS IN THE DOMINION LIBRARY AT OTTAWA.
"CHARACTER OF THE MILITIA." ETC., ETC.
I. "Amongst the first settlers on the frontier of Upper Canada were
those faithful and loyal men, the United Empire Loyalists, with the Six
Nations of Indians, who, at the sacrifice of their all, were steadfast
to the British Crown during the revolutionary struggle of the old
British colonies, now the United States, for independence, and other
United States citizens who had adopted Canada as a home for themselves
and their children. That struggle ended by the treaty of 1783.
"Those faithful men, the U.E. Loyalists and their associates, sought an
asylum under Britain's Crown in this, the then wilderness of Canada,
which now stands as one of the most flourishing provinces of our beloved
Sovereign. In that then wilderness the flag of England was unfurled, and
after the lapse of one century, and on the commencement of another, that
flag floats triumphantly over this loyal Canadian land. Those first
settlers were our first militiamen, under our first and venerated
Governor, Sir John Graves Simcoe, in the year 1791.
"The descendants of those faithful men, with some soldiers and sailors
and others, the sons of Britain who had adopted Canada, were our first
militiamen in the war of 1812; and those who are left of them are
therefore the veteran soldiers of 1812. The war was declared by the
United States Government against Great Britain, June 18th,
1812--involving Imperial interests alone, and not those of the
colonies.[224] This declaration of war against Britain was the signal
for the loyal inhabitants of Canada to rush _en masse_ to the frontier
of their country to repel invasion. In this momentous crisis we met our
beloved Governor and Commander-in-Chief, the late Major-General Sir
Isaac Brock, on the Niagara frontier, whose monument stands on the
battle ground of Queenston Heights. That monument stands in remembrance
of him who sacrificed his valuable life in duty to his King and in
defence of our Canadian homes; in memory of him who caused the youthful
part of the Militia of Upper Canada to be embodied in the Militia Flank
Companies, to be trained for actual service in their country's defence;
in remembrance of him in whom their entire confidence was placed--for
where he led they were sure to follow."
II. The invasions of Canada by the Americans during the war were as
follows:
Men.
1. General Hull, at Sandwich 3,000
2. General Van Rensellaer, at Queenston 2,000
3. General Smyth, at Fort Erie 3,000
4. General Pike, Toronto 2,500
5. General Dearborn, Fort George 3,000
6. General Winchester, Chrystler's Farm,
for Montreal 3,000
7. General Hampton, Chateauguay river, L.C.,
for Montreal 8,000
8. General Brown, Fort Erie 5,000
9. General Brown, Lundy's Lane 5,000
10. General Izzard, Fort Erie 8,000
11. General Wilkinson, Lacolle Mills, L.C. 2,500
Total number of invaders 45,000
The foregoing is an aggregate of the United States forces employed in
the attempt to invade and take Canada, when they desired peace; and
when peace was proclaimed, they did not find themselves in possession of
an inch of Canadian territory.
"Thus it may be said as the opinion of all, that if the loyal
inhabitants of Canada had not, in those days of trial and privation,
stood to their arms under General Brock and other generals, Canada might
not at this day be a continued appendage of the British Crown. In
corroboration of this opinion, I here insert General Brock's answer to
an address of the magistrates at Niagara after Hull's surrender of
Detroit. General Brock said--
"That had not Western Canada rose in their might as one man, in defence
of their rights, and in support of the constitution of Great Britain,
his hands would have been as if tied, being without the aid of the
regular British troops, who were all then engaged in the European war.
"Truly extracted from my book,
"JOHN CLARKE,
"Captain-Adjutant-General of Militia, 1812, '13, '14."
Colonel Clarke says of himself: "I was placed on duty by General Brock
from the commencement of the war of 1812, as Lieutenant and Adjutant of
the 4th Lincoln flank companies. In March I was promoted to the rank of
Captain-Assistant-Adjutant-General of Militia by General Sir Roger H.
Sheaffe, Administrator of the Government of Upper Canada; which place I
retained until the peace of 1815."--"I served throughout the rebellion
of 1837 and 1838--being invested with the command of an organized
regiment of militia, the First Frontier Light Infantry."
Colonel Clarke's recollections and reminiscences are in every respect
reliable, and are very valuable, extending to nearly 300 manuscript
quarto pages, in the Parliamentary Library at Ottawa (entitled "U.E.
Loyalists"). His own contributions are entitled, "Memoirs of Colonel
John Clarke, of Port Dalhousie, C.W.; born in Canada in 1783: giving an
account of the family's early arrival in the country in 1768; the
progress of the settlers; the arrival of Governor Simcoe, his
improvements and government; settlement of the Indians; the war of
1812--full particulars; the rebellion of 1837; the Welland Canal, and
various other things connected with the progressive growth of Upper
Canada."
TREATMENT OF CANADIANS BY THE AMERICANS WHO INVADED CANADA.
"In 1812 General Hull invaded the British province of Upper Canada, and
took possession of the town of Sandwich. He threatened (by proclamation)
to exterminate the inhabitants if they made any resistance. He plundered
those with whom he had been on habits of intimacy for years before the
war. Their plate and linen were found in his possession after his
surrender to General Brock. He marked out the loyal subjects of the King
as objects of his peculiar resentment, and consigned their property to
pillage and conflagration.
"In the autumn of 1812, several houses and barns were burnt by the
American forces near Fort Erie, Upper Canada.
"In 1813--April--the public buildings of York, the capital of Upper
Canada, were burnt by the troops of the United States, contrary to the
articles of capitulation. These public buildings consisted of two
elegant halls, with convenient offices for the accommodation of the
Legislature and the Courts of Justice. The library and all the papers
and records belonging to these institutions were consumed at the same
time. The Church was robbed, and the town library perfectly pillaged.
Commodore Chauncey, who has generally behaved honourably, was so ashamed
of this last transaction, that he endeavoured to collect the books
belonging to the town and legislative library, and actually sent back
two boxes filled with them; but hardly any were complete. Much private
property was plundered, and several houses left in a state of ruin.
"In June, 1813, Newark, Niagara, came into possession of the army of the
United States, and its inhabitants were repeatedly promised protection
to themselves and property by Generals Dearborn and Boyd. In the midst
of these professions, the most respectable of them, although
non-combatants, were made prisoners and sent to the United States.
"Two churches were burnt to the ground. Detachments were sent under the
direction of British traitors [of whom the traitor deserter Wilcox was
the leader] to pillage the loyal inhabitants in the neighbourhood. Many
farm-houses were burnt during the summer; and, at length, to fill up the
measure of iniquity, the whole beautiful town of Newark, with a short
previous intimation--so short as to amount to none, and in an intense
cold day of the 10th of December--was consigned to the flames.
"The wretched inhabitants had scarcely time to save themselves, much
less any of their property. More than 400 women and children were
exposed without shelter, on the night of December the 10th, to the
inclement cold of a Canadian winter. A great number must have perished,
had not the flight of the American troops, after perpetrating their
unfeeling act, enabled the inhabitants of the country to come to their
relief.
"President Madison has attempted to justify this cruel act as necessary
for the defence of Fort George. Nothing can be more false. The town was
some distance from the fort; and instead of thinking to defend it,
General McClure was actually retreating to his own shore when he caused
Newark (Niagara) to be burnt. This officer says that he acted in
conformity with the orders of his Government.
"The American Government, finding their defence useless, disavow the
conduct of McClure, who appears to have been a fit agent for such a
Government. He not only complied with his instructions; but he refined
upon them, by choosing a day of intense severity, giving the inhabitants
almost no warning until the fire began, and the conflagration in the
night."
(The above facts relating to the burning, etc., are extracted from the
proceedings of the Loyal Patriotic Society of Upper Canada, established
at York for the relief of sufferers in the war; and of which Chief
Justice Scott was President.)
_The Royal and Patriotic Society of Upper Canada_ was established at
Toronto, extended its branches to different parts of the Province,
existed from 1812 to 1815, and did a great deal for the relief of
sufferers by the war. On the destruction of the town of Niagara, large
subscriptions were obtained and distributed for the relief of the
sufferers. The following are extracts from its recorded proceedings:
"The inhabitants came forward in the most noble manner, as well as the
gallant officers of his Majesty's troops.
Major-General Sheaffe £200
Lieutenant-Colonel Bishop 100
with a vast number of liberal subscriptions, according to the means of
the donors: so that in a short time upwards of £2,000 was raised to
commence with.
City of Kingston sent £500
Amherstburg " 300
City of Montreal " 3,000
Quebec " 1,500
"The amount raised in the first year was £10,000.
"Eight hundred and sixty-four (864) families were relieved from
starvation by this timely aid.
"The following summer a large meeting was held in London (England), at
which the Duke of Kent, who had visited Canada twenty years before,
presided. By his influence a very large sum was subscribed. The Bank of
England graced the list with £1,000. This effort produced another
£10,000.
Kingston in Jamaica sent £2,000
Nova Scotia " 2,500
"Indeed, the liberality evinced in all quarters was of the greatest
service to the sufferers, and gladdened many bowed down by sorrow and
indigence."
The whole of these interesting particulars may be seen in the
Transactions of the Society, published in Toronto, 1814.
It may be interesting to the reader if I subjoin the address of the
President, explanatory of the origin, character, and objects of this
noble Society, the former existence of which is now scarcely known:
"AN ADDRESS
"_Copied from the Proceedings of the Loyal Patriotic Society of Upper
Canada, who, by their funds, relieved much real distress to families in
the war of 1812, '13, '14._
"Gentlemen,--In the unprovoked war waged against us by the American
Government, Providence hath evidently smiled on the justice of our
cause.
"But our exertions have been attended with many privations and
sacrifices hard to be borne, and should hostilities continue many more
will be required.
"In order to mitigate some of these, the inhabitants of York came
forward to contribute toward the comforts of the flank companies; and a
large sum of money was raised for that purpose, of which the greater
part is expended.
"But, on reflection, it appeared that something more might be done of a
permanent nature, and that portion of the inhabitants who are not liable
to military duty, eager to prove that their zeal in the cause is not
inferior to that of those in actual service, formed themselves into a
Society, named '_The Loyal Patriotic Society of Upper Canada_,' for the
following distinct purposes:
"1st. To afford aid and relief to such families of the militia, in all
parts of the Province, as shall be made to appear to experience
particular distress, in consequence of the death or absence of some of
their friends and relations.
"2nd. To afford like aid and relief to such militiamen as have been or
shall be disabled from labour by their wounds or otherwise in course of
the service aforesaid.
"3rd. To reward merit, excite and commemorate glorious events, by
bestowing medals or other honorary marks of public approbation or
distinction for extraordinary instances of personal courage or fidelity
in defence of the Province by individuals, either of his Majesty's
regular troops or militia forces.
"4th. Also the seamen on the lakes.
"This Society, so honourable in its nature, and which we hope will prove
most important in its consequences, was first suggested by the
Honourable Mr. Selby, and was received with acclamation.
"In a public meeting of the gentlemen of York and its vicinity, the
Chief explained the great advantages likely to result from it, if
generally supported; and, assisted by his most respectable colleagues,
prepared views for its management. To these the meeting gave their
cordial assent, and in a few minutes nearly $2,000 per annum was
subscribed. There are some who have given during the continuance of the
war one-tenth of their income.
"General Sheaffe, in a letter to the Chief Justice, our chairman, not
only extols, in earnest language, the objects of the Society, but, far
exceeding our expectations, presents us with £200. Colonel Bishop, a
stranger [who was afterwards mortally wounded at Black Rock], and not
an inhabitant of the Province, with a liberality above all praise,
subscribes £100.
"Now, gentlemen, our object in addressing you is to procure your
co-operation. Foremost in deeds of warlike glory, we desire that you
should become sharers in the work of benevolence.
"Let your contributions be as small as you please--a halfpenny, a
farthing per day--anything to show your good-will.
"It is not the value of what you give; it is your countenance that we
mainly desire.
"We know that your means are narrow, but your example is inestimable;
and we shall be proud of having you for our companions and supporters in
mitigating the distress incident to the war.
"And when it is heard that the York Volunteers and their comrades, among
the first in danger, have patronized this Society, the militia of other
districts will be anxious to emulate the military glory of the
conquerors of Detroit and Queenston, and will hasten to emulate you in
contributing to the support of our benevolent design.
"Those that join will intimate to the captains what they are willing to
give, while they are in active service, that it may be paid over monthly
to the treasurer.
"And they will remember that they are soothing the sick and the wounded
in war, protecting aged parents and helpless children, and doing all
they can to comfort those whom they love and revere, who suffer during
the horrors of war."
(Signed) CHIEF JUSTICE SCOTT,
_President_.
ALEX. WOOD,
_Secretary_.
The above excellent address is understood to have been written by the
late Dr. Strachan, first Bishop of the Church of England of Toronto, and
who acted the part of a true, a bold, and generous patriot during the
war of 1812-15.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 224: Yet while the American Government professed to declare a
_defensive_ war--a war in defence of their rights at sea--the first act
was _the invasion of Canada_, for which they had been collecting men and
arms for several months before the declaration of the war; and thus the
first acts of the Canadians were to provide for the defence of their
country and their homes against the American invasions. The facts show
that the real object of the American Government was to take Canada, and
their invaded rights at sea was a mere pretext.]
CHAPTER LX.
CLOSE OF THE WAR AND OF THE HISTORY OF THE U.E. LOYALISTS--DEFEAT AND
DISGRACE OF THE DEMOCRATIC INVADERS OF CANADA--HONOUR AND SUCCESS OF ITS
DEFENDERS--COMPARATIVE STATE OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA AT THE
CLOSE OF THE WAR--MUTUAL RESPECT AND FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN AMERICANS AND
CANADIANS--CONCLUDING REMARKS.
Thus closed the war of the United States against Great Britain, in
1812-15--a war undertaken at the prompting of the scourge of Europe,
Napoleon, but upon pretexts which were never so much as mentioned, much
less reiterated, by the United States Commissioners when peace was
proposed between Great Britain and America in 1815--a war in which the
democratic rulers of the United States suffered both defeat and
disgrace, while the loyal inhabitants of Canada maintained inviolate
their honour and independence.
With the close of that war terminates the history of the United Empire
Loyalists of Canada as a distinct and controlling class of the
inhabitants; for their numbers had become so reduced by the ravages of
time and war, and other classes of immigrants had become so numerous,
between whom and the families of old Loyalists so many intermarriages
had taken and were taking place, that the latter became merged in the
mass of the population; and therefore my history of them as a distinct
class comes to an end. All classes were Loyalists, and all had fought as
one man in defence of their country during the recent war, although all
had not fought for the life of the nation and the unity of the empire
from 1776 to 1783, or been driven from their homes to Canada, to become
the fathers of the inhabitants and founders of the institutions of our
country. It would be out of place, and at variance with the title of my
book, did I proceed to narrate and discuss the history of Upper Canada
after the close of the war; but I may properly conclude my work by
referring to a few facts leading to and arising out of the war, and the
state of our country at its close.
The democratic party in the United States, which had confiscated the
property of our forefathers, and exiled them from their homes, and
compelled them to seek a home in the wilderness of Canada, had followed
them with their enmities into their new place of refuge, and, by their
emissaries, in conjunction with those of the French revolutionists,
sought to insinuate a disturbing element into Canadian peace and safety
from the commencement of the bloody French revolution to 1812, when it
culminated, under the promptings of Napoleon and his obsequious tools,
in the war of 1812-15, with a view to wrest Canada from Great Britain,
and to divide the commerce of Europe between France and the United
States. But how vain are the devices of men against the laws of God and
of human society! The Gideon hundreds of loyal Canadians repelled and
scattered, for more than two years, the Midian and Amalekite thousands
of democratic invaders, until Great Britain, having chained the
marauding tiger of Europe to the rock of St. Helena, despatched her
thousands of soldiers to the aid of Canada, and sent her fleets across
the Atlantic--sweeping the American coasts from Maine to Georgia--taking
and burning their capital in retaliation for the American raid upon the
capital of Upper Canada, and soon compelling the heretofore boasting
Madison partizans to seek for peace without even the mention of their
alleged causes of war with England. If the American armies were defeated
and driven back in their repeated invasions of Canada, their commerce
and commercial men suffered not less before the end of the war. Their
annual exports declined, between 1811 and 1814, from £22,000,000
sterling to £1,500,000; their vessels to the number of 3,000 were
captured; two-thirds of their commercial class were reduced to
bankruptcy; an immense war tax was incurred; many thousands of lives had
been sacrificed, and the Union itself imperilled by the threatened
secession of the New England States.
On the other hand, Canada had felt deeply the calamities of war, it
being the seat of the conflict, a large portion of its revenue and
inhabitants having been diverted from their ordinary employments--having
themselves chiefly to depend upon for their defence, while England was
engaged in a twenty years' conflict for law and liberty in Europe. In
the extremity of this contest, the democratic President of the United
States combined with the tyrant despot of Europe to seduce and sever the
Canadians from their British connection; but the Canadians nobly
maintained their fidelity and triumphantly vindicated their honour and
independence, though, in doing so, they suffered the desolation of many
of their homes, shed many bitter tears for sires, and sons, and
brothers, who had poured out their life's blood in defence of their
country on the battle fields of both Upper and Lower Canada. Yet, upon
the whole, the war did much good to Canada, apart from the success of
its arms; it tended to cement the people together as one family;
English, French, Scotch, Irish, and Americans had forgotten former
distinctions and jealousies, and had all become Canadians, with
increased devotion not only to the land of their nativity or adoption,
but to the glorious mother country which had become the victorious
champion of the liberties of Europe, and leader in the civilization of
mankind.
Though, in the course of the war, Canada--especially Upper Canada, which
had to bear the brunt of it--was greatly exhausted, emigration being
checked, agriculture partially neglected, by the embodiments of militia
and frequent mobilization of sedentary corps,--requiring some time after
the war for the inhabitants to return to their old habits and resume
their peaceful pursuits; yet Canada flourished financially during the
war. Owing to England's supremacy on the ocean, Canadian trade and
commerce were not seriously affected; taxes were light; not a few
fortunes were made; money was plentiful, as the mother country paid most
of the expenses of the war.
It is worthy of remark, as one of the notable features of the war, that
no class of Canadians were more loyal, none more brave and devoted to
the defence of the Government and institutions of the country, than were
the Americans who had become settlers in Canada--not the United Empire
Loyalists alone, but those who had from time to time emigrated from the
United States of their own accord, and not on account of political
persecution, as was the case with the old Loyalists.
The unfriendly feelings and even enmities which had been excited by the
war between Canadians and Americans, soon changed into mutual respect
and friendship; trade and commerce between the two countries were
renewed and increased; intermarriages multiplied, with all the amenities
and intimacies of social life. Though there has always been a democratic
mob faction--latterly mostly Fenian--in the United States, which has
seized every opportunity to invade and disturb the peace of Canada, yet
it is well understood that this freebooting faction does not represent
the sentiments or feelings of the industrious, business, commercial,
intelligent, and Christian people of the United States, who, with few
exceptions, are, as most of them were when Madison declared war against
England in June, 1812, lovers of peace, law, and order, and friends of
England and Canada, as well as of mankind; and we believe there are no
more ardent well-wishers on the continent of America for the happiness
and prosperity of the citizens of the American Republic than the loyal
and patriotic inhabitants of Canada.
I may perhaps be expected to add a few words on the chief public
occurrences which took place in Upper Canada after the war, but without
discussing any of the questions which they involved.
From 1791 to the close of the war in 1815, and for some years
afterwards, the Executive Government of the day commanded the votes of a
majority of the House of Assembly. Public questions and measures were
freely discussed; but no organized opposition appeared in the Assembly
against the Administration. Shortly after the close of the war, however,
the elements of discord began to be developed in the country. Many
discharged officers of the British army, at the termination of the long
European war, came to Canada with instructions from the Secretary of
State for the Colonies to the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada
(himself an English officer), to provide for them; and they were
appointed to all offices of emolument (with few exceptions), to the
exclusion of the old Loyalists and their descendants and other
inhabitants who had felled the wilderness, and made the country
valuable, and had borne the burden and heat of the war in its defence.
The administration of the Crown or Public Lands was sadly defective and
partial, giving whole blocks to friends and speculators, while the
applications of the legitimate settler were often rejected. It also
began to be complained of that these large blocks of land given to
individuals, and the one-seventh of the lands set apart as Clergy
Reserves, greatly impeded the settlement and improvement of the country;
that those who had occupied the Clergy Reserves on _leases_ were
required to pay higher rents on the renewal of their leases, or the
purchase of the Reserves, on account of their increased value created by
the labour of the tenants and their neighbours. A special Board of
Management was appointed for these Reserves in the interest of the
clerical claimants of them. The representatives of the Church of
Scotland claimed to share in the proceeds of the Clergy Reserves, and a
co-ordinate standing with the Church of England, as the endowed Church
establishment of Upper Canada. The other religious persuasions had not
the privilege of having matrimony solemnized by their own ministers, or
the right of holding a bit of ground on which to worship God, or in
which to bury their dead. It soon began to be claimed by the leaders of
the Church of England that their Church had the sole right to the Clergy
Reserves and to all the prerogatives of _the_ Established Church, whose
supremacy and endowments, it was now pretended, were essential to the
loyalty of the people; notwithstanding, no people could have been more
loyal than the Canadian people during the then recent war in defence of
British supremacy, and who were as brave as they were loyal, though
there were not then three settled Episcopal clergymen in all Upper
Canada.
These, with various co-ordinate and minor causes, lost to the
Lieutenant-Governor and his Executive Council the control and confidence
of the representatives of the people, and in less than ten years after
the war, the Governor and Council fell into a hopeless minority in the
House of Assembly, but in opposition to it actually governed the country
for fifteen years, until the dissatisfaction of the people became so
general and strong that Commissions of Inquiry were sent out from
England, which resulted in placing all religious persuasions on an equal
footing before the law, in applying the proceeds of the Clergy Reserves
to the general purposes of the education and improvement of the country,
in making the heads of public departments (who were to be Executive
Councillors) responsible to the House of Assembly, and holding their
offices no longer than they enjoyed its confidence. From that time
forward the Government became strong, the people contented, and the
country prosperous and rapidly increasing in wealth, education, and
intelligence--rendering, at this day, the inhabitants of the vast
Dominion of Canada the lightest-taxed and the freest people on the
American continent.
GENERAL INDEX.
Abercrombie (General)--Arrives in America with the troops, and forty
German officers to drill and command regiments in America (which
gives offence to the Colonists). i. 257.
Is disgracefully defeated by Montcalm (though commanding the largest
force ever assembled in America). i. 258.
With General Loudoun, hesitates and delays at Albany, while the French
generals are active and successful. i. 258.
Adams (John)--The prompter and adviser of hanging "Tories." ii. 127.
Address of Governor Winthrop and his company on leaving England, in
1630, to their "Fathers and Brethren of the Church of England,"
declaring their filial and undying love to the Church of England,
as their "dear mother," from whose breasts they had derived their
nourishment. i. 55.
Alliance between Congress and the Kings of France not productive of
the effect anticipated, and deferred twelve months by France after
it had been applied for by Congress. ii. 1.
American Affairs--Misrepresented in the English Parliament and by
the English Press. i. 390.
American boastings groundless over the surrender of Cornwallis. ii. 46.
American Colonies--Their position in regard to England and other nations
at the Peace of Paris, 1763. i. 274.
American Revolution--primary cause of it. i. 30.
American treatment of Canadians by Americans who invaded them. ii. 464.
Invasions of Canada, and their forces. ii. 262.
Amherst (Lord)--Supersedes Abercrombie as Commander-in-Chief, assisted
by General Wolfe. i. 260.
Plans three expeditions, all of which are successful. i. 261.
His energetic movements. i. 262.
He receives all Canada for the King from the French. i. 267.
His parting address to the army. i. 268.
Anderson (Samuel). ii. 192.
Andros (Edmond)--Appointed local Governor of Massachusetts Bay, and
Governor-General of New England; his tyranny; seized at Boston and
sent prisoner to England. i. 215.
(Examined)--Acquitted by King William in Council, because he had acted
according to his instructions. i. 215.
Articles of treaty and preamble. ii. 56.
Associations in the Colonies against the use of tea imported from
England. i. 370.
Bancroft--Confirms the statement as to the aggressions and pretensions of
the Massachusetts Bay Government. i. 200.
His interpretations against England. i. 247.
Baptists--The persecution of them instigated by the Rev. Messrs. Wilson
and Newton, and justified by the Rev. Mr. Cotton. i. 120.
Barnard (Governor)--His reply to the Massachusetts Legislative
Assembly. i. 357.
His recall and character. i. 359.
Bethune (Rev. John). ii. 192.
Boston and Massachusetts--Three Acts of Parliament against, all infringing
and extinguishing the heretofore acknowledged constitutional rights of
the people. i. 389.
Boston--In great distress; addresses of sympathy and contributions from
other towns and provinces.
Fourth Act of Parliament, legalizing the quartering of troops in. i. 397.
General sympathy and liberality in its behalf. i. 404.
Boston Massacre--Soldiers acquitted by a Boston jury. i. 365.
Boyle (Hon. Robert)--In a letter in which he expostulates with the
Massachusetts Bay rulers on the intolerance and unreasonableness of their
conduct. i. 160.
Braddock's unfortunate expedition. i. 247.
Bradstreet (Colonel)--His brilliant achievement in taking and destroying
Fort Frontenac. i. 261.
Bradstreet and Norton--Sent to England to answer complaints; favourably
received; first thanked and then censured by the Massachusetts Bay
rulers; Norton dies of grief. i. 142.
Brock (Sir Isaac)---His address to the Legislature of Upper Canada,
ii. 341, 342.
Takes Detroit. ii. 352-354.
Proclamation to the inhabitants of Michigan. ii. 362, 363.
Killed at Queenston Heights. ii. 366.
Brown, Samuel and John--Their character and position. i. 35.
Banished from Massachusetts Bay for adhering to Episcopal worship. i. 35.
Misrepresented by Messrs. Palfrey and Bancroft. i. 37.
Their letters and papers seized, and their complaints successfully
denied to the King by their persecutors. i. 46.
Their conduct unblamable. i. 42.
Bunker's Hill, Concord, and Lexington--Battles of, numbers engaged,
with the accounts, on both sides. i. 460, 461.
Burke (the celebrated Edmund)--Reviews and denounces the persecuting
laws and spirit of the Massachusetts Bay Puritans, during thirty
years. i. 122.
Canadian Militia--Their character. ii. 461.
Canada--What had been claimed by old American colonies in regard to the
payment of official salaries contended for by, and granted to Canada,
to the satisfaction and progress of the country. i. 267.
Canada wholly surrendered to the King of Great Britain, through Lord
Amherst. i. 267.
Canada--State of at the close of the war. ii. 471.
Carscallen (Luke). ii. 202.
Causes--Characteristics of early emigration to New England. i. 25.
Change of government in England and end of Lord North's administration.
ii. 57.
Change of tone and professions at Massachusetts Bay on the confirmation
of the King's restoration. i. 131.
The King's kind reply to their address--their joy at it, but they evade
the six conditions on which the King proposes to forgive their past
and continue their charter. i. 135-137, 139.
Characteristics of fifty-four years' government of Massachusetts Bay,
under the first charter. i. 217.
Charles the First--Deceived by the misstatements of the Massachusetts
Bay Puritans, to decide in their favour against the complaints made
in 1632. i. 67.
His kind and indulgent conduct to the Massachusetts Bay Company, and
how they deceived him. i. 67.
Charles the Second--His restoration; news of it received with joy in all
the Colonies except in Massachusetts, where false rumours are
circulated. i. 130.
Chateauguay, Battle of. ii. 413.
Chatham (Earl of)--Amendment; speech in the House of Lords (1774) against
the coercive policy of the Ministry and defence of Colonial rights; his
amendment opposed by Lord Suffolk, and supported by Lord Camden;
negatived by a majority of 68 to 18. i. 423-429.
His bill "to settle the troubles in America" not allowed a first reading
in the Lords. i. 425.
Chrystler's Farm, Battle of. ii. 419.
Clarendon (Earl of, Chancellor)--Reply to the address to the King,
Charles II., of the Massachusetts Bay rulers, dated October 25, 1664,
in which Lord Clarendon exposes the groundlessness of their pretensions,
suspicions, and imputations. i. 160.
Clark (Colonel John), and his Manuscript contributions. ii.
Clinton (Sir Henry)--Succeeds General Howe as Commander-in-Chief. ii. 14.
Deceived as to the design of Washington and the French commander. ii. 42.
Fails to reinforce Lord Cornwallis. ii. 44.
Colonies--All resolve in favour of a general convention or congress and
election of delegates to it, in 1774. i. 408.
How information on subjects of agitation was rapidly diffused throughout
the Colonies. i. 405.
Colonial Assemblies--Their dissolutions. i. 356.
Colonists--Their agreements for the non-importation of British
manufactured goods. i. 356.
Sons of Governors Barnard and Hutchinson refuse to enter into agreement,
but are at length compelled to yield. i. 360.
Their effective services to England in the English and French war; their
experience and skill thereby acquired in military affairs; their
superiority as marksmen. i. 460.
Desire to provide as aforetime for their own defence and the support of
their own local government, as is done in the provinces of the Dominion
of Canada. i. 460.
Colonist--The writer a native. i. 1.
Colonies--Three causes of irritation in 1768. i. 348.
Unjust imputations in the British Parliament and Press against their
loyalty. i. 353.
Their manly response to the imputations and assertion of British rights,
led by the General Assembly of Virginia. i. 355.
Company of Massachusetts Bay--Write to Endicot and ministers sent by them
against Church innovations. i. 49, 51.
Deny to the King and British public having made any Church innovations in
Massachusetts. i. 53.
Complaints of banished Episcopalians, persecuted Presbyterians, Baptists,
&c., to the King. i. 46, 137.
Complaints of the Massachusetts Bay Rulers--a pretext to perpetuate
sectarian rule and persecution. i. 183.
Conduct and pretensions of Massachusetts Bay Rulers condemned and exposed
by Loyalist inhabitants of Boston, Salem, Newbury, and Ipswich. i. 163.
Congregationalists--None other eligible for office, or allowed the elective
franchise at Massachusetts Bay. i. 63.
Congress (First General Congress)--
Met at Philadelphia, September, 1774. i. 409.
The word defined. i. 409.
Each day's proceedings commenced with prayer. i. 410.
Its members and their constituents throughout the Colonies thoroughly
loyal, while maintaining British constitutional rights. i. 410.
Its declaration of rights and grievances. i. 411.
Its loyal address to the King. i. 414.
Its manly and affectionate appeal to the British Nation. i. 416.
The address of its members to their constituents--a temperate and lucid
exposition of their grievances and sentiments. i. 417.
Its proceedings reach England before the adjournment for the Christmas
holidays in 1774, and produce an impression favourable to the
Colonies. i. 420.
(Second Continental) meets in Philadelphia, September, 1775; number and
character of its members. i. 442.
Its noble and affectionate petition to the King; the King denies an
audience to its agent, Mr. Penn, and answers the petition by
proclamation, declaring it "rebellion," and the petitioners
"rebels." i. 443-445.
Its petition to the House of Commons rejected, and its agent, Mr. Penn,
not asked a question. i. 444.
A large majority (Oct. 1775) still opposed to independence, but unanimous
in defence of British constitutional rights. i. 448.
Divided on the question of _Independence_, which is first moved in
Congress in May, 1776--deferred, after long debates, for three weeks, by
a vote of seven to five Colonies. i. 483, 484.
Manipulation and agitation to prepare the members of Congress and the
Colonies for separation from England. i. 482-485.
Proceeds with closed doors, and its members sworn to secrecy.
Votes by Colonies, and decides that each vote be reported unanimous,
though carried by only a bare majority. i. 486.
After three days' debate, the six Colonies for and seven Colonies against
independence; how a majority of one was obtained in favour of
it. i. 486, 487.
Refuses to confer with British Commissioners with a view to
reconciliation. ii. 2.
Feelings of the people of England and America different from those of
the leaders of Congress. ii. 14.
Sycophancy of its leaders to France. ii. 13.
Its degeneracy in 1778, as stated by General Washington. ii. 29.
The depression of its credit. ii. 30.
It confiscates and orders the sale of the property of "Tories." ii. 30.
Appeals to France for men and money as their only hope. ii. 40.
Fallacy of the plea or pretext that it had not power to grant compensation
to the Loyalists. ii. 61.
Meets at Philadelphia, 10th May, 1776. i. 479.
Contests--Chiefly between the Colonists, the French, and the Indians,
from 1648 to 1654. i. 250.
Colonies--their divided councils and isolated resources. i. 257.
Their alarming state of affairs at the close of the year 1757. i. 255.
Cornwallis--His antecedents, ii. 38; his severe policy injurious to the
British cause, ii. 40;
his defence of Yorktown, ii. 44;
his surrender to the French and American armies, ii. 45;
conditions of capitulation, ii. 46.
Count De Grasse--Sails from New York to the Chesapeake with a fleet of
28 ships and 7,000 French troops. ii. 43.
Crown Point taken from the French by the English. i. 263.
Debts--Incurred by the New England Colonies in the Indian wars; how
Massachusetts was relieved by England, and made prosperous. i. 240.
Declaration of American Independence--How the vote of the majority of the
Colonies for it was obtained, and how reported. i. 486, 487.
Copy of it. i. 488.
Homage of respect by the authors to the fathers of. i. 492-495.
1. A renunciation of all the principles on which the General Congress,
Provincial Legislatures, and Conventions professed to act from the
beginning of the contest; proofs and illustrations. i. 496-499.
2. A violation of good faith to those statesmen and numerous other
parties in Great Britain, who had, in and out of Parliament, defended
and supported the rights and character of the Colonists during the whole
contest; proofs and illustrations. i. 499-501.
3. A violation, not only of good faith, but of justice to the numerous
Colonists who adhered to connection with the Mother Country; proofs and
illustrations. i. 501-504.
4. The commencement of persecutions and proscriptions and confiscation of
property against those who refused to renounce the oaths which they had
taken, and the principles and traditions which had, until then, been
professed by their persecutors and oppressors as well as by themselves;
proofs and illustrations. i. 504-507.
The plea of tyranny. i. 504.
5. The commencement of weakness in the army of its authors, and of defeat
in their battle-fields; proofs and illustrations. i. 508-513.
6. The announced expedient and prelude to an alliance with France and
Spain against the Mother Country. i. 513-517.
New penal laws passed against the Loyalists after adopting it. ii. 5.
Detroit--Taken by the British under General Brock. ii. 354.
De Salaberry (General)--Defeats 10,000 Americans with 300 Canadians at
Chateauguay ii. 381.
D'Estaing--His doings and failures in America. ii. 17-27.
Diamond (John). ii. 202.
Doane. ii. 192.
Dudley (Joseph)--Appointed Governor of Massachusetts by King James II.
i. 212.
Dunmore (Earl of)--Governor of Virginia, commits the same outrages upon
the inhabitants of Virginia, and about the same time, as those
committed by General Gage upon the inhabitants of Massachusetts. i. 462.
Assembles the House of Burgesses to deliberate and decide upon Lord
North's so-called "conciliatory proposition" to the Colonies; the
House rejects the proposition on a report prepared by Mr. Jefferson--a
document eulogized in the strongest terms by the Earl of
Shelburne. i. 464.
East India Company--Disastrous effect of its agreement with the British
Government. i. 381.
East India Company's Tea--Causes of it being thrown into Boston Harbour,
as stated on both sides. i. 377.
Elections in England hastened in the autumn of 1774; adverse to the
Colonies. i. 419.
Emigrants to Massachusetts Bay--Two classes. i. 1.
Emigration to Massachusetts Bay stopped by a change of Government in
England. i. 85.
Endicot--Leader of the first company of emigrants to Massachusetts
Bay. i. 27.
His character. i. 27.
Becomes a Congregationalist. i. 29.
Abolishes the Church of England, and banishes its adherents. i. 29.
Cause of all the tyrannical proceedings against them. i. 42.
Finally condemned by the Company, but officially retained by
them. i. 43-48.
England's best and only means of protecting the Colonies against French
encroachments and invasion. i. 244.
Position in respect to other European Powers at the Peace of Paris
in 1763. i. 273.
England--Its resources at the conclusion of the Revolutionary
war. ii. 48, 49.
The war party, and corrupt Administration, is defeated. ii. 48, 49.
Change of Administration and of policy, both for England and the
Colonies. ii. 53.
Names of new Ministers, &c. ii. 53.
English Generals and soldiers refuse to fight against the
Colonists. i. 446.
English Government employs seventeen thousand German mercenaries to
bring the Colonists to absolute submission. i. 446-479.
Its change of policy, and effect of it in regard to the Colonies after
the Peace of Paris, 1763. i. 277.
Its first acts which caused dissatisfaction and alienation in the
American Colonies. i. 279.
Falmouth (now Portland) bombarded and burnt, by Captain Mowat, of the
British Navy. i. 446.
Five-sixths of the male population disfranchised by Puritan bigotry and
intolerance at Massachusetts Bay. i. 63.
Fort de Quesne taken by the English and called Pittsburg. i. 263.
Fox (C.J.)--His amendment to Lord North's address to the King, 1775,
rejected by a majority of 304 to 105. i. 430.
France and England at war; mutually restore, in 1748, places taken
during the first war. i. 242.
Franklin (Dr.)--His evidence at the Bar of the House of Commons on
the Stamp Act, etc. i. 308.
Dismissed from office the following day. i. 426.
His petition to the House of Commons rejected. i. 426.
Proposes to include Canada in the United States. ii. 54.
Counter scheme to defeat the proposition of the English
Commissioners. ii. 58.
Outwits the English Commissioners. ii. 63.
His Indian scalp fictions. ii. 119.
French--Attempt to take Quebec. i. 266.
Bitter feeling between French and American officers and soldiers,
at Rhode Island, Boston, Charleston, and Savannah. ii. 20-25.
Encroachments on the British Colonies, from 1748 to 1756. i. 243.
Evasions and disclaimers, while encroaching on the British Colonies
and making preparations for war against England. i. 245.
Successes in 1755, 1756, and 1757, in the war with England. i. 252.
French Fleet--Its complete failure under Count D'Estaing. ii. 17.
French Officers and Soldiers--Their kindness to the English after
the defeat of Lord Cornwallis. ii. 129.
Gage (General)--His arrival in Boston; courteous reception, as successor
to Governor Hutchinson; his character. i. 398.
Summons a meeting of the Legislature, which adjourns to meet at Salem,
and which replies respectfully but firmly to Governor
Gage's speech; his bitter answer. i. 399.
His curious dissolution of the last Legislature held in Massachusetts
Bay according to its first charter, which had proceeded with closed
doors, and adopted by a majority of 92 to 12, declaring the necessity
of a meeting of all the Colonies to meet and consult together on their
present state. i. 401.
Governor of Massachusetts, and Commander-in-chief of the British in
America, commences the first attack upon the Colonists. i. 460.
Governments of the British Provinces. ii. 271-276.
(1) Nova Scotia. ii. 274-277.
(2) New Brunswick. ii. 277-280.
(3) Prince Edward Island. ii. 280.
(4) Lower Canada. ii. 281-306. (See table of contents, chapter xlv.)
(5) Upper Canada, ii. 307-316. (See table of contents, chapter xlvi.)
Governor of Massachusetts Bay Puritans and a majority of the assistants
or magistrates vote in favour of submitting to the decision of the King
on the conditions of perpetuating the Charter; but Congregational
Ministers advise, and the majority of the deputies vote against
it. i. 208, 209.
Governors of South and North Carolina (Campbell and Martin), like Dunmore,
Governor of Virginia, betake themselves to ships--the Colonists in each
case being treated with like severity. i. 473.
Haight (Canniff). ii. 219.
Happiness and prosperity of Massachusetts during seventy years under the
second Charter. i. 240.
Harris (Mrs. Amelia). ii. 228-236.
Hessian soldiers--Their unreliable and bad character. ii. 73.
Hildreth, the historian, on the gloomy state of American affairs at
the close of 1780. ii. 41.
Hillsborough (Earl of)--Effects of his circular letter to Colonial
Governors. i. 345.
Joy in the Colonies at his despatch promising to repeal the
obnoxious revenue Acts, and to impose no more taxes on the Colonists
by acts of the British Parliament. i. 361.
Holland--Flight of Pilgrim Fathers to; trades there. i. 10.
Howe (Lord)--A monument erected to his memory in Westminster Abbey,
at the expense of £250 sterling, by the Massachusetts Court. i. 260.
Hutchinson (Governor of Massachusetts) and his sons alone determine to
land the East India Company tea in Boston. i. 376.
His account of the transactions at Boston, and vindication of
himself. i. 383.
His conduct different from that of the Governors of other
Colonies. i. 387.
Independence disclaimed by Franklin in 1773, by Washington and
Jefferson and by leading New Englanders in July, 1775. i. 451-453.
Independents, origin of. i. 7.
Indians--Employed by both French and English in their wars. ii. 75.
Their employment in the war with the Colonies, opposed by the English
Generals. ii. 76.
Their employment disadvantageous to England. ii. 76.
Their alliance and co-operation sought for by Congress. ii. 77.
Retaliations upon them by the Congress soldiers exceeded all that had
been committed by the Indians upon the Americans--opinion of American
writers. ii. 77.
Much that was written against them during the Revolution, since shown
by the letters and biographies of its actors to have been
fictitious. ii. 78.
Their employment against the English recommended by Washington, July
27th, 1776. ii. 80.
Efforts of General Burgoyne to restrain them from all cruel acts and
excesses. ii. 82.
Their conduct injurious to the English cause and beneficial to the
American. ii. 83.
The unprovoked invasion of their country, destruction of their
settlements, and desolation of their towns, orchards, and crops and
farms, by order of Congress. ii. 84.
Further examples of "retaliation," so-called, upon the Indian
settlements. ii. 106.
The "Tories" driven among them as their only refuge, and treated as
"traitors;" their conduct and duty. ii. 107.
Indians (Six Nations)--Colonel Stone's account in detail of General
Sullivan's expedition of extermination against the Six Nations of
Indians. ii. 108.
Indians--Treatment of by the Puritans in New England. ii. 293.
Intolerance and persecution of Baptists, Presbyterians, etc., by the
Massachusetts Bay Rulers, from 1643 to 1651. i. 112.
Invasions of Canada by Americans; numbers of invaders. ii. 462.
James II.--Succession to the throne; thanked by the Massachusetts Bay
Rulers for his Proclamation which violated the rights of England, and
cost him his crown. i. 216.
Jarvis (Stephen). ii. 193.
(William). ii. 193.
Johnson's (Sir William) victory over the French General Dieskau. i. 250.
Jones (David). ii. 193.
(Jonathan). ii. 193.
King Charles the Second--Enjoins to cease persecuting the Quakers;
how answered. i. 135.
The King retains Puritan councillors, who are kindly disposed to the
Massachusetts Bay Puritans. i. 138.
The King's pardon and oblivion of the past misdeeds of the Massachusetts
Bay Rulers, and promised continuance of Charter joyfully proclaimed;
but the part of the letter containing the conditions of pardon, and
oblivion, and toleration withheld from the public; and when the
publication of it was absolutely commanded, the Massachusetts Bay
Rulers ordered that the conditions of toleration, etc., should be
suspended until further orders from their Court. i. 139-141.
Royal Commissioners appointed by the King, to inquire into the matters
complained of in the New England Colonies, and to remedy what was
wrong. i. 145.
Royal Commission appointed; slanderous rumours circulated against the
Royal Commissioners. i. 146.
Copy of it explaining the reason and object of it. i. 147.
Duly received by all the New England Colonies except Massachusetts,
where slanderous rumours were circulated against the Commission and
Commissioners. i. 146, 147.
King Charles the Second's reply to the long address or petition of the
Massachusetts Bay Court, dated February 25, 1665, correcting their
misstatements and showing the groundlessness of their pretended fears
and actual pretensions. i. 166.
Kind letter without effect upon the Massachusetts Bay Rulers, who refuse
to receive the Royal Commissioners; second and more decisive letter from
the King, April, 1666. i. 169.
Grants Charters to Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1663, with remarks
upon them by Judge Story. i. 172.
On receiving the report of his Commissioners, who had been rejected by
the Massachusetts Bay Rulers, orders them to send agents to England to
answer before the King in Council to the complaints made against the
Government of the Colony. i. 179.
Entreated by the Massachusetts Bay Rulers, who try to vindicate their
proceedings, and instead of sending agents, send two large masts and
resolve to send £1000 sterling to propitiate the King. i. 180.
Desists for some time from further action in regard to the Massachusetts
Bay Rulers, but is at length roused to decisive action by complaints
from neighbouring Colonists and individual citizens of the
invasions of their rights, and persecutions and proscriptions
inflicted upon them by the Massachusetts Bay Rulers. i. 187.
Seven requirements of the Massachusetts Bay Rulers, in his letter to them,
dated July, 1679, just and reasonable, and observed by all British
Colonies at this day. i. 188.
King George III.--Alleged author of the scheme with the East India
Company; his condemnation of the petitions and remonstrances
from the Colonies. i. 382.
His speech at the opening of the New Parliament, March 30th,
1774; and answers of both Houses. i. 419.
Opposition to the Royal Speech in both Houses; protest in the
Lords. i. 420.
Denounces the Earl of Chatham and others. i. 424.
La Fayette returns from France in 1778, with a loan of money and
reinforcements of land and naval forces. ii. 33.
Liberty (civil and religious) established in Massachusetts, not by
the Puritans, but by Royal Charter. i. 237.
Lippincott (Captain Richard). ii. 193.
Long Parliament--Its ordinances in regard to Massachusetts trade
in 1642. i. 87.
Appoints Commissioners and Governor General to Massachusetts
Bay in 1646, with large powers. i. 88.
Orders the surrender of the Massachusetts Bay Charter; and means
employed to evade it. i. 99, 100.
Loudoun (Earl of)--Arrival of from England, with troops, as
Commander-in-chief. i. 252.
Disputes between him and the Massachusetts Court, in regard
to the Mutiny Act, and quartering the troops upon the
citizens. i. 255.
His arbitrary conduct in quartering his officers in Albany and
New York. i. 258.
Hesitates and delays at Albany; never fought a battle in America. i. 259.
Loyalists--Circumstances of, after the surrender of Charleston to the
French and Americans. ii. 46.
Unprotected in the articles of peace. ii. 57.
Constituted a majority of the population of the Colonies at the beginning
of the contest. ii. 57.
Sacrificed in the treaty, as stated by Dr. Ramsay and Mr.
Hildreth. ii. 59-61.
What demanded had been sanctioned by all modern civilized
nations, in like circumstances. ii. 61.
Their deplorable condition during the war; utter abandonment by the
English commissioners. ii. 64.
Much of what was written against the Revolution, since shown by the
biographies and letters of its actors to be fictitious. ii. 77.
Summary of their condition and treatment. ii. 123.
Changes of their relation and condition by the Declaration of
Independence. ii. 124.
The elements of their affectionate attachment to England. ii. 125.
The largest part of the population of the Colonies after the Declaration
of Independence. ii. 124.
Their claims to have their rights and liberties restored. ii. 125.
Their position and character, described by Mr. Hildreth, and
abused by mobs and oppressed by new Acts, and authorities. ii. 125.
First scene of severity against them; new American maxim of forgiving
"Tories." ii. 127.
Their treatment in New York, Philadelphia, Virginia, and other
places. ii. 128.
Legislative and executive acts against them. ii. 130-136.
Rhode Island, Connecticut. ii. 130.
Massachusetts. ii. 131.
New Hampshire, Virginia, New York. ii. 131.
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware. ii. 132.
Maryland, North Carolina, Georgia. ii. 132.
South Carolina. ii. 136.
Their treatment on their applications for compensation after the
Revolution. ii. 139-144.
Their treatment by the British Government and Parliament after
the Revolution. ii. 159-182.
Refused compensation by the States of America, as proposed in the
Treaty of Peace, and contrary to the practice of civilized
nations. ii. 159.
Their compensation advocated in both Houses of Parliament. ii. 160, 163.
Their agents in England; proceedings of Parliamentary Commission;
results. ii. 166-182
Driven from the United States to the British Provinces; and sketches
of twenty-three of them. ii. 191-204.
Dr. Canniff's account of their first settlement on the North shore
of the St. Lawrence and in the country around and West of
Kingston. ii. 203-208.
Their adventures, sufferings, and first settlement in Canada,
privations and labours, as written by themselves and their
descendants. ii. 206-270.
(See table of contents, chapter xli.)
Loyalists--New penal laws passed against them after the Declaration
of Independence. ii. 5.
Loyalists, in Massachusetts, who maintain in the Court and among the
people, the Royal authority. i. 162.
The true Liberals of that day. i. 152.
Lundy's Lane--Battle of. ii. 438.
Marsden (Rev. J.W.). i. 298.
Maryland General Assembly's reply to the message of the Lt. Governor
on Lord Hillsborough's circular. i. 344.
Massachusetts and other Colonial grateful acknowledgments to England
for deliverance from the French and Spaniards. i. 27.
Massachusetts Bay Rulers persecute the Baptists, etc. i. 87.
Prohibit writing or speaking in favour of the King as a capital offence,
but authorize it in favour of the Parliament. i. 87.
Petition Parliament in 1651, and address Cromwell in 1651, 1654. i. 108.
Massachusetts Bay Rulers' treatment of Cromwell at his death, and their
professions in regard to Cromwell and Charles the Second at his
restoration. i. 124.
They evade the conditions on which the King promised to continue the
Charter, and deny the King's jurisdiction. i. 149.
They present a long address to the King, and enclose copies of it,
with letters to Lord Chancellor Clarendon, the Earl of Manchester,
Lord Say, and the Hon. Robert Boyle. i. 152.
Massachusetts Bay Rulers aggressors throughout upon the rights of the
Sovereign and of their fellow-subjects. i. 75.
They side with the Long Parliament and Cromwell; their first address
and commissioners to. i. 86.
They pass Acts for publication in England, and then adopt measures to
prevent their execution in Massachusetts--such as the Navigation Act,
Oath of Allegiance, the Franchise, Liberty of Worship, and Persecution
of the Baptists and Quakers. i. 195.
They bribe Clerks in the Privy Council, and offer a bribe to the
King. i. 205.
Their double game played out. i. 204.
Massachusetts circular displeasing to the British Ministry. i. 341.
Circular from Lord Hillsborough, Secretary of State for the
Colonies. i. 341.
Massachusetts compensated by Parliament. i. 267.
Benefited by the English and French war. i. 270.
Massachusetts General Assembly refuse to legislate under the guns of
a land and naval force. i. 357.
General Assembly--Its proceedings on the quartering of troops in
Boston. i. 358.
Massachusetts never acknowledged the Act of Parliament changing its
constitution without its consent. i. 407.
Its proceedings before the affairs of Lexington and Concord to enlist
the Indians. ii. 79.
Massachusetts Legislative Assembly's noble circular to the Assemblies
of other Colonies, on the unconstitutional and oppressive acts of
the British Parliament. i. 338.
Massachusetts--Seed-plot of the American Revolution. i. 1.
First emigration to. i. 1.
Mahon (Lord)--His reflections on the American contest; apology for
George III.; unhappiness of the Americans since the Revolution;
unity of the Anglo-Saxon race. ii. 154.
Mather (Rev. Dr. Increase) makes a violent speech--appeals from man
to God--decision against him. i. 209.
His proceedings in England, i. 226.
Fails to get the first Charter restored. i. 228.
First protests against the second Royal Charter, then thanks King
William for it. i. 229.
Merritt (Thomas). ii. 196.
McDonald (Alexander). ii. 195.
McGill (John). 196.
McGillis (Donald). ii. 196.
McNab (Allan). ii. 202.
Moneys provided for the war, abstracted from England and expended
in the Colonies. i. 270.
Montcalm, French General, captures Forts Oswego and William Henry. i. 253.
Morris (Roger). ii. 200.
Montreal besieged and taken from the French. i. 267.
Navigation Act passed by the Long Parliament in 1651, oppressive to the
Southern Colonies, but regularly evaded in Massachusetts by collusion
with Cromwell. i. 111.
Neal (the Puritan historian) deprecates the persecutions by the
Massachusetts Bay Rulers. i. 120.
Newark (now Niagara)--Seat of Government of Upper Canada first established
there. ii. 308.
Burned by the Americans. ii. 423.
New England--Two distinct emigrations to. i. 1.
Two separate Governments in for seventy years, and characteristics
of each. i. 1.
New Plymouth--Original name of--first Sabbath in. i. 7.
First mild winter and early vegetation at. i. 8.
First "Harvest-home." i. 9.
Their government, toleration, oath of allegiance, loyalty. i. 15.
Their answers to the King's Commissioners. i. 18.
The melancholy end of their government. i. 22.
The loyalty and enterprise of their descendants. i. 23.
Ancestors of English Peers. i. 23.
New York--First Act of Parliament against. i. 329.
New York Legislature, which had not endorsed the first continental
Congress, in 1774, now petitions Parliament on the subject of
Colonial grievances; but its petition, presented by Mr. Burke,
defended by Mr. Fox and others, is refused to be received, on motion
of Lord North, by a majority of 186 to 67, and the Lords reject the
same petition. i. 434-440.
Niagara (Newark) taken from the French by the English. i. 263.
Nineteen years' evasion by the Massachusetts Bay Rulers of the conditions
on which King Charles II. promised to perpetuate their Charter. i. 193.
North (Lord)--His Bill to repeal the Colonial Revenue Acts, except the
duty on tea. i. 368.
His agreement with the East India Company rouses and intensifies
opposition in America. i. 371.
Combined opposition to it by English merchants and the Colonists. i. 372.
Explains his American policy. i. 394.
His resolution for address to the King, 1775, endorsing the coercive
policy, and denouncing Colonial complaints as "rebellion;" debates
on it. i. 426-429.
Second great debate in the Commons on his warlike resolution. i. 430.
His address made the joint address of both Houses of Parliament; the
King's reply. i. 431.
Lord North's proposed resignation and preparations for it. ii. 8.
Defeat of his Administration. ii. 51.
Opinions of Lords Macaulay and Mahon on the success of a Commission
recommended by the Earl of Chatham. ii. 8.
Origin of non-importation agreement in New York; sanctioned by persons
in the highest stations. i. 360.
Origin of republicanism and hatred of monarchy in America. ii. 66.
Paine (Tom)--His appeal to the Colonists, called _Common Sense_, the first
publication in America against monarchy. i. 450.
Author of republicanism and hatred of monarchy in America; his character
and writings, and their effects. ii. 66-72.
Palfrey's and other New England historians' unfair statements and unjust
imputations against the British Government of that time. i. 190, 211.
Parliament--Its authority over the Colonies. i. 317.
Three Bills passed by, to raise a revenue in the Colonies. i. 331.
Parliament passes an Act (1775) to punish the Colonies for countenancing
Massachusetts. i. 433.
Parliament passes oppressive Acts in 1775 and 1776, with measures for
employing foreign soldiers, Indians, and slaves against the complaining
Colonists. i. 459.
Parliament passes no Act to authorize peace with America for three months
after the accession of the new Ministry. ii. 54.
Parliament votes £115,000 sterling to compensate the Colonies for expenses
incurred by them. i. 252.
Parties--Origin of political parties at Massachusetts Bay. i. 209.
Petitions and representations to the King from Episcopalians,
Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., in Massachusetts Bay, on their
persecutions and disfranchisement by the local Government. i. 137.
Petitions from various towns in England, Scotland, and Ireland against
Lord North's coercive American policy. i. 425.
Pilgrim Fathers--who. i. 2.
Their settlement, and residence of 12 years in Holland. i. 3.
Long to be under the English Government. i. 3.
Cross the Atlantic in the _Mayflower_. i. 3.
Where intended to settle in America, i. 4
What known of Cape Cod before the Pilgrims landed. i. 4.
Their agreement and constitution of government before landing. i. 5.
Remarks upon it by Messrs. Bancroft and Young. i. 6.
Inflated American accounts of their voyage. i. 7.
Their first "Harvest-home." i. 9.
Pitt (afterwards Earl of Chatham) changes the whole fortune of the war
with the French in America in favour of England. i. 260.
Policy of the British Ministry in employing foreign soldiers and Indians,
deprecated by all classes in Europe and America. ii. 72-74.
Pownall (Governor)--His speech and amendment in the House of Commons to
repeal the duty on tea; rejected by a majority 242 to 204. i. 361.
Preface--The reason and objects of writing the history of the Loyalists
of America. i. 3-5.
Protests and Loyal Petitions of the Colonists against English
Parliamentary Acts to raise a revenue in the Colonies. i. 337.
Puritan authorities alone adduced in this historical discussion. i. 59.
Puritan letters suppressed by the biographer of Governor Winthrop. i. 59.
Puritans of Massachusetts Bay Company. i. 24.
Their Charter and settlement in 1629. i. 23.
Their intolerance. i. 24.
Their wealth and trade. i. 25.
Their enterprise under two aspects. i. 26.
Professed members of the Church of England when they left England. i. 26.
Puritan treatment of the Indians. i. 298.
Puritan legal opinions in England on the constant violation of the first
Charter by the Massachusetts Bay Rulers. i. 233.
Quebec taken by General Wolfe. i. 263.
Queenston Heights--Battle of. ii. 365-8.
Quo Warranto--Notice of sent to the Rulers of Massachusetts Bay in July,
1683, to answer to thirteen complaints against them for violating the
Royal Charter; received in October, 1683; judgment given July, 1685,
nearly two years afterwards. i. 208-211.
Remonstrances of the Rev. Drs. Owen, T. Goodwin, and other Nonconformist
ministers in England against the persecutions by the Massachusetts Bay
Puritans. i. 185.
Retrospect of the transactions between Charles I. and II. and the
Massachusetts Bay Rulers from 1630 to 1666, with extracts of
correspondence. i. 171.
Revolution--Principal characteristics of it, and the feeling which should
now be cultivated by both of the former contending parties; by
J.M. Ludlow. ii. 145.
Richardson (Rev. James)--Letter by. ii. 208.
Robinson (Beverley). ii. 196.
Robinson (Christopher). ii. 198.
Robinson (Sir J.B.). ii. 199.
Robinson (Sir C.K.P.). ii. 199.
Robinson (Morris). ii. 199.
Robinson (John). ii. 200.
Rockingham (Marquis of)--His death and its consequences. ii. 53.
Royal Charter (second) by William and Mary; nine principal provisions of
it, establishing for the first time civil and religious liberty in
Massachusetts. i. 229-233.
Royal Charter to Massachusetts Bay Puritans. i. 28.
Its provisions. i. 30.
Violated by the Massachusetts Bay Puritans. i. 33.
Transferred from England to Massachusetts Bay, and the fact concealed
for four years. i. 69.
Royal Commission issued to examine into the complaints made against
the Massachusetts Bay Rulers--conduct of parties. i. 72.
Royal Commissioners' Report on the Colony of Massachusetts Bay; twenty
anomalies in its laws inconsistent with the Royal Charter; evades the
conditions of the promised continuance of the Charter; denies the
King's jurisdiction. i. 149.
Royal Patriotic Society of Upper Canada and its doings. ii. 464.
Royal Speech on meeting Parliament, October 26th, 1775, and discussions
upon it. i. 474.
Ryerse (Rev. George)--Letter by. ii. 226.
Ryerse (Colonel Samuel). ii. 229.
Ryerson (Colonel Joseph). ii. 257.
Salaries of officials paid independent of the Colonies--cause of
dissatisfaction. i. 366.
Saltonstall (Sir Richard) remonstrates against the persecutions by
the Massachusetts Bay Rulers. i. 116.
Scadding (Rev. Dr.)--Sketch by. ii. 259.
Second Charter--Its happy influence upon toleration, loyalty, peace,
and unity of society in Massachusetts. i. 237.
Seven years of war and bloodshed prevented, had Congress in 1776
adhered to its previous professions. ii. 56.
Shelburne (Earl of)--Correspondence with Dr. Franklin on negotiations
for peace. ii. 54.
Simcoe (General Graves)--First Governor of Upper Canada. ii. 308.
Soldiers--The humiliating position of soldiers in Boston. i. 360.
Insulted, abused, and collisions with the inhabitants. i. 365.
Spain joins France against England in 1779. ii. 28.
Spohn (Mrs. E.B.)--Paper by. ii. 264.
Stamp Act and its effects in America. i. 283.
Virginia leads the opposition against it. i. 287.
Riots in Boston against it. i. 288.
Petitions in England against it. i. 291.
Its repeal and rejoicings at it. i. 323.
Extracts from speeches respecting it by Charles Townsend and Colonel
Barré, and remarks upon them. i. 296.
Extracts from the speeches of Lords Chatham and Camden on the passing
and repeal of the Stamp Act. i. 302.
Summary of events from its repeal, March, 1766, to the end of the
year. i. 323-336.
Statements of the historians Hutchinson and Neal on the persecutions by
the Massachusetts Bay Puritans. i. 185.
Story (Judge) on the happy influence of the second Charter, and
improved legislation and progress of the Colony under it. i. 235.
Tea Duty Act virtually defeated in America. i. 370.
Opposition to it represented in England as "rebellion," and the
advocates of Colonial rights as "rebels" and "traitors." i. 388.
Tea--Duty of threepence per pound, to be paid in America into the
British Treasury, continued. i. 363.
Three Acts of Parliament passed to remove all grounds of complaint
on the part of the Colonists. ii. 6.
Ticonderago taken by the English. i. 263.
Treaty of Peace between Great Britain and the United States; rights
and interests of the Loyalists sacrificed by it; omissions in it;
protests against it in Parliament. ii. 164, 165.
Vane (Sir Henry) remonstrates against the persecutions by the
Massachusetts Bay Rulers. i. 116.
Vice-Admiralty Courts and the Navy employed as custom-house offices
in the Colonies. i. 331.
Virginia House of Burgess's admirable answer to the Massachusetts
Circular, 1668, and similar replies from other Colonies. i. 342, 343.
Rejects Lord North's so-called "conciliatory proposition" to the
Colonies. i. 464.
Its traditional loyalty of Virginians, and their aversion to revolutions;
but resolved to defend their rights. i. 464.
Remonstrate with Lord Dunmore for leaving the seat of his government
and going on board of a vessel; assure him and his family of perfect
safety by remaining at Williamsburg. i. 467.
Are horror-struck at Lord Dunmore's threat and proclamation to free
the slaves. i. 465.
Moved by his fears, goes on board of ship, twelve miles from the seat
of government. i. 466.
Attempts to destroy the town of Hampton; reduces to ashes the town of
Norfolk, then the first commercial city in Virginia. i. 467, 471.
His conduct unlawful and inhuman; English accounts of his
conduct. i. 470, 472.
War formally declared between England and France in 1756. i. 252.
War party and corrupt Administration defeated in the House of
Commons, 1782. ii. 49.
War by the United States against Great Britain, 1812-1815. ii. 316-330.
(See table of contents, chapters xlvii., xlviii., xlix., l., li., lii.,
liii., liv., lv., lvi., lvii., lviii.)
War--Close of; remarks; conclusion.
(See table of contents, chapter lx.)
Washington--Weakness of his army and depression of American finances
in 1778. ii. 32.
His despondency without funds. ii. 41.
With the French commander plans an expedition to the South. ii. 42.
His skill and courage. ii. 47.
Washington recommended by Dunwiddie, Governor of Virginia, but his
services are not recognized. i. 257.
Washington, under date of July 27th, 1776, recommends the employment
of the Indians in the Revolutionary Cause. ii. 80.
Watts (Rev. Isaac)--A remarkable letter from him addressed to the
Rev. Dr. Cotton Mather, explanatory of Neal's History of New
England, on "the persecuting principles and practices of the first
planters," and urging the formal repeal of the "cruel and sanguinary
statutes" which had been passed by the Massachusetts Bay Court under
the first Charter. i. 239.
White (Rev. John), projector and founder of the Massachusetts Bay
Settlement. i. 26-28.
Wolfe (General)--His heroism at Louisburg. i. 262.
Takes Quebec. i. 263.
Wyoming--The massacre of, original inflated accounts of. ii. 85.
Four versions of it, by accredited American historians--Dr. Ramsay,
Mr. Bancroft, Mr. Tucker, and Mr. Hildreth. ii. 85-90.
Discrepancies in four essential particulars of these four
accounts. ii. 92.
Supplementary remarks upon, by the author of the Life of Joseph
Brant, etc. ii. 94.
Massacre (alleged) of Wyoming--American retaliation for. ii. 99-106.
(See table of contents, chapter xxxv.)
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Loyalists of America and Their
Times, Vol. 2 of 2, by Edgerton Ryerson
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA ***
***** This file should be named 24658-8.txt or 24658-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/2/4/6/5/24658/
Produced by Jason Isbell, Graeme Mackreth and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
http://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at http://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit http://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
http://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
