The War With the United States by William Wood

W >> William Wood >> The War With the United States

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

In the middle of August the British fleet under Admirals
Cochrane and Cockburn sailed into Chesapeake Bay with a
detachment of four thousand troops commanded by General
Ross. Barney had no choice but to retire before this
overwhelming force. As the British advanced up the
narrowing waters all chance of escape disappeared; so
Barney burnt his boats and little vessels and marched
his seamen in to join Winder's army. On August 24 Winder's
whole six thousand drew up in an exceedingly strong
position at Bladensburg, just north of Washington; and
the President rode out with his Cabinet to see a battle
which is best described by its derisive title of the
Bladensburg Races. Ross's four thousand came on and were
received by an accurate checking fire from the regular
artillery and from Barney's seamen gunners. But a total
loss of 8 killed and 11 wounded was more than the 5,000
American militia could stand. All the rest ran for dear
life. The deserted handful of regular soldiers and sailors
was then overpowered; while Barney was severely wounded
and taken prisoner. He and they, however, had saved their
honour and won the respect and admiration of both friend
and foe. Ross and Cockburn at once congratulated him on
the stand he had made against them; and he, with equal
magnanimity, reported officially that the British had
treated him 'just like a brother.'

That night the little British army of four thousand men
burnt governmental Washington, the capital of a country
with eight millions of people. Not a man, not a woman,
not a child, was in any way molested; nor was one finger
laid on any private property. The four thousand then
marched back to the fleet, through an area inhabited by
93,500 militiamen on paper, without having so much as a
single musket fired at them.

Now, if ever, was Prevost's golden opportunity to end
the war with a victory that would turn the scale decisively
in favour of the British cause. With the one exception
of Lake Erie, the British had the upper hand over the
whole five thousand miles of front. A successful British
counter-invasion, across the Montreal frontier, would
offset the American hold on Lake Erie, ensure the control
of Lake Champlain, and thus bring all the scattered parts
of the campaign into their proper relation to a central,
crowning triumph.

On the other hand, defeat would mean disaster. But the
bare possibility of defeat seemed quite absurd when
Prevost set out from his field headquarters opposite
Montreal, between La Prairie and Chambly, with eleven
thousand seasoned veterans, mostly 'Peninsulars,' to
attack Plattsburg, which was no more than twenty-five
miles across the frontier, very weakly fortified, and
garrisoned only by the fifteen hundred regulars whom
Izard had 'culled out' when he started for Niagara.

The naval odds were not so favourable. But, as they could
be decisively affected by military action, they naturally
depended on Prevost, who, with his overwhelming army,
could turn them whichever way he chose. It was true that
Commodore Macdonough's American flotilla had more trained
seamen than Captain Downie's corresponding British force,
and that his crews and vessels possessed the further
advantage of having worked together for some time. Downie,
a brave and skilful young officer, had arrived to take
command of his flotilla at the upper end of Lake Champlain
only on September 2, that is, exactly a week before
Prevost urged him to attack, and nine days before the
battle actually did take place. He had a fair proportion
of trained seamen; but they consisted of scratch drafts
from different men-of-war, chosen in haste and hurried
to the front. Most of the men and officers were complete
strangers to one another; and they made such short-handed
crews that some soldiers had to be wheeled out of the
line of march and put on board at the very last minute.
There would have been grave difficulties with such a
flotilla under any circumstances. But Prevost had increased
them tenfold by giving no orders and making no preparations
while trying his hand at another abortive armistice--one,
moreover, which he had no authority even to propose.

Yet, in spite of all this, Prevost still had the means
of making Downie superior to Macdonough. Macdonough's
vessels were mostly armed with carronades, Downie's with
long guns. Carronades fired masses of small projectiles
with great effect at very short ranges. Long guns, on
the other hand, fired each a single large projectile up
to the farthest ranges known. In fact, it was almost as
if the Americans had been armed with shot-guns and the
British armed with rifles. Therefore the Americans had
an overwhelming advantage at close quarters, while the
British had a corresponding advantage at long range. Now,
Macdonough had anchored in an ideal position for close
action inside Plattsburg Bay. He required only a few men
to look after his ground tackle; [Footnote: Anchors and
cables.] and his springs [Footnote: Ropes to hold a vessel
in position when hauling or swinging in a harbour. Here,
ropes from the stern to the anchors on the landward side.]
were out on the landward side for 'winding ship,' that
is, for turning his vessels completely round, so as to
bring their fresh broadsides into action. There was no
sea-room for manoeuvring round him with any chance of
success; so the British would be at a great disadvantage
while standing in to the attack, first because they could
be raked end-on, next because they could only reply with
bow fire--the weakest of all--and, lastly, because their
best men would be engaged with the sails and anchors
while their ships were taking station.

But Prevost had it fully in his power to prevent Macdonough
from fighting in such an ideal position at all. Macdonough's
American flotilla was well within range of Macomb's
long-range American land batteries; while Prevost's
overwhelming British army was easily able to take these
land batteries, turn their guns on Macdonough's helpless
vessels--whose short-range carronades could not possibly
reply--and so either destroy the American flotilla at
anchor in the bay or force it out into the open lake,
where it would meet Downie's long-range guns at the
greatest disadvantage. Prevost, after allowing for all
other duties, had at least seven thousand veterans for
an assault on Macomb's second-rate regulars and ordinary
militia, both of whom together amounted at most to
thirty-five hundred, including local militiamen who had
come in to reinforce the 'culls' whom Izard had left
behind. The Americans, though working with very creditable
zeal, determined to do their best, quite expected to be
beaten out of their little forts and entrenchments, which
were just across the fordable Saranac in front of Prevost's
army. They had tried to delay the British advance. But,
in the words of Macomb's own official report, 'so undaunted
was the enemy that he never deployed in his whole march,
always pressing on in column'; that is, the British
veterans simply brushed the Americans aside without
deigning to change from their column of march into a line
of battle. Prevost's duty was therefore perfectly plain.
With all the odds in his favour ashore, and with the
power of changing the odds in his favour afloat, he ought
to have captured Macomb's position in the early morning
and turned both his own and Macomb's artillery on
Macdonough, who would then have been forced to leave his
moorings for the open lake, where Downie would have had
eight hours of daylight to fight him at long range.

What Prevost actually did was something disgracefully
different. Having first wasted time by his attempted
armistice, and so hindered preparations at the base,
between La Prairie and Chambly, he next proceeded to
cross the frontier too soon. He reported home that Downie
could not be ready before September 15. But on August 31
he crossed the line himself, only twenty-five miles from
his objective, thus prematurely showing the enemy his
hand. Then he began to goad the unhappy Downie to his
doom. Downie's flagship, the _Confiance_, named after a
French prize which Yeo had taken, was launched only on
August 25, and hauled out into the stream only on September
7. Her scratch crew could not go to battle quarters till
the 8th; and the shipwrights were working madly at her
up to the very moment that the first shot was fired in
her fatal action on the 11th. Yet Prevost tried to force
her into action on the 9th, adding, 'I need not dwell
with you on the evils resulting to both services from
delay,' and warning Downie that he was being watched:
'Captain Watson is directed to remain at Little Chazy
until you are preparing to get under way.'

Thus watched and goaded by the governor-general and
commander-in-chief, whose own service was the Army,
Downie, a comparative junior in the Navy, put forth his
utmost efforts, against his better judgment, to sail that
very midnight. A baffling head-wind, however, kept him
from working out. He immediately reported to Prevost,
giving quite satisfactory reasons. But Prevost wrote back
impatiently: 'The troops have been held in readiness,
since six o'clock this morning [the 10th], to storm the
enemy's works at nearly the same time as the naval action
begins in the bay. I ascribe the disappointment I have
experienced to the unfortunate change of wind, and shall
rejoice to learn that my reasonable expectations have
been frustrated by no other cause.' '_No other cause_.'
The innuendo, even if unintentional, was there. Downie,
a junior sailor, was perhaps suspected of 'shyness' by
a very senior soldier. Prevost's poison worked quickly.
'I will convince him that the Navy won't be backward,'
said Downie to his second, Pring, who gave this evidence,
under oath, at the subsequent court-martial. Pring, whose
evidence was corroborated by that of both the first
lieutenant and the master of the _Confiance_, then urged
the extreme risk of engaging Macdonough inside the bay.
But Downie allayed their anxiety by telling them that
Prevost had promised to storm Macomb's indefensible works
simultaneously. This was not nearly so good as if Prevost
had promised to defeat Macomb first and then drive
Macdonough out to sea. But it was better, far better,
than what actually was done.

With Prevost's written promise in his pocket Downie sailed
for Plattsburg in the early morning of that fatal 11th
of September. Punctually to the minute he fired his
preconcerted signal outside Cumberland Head, which
separated the bay from the lake. He next waited exactly
the prescribed time, during which he reconnoitred
Macdonough's position from a boat. Then the hour of battle
came. The hammering of the shipwrights stopped at last;
and the ill-starred _Confiance_, that ship which never
had a chance to 'find herself,' led the little squadron
into Prevost's death-trap in the bay. Every soldier and
sailor now realized that the storming of the works on
land ought to have been the first move, and that Prevost's
idea of simultaneous action was faulty, because it meant
two independent fights, with the chance of a naval disaster
preceding the military success. However, Prevost was the
commander-in-chief; he had promised co-operation in his
own way; and Downie was determined to show him that the
Navy had stopped for '_no other cause_' than the head-wind
of the day before.

Did _no other cause_ than mistaken judgment affect Prevost
that fatal morning? Did he intend to show Downie that a
commander-in-chief could not suffer the 'disappointment'
of 'holding troops in readiness' without marking his
displeasure by some visible return in kind? Or was he no
worse than criminally weak? His motives will never be
known. But his actions throw a sinister light upon them.
For when Downie sailed in to the attack Prevost did
nothing whatever to help him. Betrayed, traduced, and
goaded to his ruin, Downie fought a losing battle with
the utmost gallantry and skill. The wind flawed and failed
inside the bay, so that the _Confiance_ could not reach
her proper station. Yet her first broadside struck down
forty men aboard the _Saratoga_. Then the _Saratoga_
fired her carronades, at point-blank range, cut up the
cables aboard the _Confiance_, and did great execution
among the crew. In fifteen minutes Downie fell.

The battle raged two full hours longer; while the odds
against the British continued to increase. Four of their
little gunboats fought as well as gunboats could. But
the other seven simply ran away, like their commander
afterwards when summoned for a court-martial that would
assuredly have sentenced him to death. Two of the larger
vessels failed to come into action properly; one went
ashore, the other drifted through the American line and
then hauled down her colours. Thus the battle was fought
to its dire conclusion by the British _Confiance_ and
_Linnet_ against the American _Saratoga_, _Eagle_, and
_Ticonderoga_. The gunboats had little to do with the
result; though the odds of all those actually engaged
were greatly in favour of Macdonough. The fourth American
vessel of larger size drifted out of action.

Macdonough, an officer of whom any navy in the world
might well be proud, then concentrated on the stricken
_Confiance_ with his own _Saratoga_, greatly aided by
the _Eagle_, which swung round so as to rake the _Confiance_
with her fresh broadside. The _Linnet_ now drifted off
a little and so could not help the _Confiance_, both
because the American galleys at once engaged her and
because her position was bad in any case. Presently both
flagships slackened fire; whereupon Macdonough took the
opportunity of winding ship. His ground tackle was in
perfect order on the far, or landward, side; so the
_Saratoga_ swung round quite easily. The _Confiance_ now
had both the _Eagle's_ and the _Saratoga's_ fresh carronade
broadsides deluging her battered, cannon-armed broadside
with showers of deadly grape. Her one last chance of
keeping up a little longer was to wind ship herself. Her
tackle had all been cut; but her master got out his last
spare cables and tried to bring her round, while some of
his toiling men fell dead at every haul. She began to
wind round very slowly; and, when exactly at right angles
to Macdonough, was raked completely, fore and aft. At
the same time an ominous list to port, where her side
was torn in over a hundred places, showed that she would
sink quickly if her guns could not be run across to
starboard. But more than half her mixed scratch crew had
been already killed or wounded. The most desperate efforts
of her few surviving officers could not prevent the
confusion that followed the fearful raking she now received
from both her superior opponents; and before her fresh
broadside could be brought to bear she was forced to
strike her flag. Then every American carronade and gun
was turned upon Pring's undaunted little _Linnet_, which
kept up the hopeless fight for fifteen minutes longer;
so that Prevost might yet have a chance to carry out his
own operations without fear of molestation from a hostile
bay.

But Prevost was in no danger of molestation. He was in
perfect safety. He watched the destruction of his fleet
from his secure headquarters, well inland, marched and
countermarched his men about, to make a show of action;
and then, as the _Linnet_ fired her last, despairing gun,
he told all ranks to go to dinner.

That night he broke camp hurriedly, left all his badly
wounded men behind him, and went back a great deal faster
than he came. His shamed, disgusted veterans deserted in
unprecedented numbers. And Macomb's astounded army found
themselves the victors of an unfought field.

The American victory at Plattsburg gave the United States
the absolute control of Lake Champlain; and this,
reinforcing their similar control of Lake Erie,
counterbalanced the British military advantages all along
the Canadian frontier. The British command of the sea,
the destruction of Washington, and the occupation of
Maine told heavily on the other side. These three British
advantages had been won while the mother country was
fighting with her right hand tied behind her back; and
in all the elements of warlike strength the British Empire
was vastly superior to the United States. Thus there
cannot be the slightest doubt that if the British had
been free to continue the war they must have triumphed.
But they were not free. Europe was seething with the
profound unrest that made her statesmen feel the volcano
heaving under their every step during the portentous year
between Napoleon's abdication and return. The mighty
British Navy, the veteran British Army, could not now be
sent across the sea in overwhelming force. So American
diplomacy eagerly seized this chance of profiting by
British needs, and took such good advantage of them that
the Treaty of Ghent, which ended the war on Christmas
Eve, left the two opponents in much the same position
towards each other as before. Neither of the main reasons
for which the Americans had fought their three campaigns
was even mentioned in the articles.

The war had been an unmitigated curse to the motherland
herself; and it brought the usual curses in its train
all over the scene of action. But some positive good came
out of it as well, both in Canada and in the United
States.

The benefits conferred on the United States could not be
given in apter words than those used by Gallatin, who,
as the finance minister during four presidential terms,
saw quite enough of the seamy side to sober his opinions,
and who, as a prominent member of the war party, shared
the disappointed hopes of his colleagues about the conquest
of Canada. His opinion is, of course, that of a partisan.
But it contains much truth, for all that:

The war has been productive of evil and of good; but
I think the good preponderates. It has laid the
foundations of permanent taxes and military
establishments, which the Republicans [as the
anti-Federalist Democrats were then called] had deemed
unfavorable to the happiness and free institutions of
the country. Under our former system we were becoming
too selfish, too much attached exclusively to the
acquisition of wealth, above all, too much confined
in our political feelings to local and state objects.
The war has renewed the national feelings and character
which the Revolution had given, and which were daily
lessening. The people are now more American. They feel
and act more as a nation. And I hope that the permanency
of the Union is thereby better secured.

Gallatin did not, of course, foresee that it would take
a third conflict to finish what the Revolution had begun.
But this sequel only strengthens his argument. For that
Union which was born in the throes of the Revolution had
to pass through its tumultuous youth in '1812' before
reaching full manhood by means of the Civil War.

The benefits conferred on Canada were equally permanent
and even greater. How Gallatin would have rejoiced to
see in the United States any approach to such a financial
triumph as that which was won by the Army Bills in Canada!
No public measure was ever more successful at the time
or more full of promise for the future. But mightier
problems than even those of national finance were brought
nearer to their desirable solution by this propitious
war. It made Ontario what Quebec had long since
been--historic ground; thus bringing the older and newer
provinces together with one exalting touch. It was also
the last, as well as the most convincing, defeat of the
three American invasions of Canada. The first had been
led by Sir William Phips in 1690. This was long before
the Revolution. The American Colonies were then still
British and Canada still French. But the invasion itself
was distinctively American, in men, ships, money, and
design. It was undertaken without the consent or knowledge
of the home authorities; and its success would probably
have destroyed all chance of there being any British
Canada to-day. The second American invasion had been that
of Montgomery and Arnold in 1775, during the Revolution,
when the very diverse elements of a new Canadian life
first began to defend their common heritage against a
common foe. The third invasion--the War of 1812--united
all these elements once more, just when Canada stood most
in need of mutual confidence between them. So there could
not have been a better bond of union than the blood then
shed so willingly by her different races in a single
righteous cause.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Enough books to fill a small library have been written
about the 'sprawling and sporadic' War of 1812. Most of
them deal with particular phases, localities, or events;
and most of them are distinctly partisan. This is
unfortunate, but not surprising. The war was waged over
an immense area, by various forces, and with remarkably
various results. The Americans were victorious on the
Lakes and in all but one of the naval duels fought at
sea. Yet their coast was completely sealed up by the
Great Blockade in the last campaign. The balance of
victory inclined towards the British side on land. Yet
the annihilating American victories on the Lakes nullified
most of the general military advantages gained by the
British along the Canadian frontier. The fortunes of each
campaign were followed with great interest on both sides
of the line. But on the other side of the Atlantic the
British home public had Napoleon to think of at their
very doors; and so, for the most part, they regarded the
war with the States as an untoward and regrettable
annoyance, which diverted too much force and attention
from the life-and-death affairs of Europe.

All these peculiar influences are reflected in the
different patriotic annals. Americans are voluble about
the Lakes and the naval duels out at sea. But the completely
effective British blockade of their coast-line is a too
depressingly scientific factor in the problem to be
welcomed by a general public which would not understand
how Yankee ships could win so many duels while the British
Navy won the war. Canadians are equally voluble about
the battles on Canadian soil, where Americans had decidedly
the worst of it. As a rule, Canadian writers have been
quite as controversial as Americans, and not any readier
to study their special subjects as parts of a greater
whole. The British Isles have never had an interested
public anxious to read about this remote, distasteful,
and subsidiary war; and books about it there have
consequently been very few.

The two chief authors who have appealed directly to the
readers of the mother country are William James and Sir
Charles Lucas. James was an industrious naval historian;
but he was quite as anti-American as the earlier American
writers were anti-British. Owing to this perverting bias
his two books, the _Naval_ and the _Military Occurrences
of the late War between Great Britain and the United
States_, are not to be relied upon. Their appendices,
however, give a great many documents which are of much
assistance in studying the real history of the war. James
wrote only a few years after the peace. Nearly a century
later Sir Charles Lucas wrote _The Canadian War of 1812_,
which is the work of a man whose life-long service in
the Colonial Office and intimate acquaintance with Canadian
history have both been turned to the best account. The
two chief Canadian authors are Colonel Cruikshank and
James Hannay. Colonel Cruikshank deserves the greatest
credit for being a real pioneer with his _Documentary
History of the Campaigns upon the Niagara Frontier_.
Hannay's _History of the War of 1812_ shows careful study
of the Canadian aspects of the operations; but its
generally sound arguments are weakened by its controversial
tone.

The four chief American authors to reckon with are,
Lossing, Upton, Roosevelt, and Mahan. They complement
rather than correspond with the four British authors.
The best known American work dealing with the military
campaigns is Lossing's _Field-Book of the War of 1812_.
It is an industrious compilation; but quite uncritical
and most misleading. General Upton's _Military Policy of
the United States_ incidentally pricks all the absurd
American militia bubbles with an incontrovertible array
of hard and pointed facts. _The Naval War of 1812_, by
Theodore Roosevelt, is an excellent sketch which shows
a genuine wish to be fair to both sides. But the best
naval work, and the most thorough work of any kind on
either side, is Admiral Mahan's _Sea Power in its Relations
to the War of 1812_.

A good deal of original evidence on the American side is
given in Brannan's _Official Letters of the Military and
Naval Officers of the United States during the War with
Great Britain in the Years 1812 to 1815_. The original
British evidence about the campaigns in Canada is given
in William Wood's _Select British Documents of the Canadian
War of 1812_. Students who wish to see the actual documents
must go to Washington, London, and Ottawa. The Dominion
Archives are of exceptional interest to all concerned.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9