Part 6

The Commander of the forces then, for the first time, interfered, so as to give any orders respecting the expedition. Though there was scarcely a hope of success, yet he determined not to abandon the enterprise whilst a possibility of attaining his object remained. He accordingly directed Colonel Baynes to concentrate his scattered force, and to advance upon the enemy, who were posted in considerable numbers in front of and behind their loop-holed barracks. Not more than from 300 to 400 men could be assembled for this last attack. It was, however, made by this small band with intrepid gallantry. The enemy, though superior in numbers, were driven from their position, and forced to take shelter in the town; but in the further attempt to approach the works, our troops were met by such a galling and destructive fire of grape and musketry, both in front and flank, that they were compelled to abandon a contest to which their numbers were so unequal. The force of the enemy, at this period, consisted, by their own acknowledgment, exclusive of their killed and wounded, of upwards of 1,100 men, including 142 artillerymen. They were strongly posted in Fort Tompkins, armed with heavy guns, and in their block-houses and loop-holed barracks, the very situation which renders the youngest American recruit (a marksman from his youth), more than a match for the most experienced veteran. Our force was reduced to nearly one-third of its effective strength from the casualties of the field, and from the absence of those who had withdrawn to the rear with the wounded and prisoners. We possessed not a single field-piece, the artillery not having yet been landed. Colonel Young had retired from exhaustion, in consequence of previous illness. All the other field-officers, one excepted, were wounded, together with most of the captains and subalterns. Captain Mulcaster commanding the gun-boat, made every exertion in his power; but there was no hope of assistance from the fleet, in consequence of the state of the wind. Under such circumstances, that so small a band, exhausted by previous exertion, should have attacked and carried Fort Tompkins, the block-houses, and the remaining loop-holed barracks of the enemy, so numerously defended as they were, might probably be expected by such experienced warriors as the Quarterly Reviewer, and those upon whose authority he relies; but it was apparent to every officer and man who was present, that success was impossible. Such being the conviction of the Commander of the forces, who had witnessed with feelings of poignant regret the last gallant though unavailing exertions of his troops, he reluctantly ordered their re-embarkation, which was effected in the most perfect order, and without the slightest precipitation, the enemy not attempting to offer the least molestation. This expedition, though certainly attended with a considerable loss on our part, was not unproductive of advantage to us, or of damage and serious inconvenience to our adversaries. Their apprehensions of the result of the last attack, ignorant as they were of the trifling force by which it was made, induced them to set fire to their new ship and naval arsenal; and although, afterwards, when their fear subsided, from a more perfect knowledge of the state of our force, they succeeded in extinguishing the fire on board the ship, before it had got to any height, yet, by their own acknowledgment, they lost their arsenal, with a large quantity of valuable stores; while one field-piece, and upwards of 200 prisoners were brought away, together with some camp-equipage, and another field-piece was rendered useless. Their loss, also, in killed and wounded was, by their own admission, upwards of 150 men. From this detail of facts, to the truth of which there are abundant living witnesses to vouch, it must be obvious that the main object of the expedition failed principally from the smallness of our numbers, compared with the superior force of the enemy; from the want of our artillery, which could not be landed in time; and particularly from the little assistance which, from the state of the wind, the squadron could afford in taking off the fire of the forts. So far from nearly _two days_ being lost, as the Reviewer has stated,[50] it is notorious to every person who was employed in that expedition, that the fleet sailed on the evening of the 27th May from Kingston, and did not arrive at Sackett's Harbour until the morning of the 28th, when the intended attack was prevented solely by the impossibility of approaching the shore from the state of the wind, and that it did in fact take place on the following morning, the 29th, within 24 hours after the fleet had appeared off the place. It is a fact equally well known to every person engaged in this enterprise, that Sir George Prevost did not take the personal command of it, in the sense in which the Reviewer[51] would have it understood. That he accompanied the expedition was never denied, or attempted to be concealed. His zealous and anxious feelings prompted him to that measure, to prevent any delay in the contemplated service, should a reference to him become necessary. It is freely admitted, that when present he could not divest himself of his authority, or responsibility as Commander of the forces. But independently of its being contrary to all military usage, for the Governor in Chief and Commander of the forces in British North America, to assume the immediate command[52] of so inconsiderable a force, no instance of his interference took place until the period of the last attack, which certainly produced the greatest damage that the enemy sustained. The order to retreat was neither precipitate,[53] nor one which the gallant officers "believed with difficulty."[54] They were all convinced, not excepting the naval commander, Sir James Yeo, that it was impossible longer to contend with any prospect of success, and with our diminished means, against the superior numbers and resources of the enemy. It may indeed be confidently asserted, in direct opposition to the Reviewer's statement, that although "the troops withdrew to their boats in disappointment," at their not having been able to accomplish their object, they felt no disgrace in retiring from a contest which they had so long and so bravely supported; nor did either officers or men experience any indignation or shame at a retreat which, after the most gallant, though unavailing exertions, they knew to be indispensable for their own preservation. It may here be observed, that the situation of our troops at the time of the retreat was most critical. At that very period, a reinforcement of 600 men, under Colonel Tuttle, reached Sackett's Harbour. With the overwhelming superiority which this accession to their force gave the enemy, it is obvious that with very moderate pretensions to either skill or enterprise, they might have opposed most formidable obstacles to our re-embarkation. A further perseverance in the attack on our part, or the least delay in the retreat, would probably have ended in the capture or destruction of the whole of our troops. Fortunately, the coolness and deliberation with which that measure was executed, served to deceive the enemy with regard to our numbers and losses; and the re-embarkation being effected without opposition, the troops returned the same day to Kingston with the field-piece, camp-equipage, and prisoners which they had taken.

On the following morning the American squadron, which had been recalled from the head of the Lake to the assistance of Sackett's Harbour, appeared off Kingston, and it was a most fortunate circumstance that they did not fall in with our fleet, encumbered as it was with troops and wounded men. One material advantage immediately accrued from this expedition, by the recal of the enemy's fleet to Sackett's Harbour. Sir George Prevost lost not a moment in availing himself of the opportunity of their being in port, to embark the 49th regiment on board the squadron, and to despatch it to the head of the Lake to reinforce Brigadier-General Vincent, who was then hard pressed by the enemy, and to whose small force that regiment proved an important accession of strength at a very critical period. Sir James Yeo accordingly sailed with, and safely landed them, and from that time our full equality at least, if not our ascendancy, was established on Lake Ontario.

In reviewing the events that took place during the campaign of 1813, it will be necessary to notice the operations on the Detroit frontier, and on Lake Erie, more especially as the Commander of the forces has been accused of neglecting the representations of Colonel Procter, who commanded in that quarter.

The battle of Frenchtown, in which the Americans were totally defeated, and their General captured, was highly creditable to the talents of Colonel Procter, who certainly, until the retreat from Amherstburgh, was entitled to the reputation of a zealous and active officer.

It is said by the Quarterly Reviewer, that at this period Colonel Procter was positively restrained by Sir George Prevost from any offensive operations. The nature of the instructions given by the Commander of the forces to that officer has been already shewn; and will further appear by a reference to the letters[55] of Sir George Prevost to Colonel, now become Brigadier-General Procter, in answer to the despatches received from him, announcing the different operations which had taken place in the Michigan territory. These operations, though not always attended with success on the part of General Procter, and though they occasioned a considerable diminution of his small force from his repeated losses, were yet favourably viewed by Sir George Prevost, who, as it appears from the correspondence already referred to, was always disposed to give him full credit for his exertions, and to put the most favourable construction upon his failures. That Sir George Prevost was fully aware of the importance of General Procter's position, and of the necessity of strengthening it by every means in his power, will now be shewn by the testimony of General Procter himself.

The letters of that officer fully prove, in contradiction to the assertion of the Reviewer, who has attributed to the Commander of the forces, the neglect (if any took place) in forwarding to him the reinforcements which he had so strongly solicited, that no such neglect is imputable to Sir George Prevost.

As early as the month of March, 1813, a confidential letter was addressed by Sir George Prevost to General Procter, upon the subject of the reinforcements he had solicited, and Captain M'Douall, one of the Commander of the forces' Aids-de-camp, was sent for the purpose of ascertaining General Procter's wants, and the best mode of relieving them. In the correspondence between the Commander of the forces and General Vincent, the situation of General Procter was constantly alluded to, and the former officer was desired to pay his particular attention to the subject. On the 20th June, Sir George Prevost acquainted General Procter that General de Rottenburg, who had been appointed to the command of the forces serving in Upper Canada, had received his directions to push on the remainder of the 41st regiment, from the head of Lake Ontario to Amherstburgh. And in his subsequent letters to General Procter, of the 11th and 12th July, after stating that his wants of money, clothing, &c. had been supplied as far as lay in the power of the Commander of the forces, and that those articles were then on their passage to him, he informed him that the whole of the 41st regiment were either on their way, or would be with him before that letter could arrive. This assurance was given by Sir George Prevost, in the full confidence that the orders which he had sent to the officer commanding in Upper Canada, for the immediate forwarding of the remainder of that regiment to Amherstburgh, had been complied with. That they were not complied with as early as Sir George Prevost intended they should be, was owing to circumstances over which the Commander of the forces had no control. The force under Major-General de Rottenburg, from which the 41st regiment was to be detached, was then before an enemy greatly superior in numbers and resources, and he was very unwilling to weaken it by sending off the remainder of that regiment, until other reinforcements which were on their way to him should arrive. It appears, however, by his letter to Sir George Prevost, of 9th July, 1813, that he had, on the 6th of that month, sent forward 120 men of that regiment to Long Point, in order that thence they might be transported by means of the fleet to Amherstburgh, and that it was his intention to send the remainder of the regiment to General Procter, as soon as the Royals, then daily expected, should arrive. In a subsequent letter from Sir George Prevost to Major-General de Rottenburg, dated 23d July, 1813, in which his high opinion of General Procter's merits and conduct is pointedly expressed, he says, "I trust the reinforcements and supplies, which, in consequence of my orders to you, must be near him," &c.

From these letters it is evident that it was Sir George Prevost's intention that General Procter should be reinforced to the extent he had required, and that the commanding officers in Upper Canada, who from the peculiar circumstances in which they were placed at the time, thought themselves justified, as they really were, in so doing, were the persons who delayed the forwarding of such reinforcements.

That to this cause the delay was attributed by General Procter himself, is unequivocally proved by his correspondence respecting it with the Commander of the forces. The letter to Sir George Prevost, of the 4th July, 1813, to which the Reviewer has referred,[56] commences in a way little to be expected, from the extract which that writer has given from it. He says, "I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th ult. and _am fully sensible_ that this district has received a due share of your Excellency's attention. I beg to add, that _if I had received from the Line_ the reinforcements _which you had directed should be sent_, I should by this time," &c.

It must not be forgotten that this letter was before the Reviewer, and that he must therefore have designedly suppressed that portion of it, which completely exonerates Sir George Prevost from any charge of neglect.

In General Procter's next letter to the Commander of the forces, of the 11th July, he says, "I beg leave to add, that we are fully confident of every _aid from your Excellency_, and of the fortunate result of the contest, _if we are allowed the benefit of your consideration of us_; but I am unfortunately so situated, that your best intentions towards me are of no avail. If the means were afforded me, and which were no more than what your Excellency has repeatedly directed, &c."--In his next letter to the Commander of the forces, of the 13th July, he says, "The reinforcements which have been reluctantly afforded me, _notwithstanding your Excellency's intentions_, have been so sparingly and tardily sent me, as in a considerable degree to defeat the purpose of their being sent. I have no hopes of any aid from the _centre division_, where our situation is little understood, or has ever been a secondary consideration."--These extracts clearly shew that General Procter ascribed the delay in forwarding to him the remainder of the 41st regiment, not to the Commander of the forces, but to General de Rottenburg, who then commanded the centre division in Upper Canada.

Notwithstanding the Reviewer must have known this to have been the fact, from the very correspondence he was quoting, he has had the hardihood to say, "that although Sir George Prevost fully acknowledged, in his letter of the 12th July, his immediate ability to grant the reinforcement General Procter had asked for, in his letter of the 4th of that month, it will scarcely be credited, that even after this, he should have suffered _above five weeks_ to elapse before he _despatched_ the small amount of regular troops, &c."[57]

Now it appears from General de Rottenburg's letter, before referred to, that 120 men of the 41st, _had been despatched_ to Amherstburgh on the 6th July; and by a return made to the Military Secretary's Office, by Captain Chambers, Deputy-Quarter-Master-General with General Procter's army, dated Amherstburgh, 13th August, 1813, it further appears, that up to the _10th August_, more than 300 rank and file of the 41st, and 41 rank and file of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, with nearly 50 officers and non-commissioned officers, _had arrived at that post_, which was further strengthened, within ten days afterwards, by a detachment of 50 provincial dragoons. The cavalry and men of the Newfoundland Regiment were particularly requested, by General Procter, in his correspondence with the Commander of the forces, to be sent to him.

It may here be observed, that General Procter appears to have attached by far too much importance to his own command, and not to have made proper allowances for the critical situation of the centre division, from which his reinforcements were expected. Upon the safety of that division his own altogether depended; for had they been defeated, or obliged to retire from the Upper Province, he would have been cut off from all supplies and assistance, and his capture would have been inevitable. Whereas, as afterwards happened, a disaster to the force under General Procter, and the capture of Amherstburgh, would not necessarily involve in it the safety of the centre division. These reasons, without doubt, weighed with General de Rottenburg, in retaining the remainder of the 41st regiment, until they could be despatched to General Procter, without injury to the more important service for which they were required on the Niagara frontier.

Having thus proved that, as far as depended upon Sir George Prevost, General Procter's requisitions, of every description, had been complied with, we now proceed to shew that he did not neglect our marine on Lake Erie.

The Quarterly Reviewer, indeed, has not hesitated to say, "that in the whole course of that vacillation and error, which unhappily distinguished the administration of Sir George Prevost,[58] his imbecility of judgment and action was most flagrant and palpable, in the circumstances which led to the destruction of our marine on Lake Erie." These censures, unfounded as they are, may perhaps be thought to require a more particular and detailed reply.

To the exertions made by Sir George Prevost, both before the war and after its commencement, to preserve our naval ascendancy on Lake Erie, we have already had occasion to refer. From these statements it will appear, that, independently of the new schooner, Lady Prevost, launched, armed, equipped, and upon the Lake, before the month of August, 1812, the Detroit, a ship to carry 18 guns, which the Reviewer would have his readers believe was only _laid down after Captain Barclay's arrival at Amherstburgh in June_,[59] had been commenced building before the month of _March_ preceding, together with several gun-boats. The latter were launched in April. The ship was, in fact, in a state of considerable forwardness, when Captain Barclay assumed the command on the Lake. Upon the declaration of war, we had only one ship and a schooner on Lake Erie; and, within little more than a year afterwards, our fleet there consisted of two ships, a brig, a schooner, and two small vessels. In order properly to appreciate the efforts made for the construction and armament of this squadron, it must be borne in mind that the whole of the supplies necessary for that purpose, with the exception perhaps of the timber alone, were to be transported from the Lower to the Upper Province, by the St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario, and from thence to Lake Erie, where the superiority of our marine enabled us to convey them to Amherstburgh. As the efficiency of this squadron necessarily depended upon the number and discipline of the crews with which it was manned, the subject of a supply of able seamen, for that service, early engaged the attention of Sir George Prevost. Upon Sir James Yeo's arrival at Kingston, and the appointment by him of Captain Barclay, to take the naval command on Lake Erie, the Commander of the forces urgently requested Sir James to supply that officer with a greater number of seamen than he was disposed, from his own wants, to allow him. As the obtaining the naval ascendancy, on Lake Ontario, was a primary consideration, and as the seamen whom Sir James Yeo brought with him were not sufficient adequately to man his own ships, Captain Barclay was obliged to proceed with a very scanty supply of men. The Commander of the forces was in hopes that there might be other opportunities of increasing Captain Barclay's force, and that, in the mean time, the reinforcements which he intended, and immediately afterwards directed, should be sent to General Procter, would enable him to spare a sufficient number of soldiers for the use of the squadron on Lake Erie, until Captain Barclay's wants could be more efficiently supplied. The first letter from Captain Barclay, upon the subject of these wants, was addressed to Brigadier-General Vincent, who then commanded on the Niagara frontier, and was dated 17th June, 1813. The principal object of that letter was to obtain a reinforcement of troops for General Procter, in order to enable him to co-operate with Captain Barclay, in an attack upon the enemy's naval establishment at Presqu' isle, and in that letter he expressly states that he was making an application for seamen to Sir James Yeo. This communication was forwarded to the Commander of the forces by General Vincent, with an intimation that he should immediately push forward the remainder of the 41st regiment, (a company of the regiment having been sent by him the preceding month) in order to assist in the proposed attack upon the enemy's fleet. Before the above letter either was or could be received by Sir George Prevost, he had appointed Major-General de Rottenburg to the command of the forces in Upper Canada, and had given him particular directions for supplying General Procter's wants, and for immediately despatching to him the remainder of the 41st regiment. The Reviewer has asserted,[60] that "Captain Barclay stated the wants of his squadron in men, stores, and guns, with the same truth and earnestness as General Procter had repeatedly expressed; but the _only reply_ of Sir George Prevost, to his statements, was a cold and general promise, in a letter to General Procter, that some petty officers and seamen, for Lake Erie, should be sent forward on the first opportunity."