The Loyalists of America and Their Times Volume II Part 3
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 embarra.s.sments 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 repet.i.tion 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 a.s.sistance, the French auxiliaries threatened to be a burden; three thousand troops and five hundred militia were kept under arms at Newport to a.s.sist 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 a.s.sault by land and water when, on the 11th of May, "a great number of citizens addressed General Lincoln in a pet.i.tion, expressing their acquiescence in the terms which Sir Henry Clinton had offered, and requested his acceptance of them. On the reception of this pet.i.tion, 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 princ.i.p.al 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 circ.u.mstances 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 circ.u.mstances 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 a.s.sistance. 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 acc.u.mulated 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 quant.i.ty 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 apprais.e.m.e.nt 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 a.s.sociated 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 pa.s.sed 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 doc.u.ments 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 ama.s.sing 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 princ.i.p.al 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 princ.i.p.ally 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.