Summer 2008 - Journal of the War of 1812
Transcription
Summer 2008 - Journal of the War of 1812
Journal of the War of 1812 An International Journal Dedicated to the last Anglo-American War, 1812-1815 The Summer of Events: Fourteen Historical Excursions Massachusetts in the War of 1812 The Patriot War: Part II Visit 1812: “Old Ironsides” and the USS Constitution Museum Try the Massachusetts “Puzzle” Twelfth National War of 1812 Symposium (Details Inside) USS Constitution vs. HMS Guerrière Reading to the Grandchildren Before the Battle of Horseshoe Bend: Part II Features: The Trail and the Ale; Publisher's Profile; Chronology; News You Use; and More... Summer 2008 Vol. 11, No. 2 Subscription Rates/ Information Inside The Journal of the War of 1812 Volume XI, No. 2, Summer 2008 An International Journal Dedicated to the Last Anglo-American War, 1812-1815 GOVERNANCE Editor – Harold W. Youmans Co-Editor – Christopher T. George Editorial Advisors: John R. Grodzinski; Eric E. Johnson; and Mary Jo Cunningham, Editor Emeritus Board of Scholastic Advisors: Rene Chartrand, Hull, Quebec; Donald E. Graves, Almonte, Ontario; Martin K. Gordon, John Hopkins University School of Continuing Studies; Donald R. Hickey, Wayne State College; Michael D. Harris, Newberg, MO; Kathy Lee Erlandson Liston, Brookneal, VA; Robert Malcomson, St. Catherines, Ontario; Gene A. Smith, Texas Christian University; Joseph A. Whitehorne, Middletown, VA. ADVERTISING Contact the Editor at 13194 US Highway 301 South, #360, Riverview, Florida 33578-7410; Tel: 813.671.8852; Fax: 813-671-8853. SUBSCRIPTIONS Single issue costs $4.00 US or four issues for $12.50 US, $15.00 other countries. All checks must be in US dollars drawn on a US bank and sent to: Journal of the War of 1812, 844 E. Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA. Subscription questions Call (813) 671-8852 SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Authors are encouraged to request and/or consult the War of 1812 Consortium's Ten-Year Publication Plan for the Journal's current and upcoming needs and the Submission Guidelines. Both are available on request. Contact: the Editor at email: The1812archive@gmail.com. Authors should note that the time from receipt of the submission to its' publication may be up to six months in this quarterly magazine. Authors will be notified should the estimated publication date exceed six months. All submission should be sent as simple Word documents without any codes embedded for headings or other formatting. Font should be Times New Roman, font size 12, left justified. Endnotes must be numbered using Arabic and not Roman numerals. Important: Images must not be embedded in the text of a document and must be submitted separately, either in electronic format or clean hard copy. Electronic copies should be JPEG files, 300 dpi. Authors are responsible for securing permission to publish copyrighted material. The Editor reserves the right to make minor spelling, grammatical or syntax changes to any submission. Authors will be contacted should their work require any substantive changes or if their submission is unsuitable for publication. At present the Consortium does not pay for submissions. Authors affiliated with bona fide historical organizations or societies may receive free notices of their organization's War of 1812 related activities in the Journal and these organizations or societies may be otherwise further profiled in the Journal. The Journal of the War of 1812 (ISSN 1524-1459) is published quarterly by The War of 1812 Consortium, Inc., 844 E. Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201. Periodical postage paid at Baltimore, Maryland, and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to The War of 1812 Consortium, Inc., 844 E. Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA. Copyright © 2008 by The War of 1812 Consortium, Inc. All rights reserved. PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. Journal of the War of 1812 An International Journal Dedicated to the last Anglo-American War, 1812-1815 Volume XI, No. 2, Summer 2008 DEPARTMENTS 2 | Editor's Quoin: Off and running with a renewed Journal. Questions in the Quoin. 7 | The Role of the States Massachusetts and the War of 1812: A Portrait in Dissent 14 | War Leader Profile US Navy Officer Isaac Hull (1773-1843) 16 | Visit 1812 “Old Ironsides” and the USS Constitution Museum 24 | The Documents William King's dissent of Dissent and the Defense of Patriotism 25 | Subscription Form Order or renew you subscription in advance of any price increase 26 | War of 1812 Chronology War of 1812 anniversaries from August through October 27 | Publisher's Profile The University Press of Kansas has three current War of 1812-related books 28 | War of 1812 Calendar of Events Fourteen summer events, festivals and commemmorances FEATURES 8 | BEFORE HORSEHOE BEND by Charles R. Burns Part Two of a Series placing the Creek War in a new perspective 17 | THE PATRIOT WAR by Colin Murphy Concluding comments from Colin Murphy on Florida's Patriot War 23 | NATIONAL WAR OF 1812 SYMPOSIUM Baltimore, Saturday, October 11, 2008 Latest available planning for the annual meeting; excellent topics planned ALSO NEWS YOU WANT TO USE: 3 | National Historic Trail; Threatened War of 1812 Sites; Chesapeake Naval Operations Discussed; Beer for All; Beginning of the US Navy; Simeon North and the Flintlocks 5 | Bicentennial Watch; Honoring the War of 1812 Veteran; Declaration of War Remembered; A Special Apology 5 | Reading to the Grandchildren: Massachusetts youngsters and the war 6 | War of 1812 Puzzler: Special Mission. Try your research skills on the Massachusetts Puzzler COVER PHOTO: Six-hundred miles off Boston, Massachusetts, HMS Guerrière is blown up after its defeat by the USS Constitution on August 19, 1812. EDITOR'S QUOIN The Editor expresses his profound thanks for the kind comments from readers on the occasion of the renewed publication of the Journal. That thanks is shared with all who helped bring the issue into print. This issue has a reasonable concentration of materials on Massachusetts. Of course, the USS Constitution takes a significant role on center stage. Our War Leader is Captain Isaac Hull, arguably the most famous of the brave ship's brave commanders. Hull's biography could dwarf the Journal. Here you will see a focus on his 1812-1815 experience. Known for its dissent to “Mr. Madison's War,” the multi-faceted Massachusetts experience is featured in several articles. As noted historian Samuel Eliot Morison remarked, “Massachusetts myopia struggled with ... conflicted political, religious and economic views throughout the war.” Thoughtful Bay Staters recognized the vulnerability of its long and exposed coastline and District of Maine residents, more than others, felt the need to prepare for the inevitable assault as well as the tug of patriotism and martial spirit. Future Maine Governor, William King, supported these views as a member of the General Court throughout the War. His defense of his own actions in 1814, featured in The Documents, portrayed this patriot at his best. No visit to Boston would be complete without a stop at the National Park Service's USS Constitution Museum in Charlestown. The “still serving” 1797 super frigate, manned by her active duty US Navy crew rules the waves. Stop at the museum for the full experience. This issue also includes the remaining portions of Colin Murphy's The Patriot War and Part Two of Charles R. Burns' Before Horseshoe Bend. Each of these articles continue to provide rich and colorful detail on these subjects. Mr. Burns' work concludes in the Fall issue. Readers are encouraged to try our War of 1812 Puzzler. A one year renewal or a free new subscription will be awarded to the best answering essay published. Several readers have suggested additions to our departmental line up. One suggested that historical and family researchers should have a feature through which they may ask questions of other readers designed to fill the gaps of their own research. Several rules are under consideration seeking to support such a feature and maintain the interest for the general reader. More of our Questions Page in the next issue. Another seeks stronger links with the General Society of the War of 1812 and the U.S. Daughters of 1812. In this issue we have included several pieces about graves renovations. We actively seek more interaction between both of these societies as well as with the War of 1812 reenactors. A further comment on contributions of articles and features from our readers: Right now you are getting a Journal that has just over one half of its content prepared by the Editor. A better balance in opinion and research would be a journal that has about 70-80% of its content contributed by readers. That's the goal. We want the Journal to be your Journal in every way. The War of 1812 Consortium has approved a production schedule of sorts and that schedule can be emailed to anyone requesting it. Detailed submission requirements are also available. Email us at the1812archive@gmail.com for your copy. Right now the Fall and Winter issues are under development. We are seeking good “Christmasthemed” stories for this Fall and articles on the Northern New York campaigns for the Winter issue Thoughtful pieces on these two subjects would be given priority consideration. The Fall issue deadline is September 1, 2008. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 2 Your Editor. THE STAR-SPANGLED BANNER NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL LEGISLATION PASSES Soon War of 1812 sites from Calvert County's St. Leonard's Creek to Baltimore's Fort McHenry will be right along “The Trail.” On May 8, 2008, the President signed the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 which included the provisions creating the 175mile Trail. Other sites along the Trail include other historical venues in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. Service utilized scholars within advisory committees and in the end conducted field efforts that examined the condition of 243 battlefields and 434 associated historical properties in 31 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Of these as many as 170 sites will face “injury or destruction” in the next 10 years. The full, 142-page study is available on-line through the National Coalition for History website. Maryland Senator Benjamin L. Cardin and Representative John P. Sarbanes, among others, sponsored this legislative effort. The aim of the Act is to tie together the public focus on “heritage” sites throughout the Chesapeake area and to, as voiced by Gay Vietzke, superintendent of Fort McHenry Monument and Historic Shrine, “make a connection with all these other historic places,” and to extend the War of 1812 story beyond the boundaries of particular sites. A special commemorative celebration was held at the Fort McHenry National Park on June 9, 2008. This is a good news story! NATIONAL PARK SERVICE REPORT CITES THREATENED WAR OF 1812 SITES Driven by the risk of loss, injury or destruction due to development or neglect, the National Park Service released a long-awaited report to Congress on June 13, 2008. “Report to Congress on the Historic Preservation of Revolutionary War and War of 1812 Sites in the United States” is a broad federal effort to determine the status of these historic resources and was successful in identifying the sites of almost 3,000 events associated with the two wars. During this study, initiated in 1996, the Park Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Courtesy: National Park Service (Find Chuck Burn's Article on Page --) DELAWARE CURATOR PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO ROYAL NAVY'S CHESAPEAKE OPERATIONS The Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum and the Calvert Marine Museum co-hosted a Delaware expert on colonial and military archeology last month. Charles H. Fithian, Curator of Collections for the State of Delaware, visited the Maryland site to present his talk: “Heart of Oak: The Royal Navy in the Chesapeake Campaign, 1813-1814.” This presentation was part of the “War Comes to the Chesapeake” lecture series and provided an overview of the ships, personalities and the daily life and routines of those serving aboard British vessels in the Bay. More information about upcoming lectures is available at http://www.jefpat.org. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 3 BREWER'S ALE STIMULATES INTEREST, TASTE Your Editor was driven to dig out that dog-eared copy of the Bartender's Guide when a news release from the Sackets Harbor Brewing Company hit the streets. At exactly 9:39 am EDT, May 21, 2008, the Company announced the introduction of its “War of 1812 Amber Ale” on a national basis. slide toward another conflict with Britain materialized, however, both Jefferson and Madison altered their position. Should be an interesting read. The recently christened brew is now available in selected northeastern and southeastern beer markets. Here at the Consortium's Southern Outpost in Riverview, Florida, telephones rang, emails clicked, and glasses clinked as news of the brew flowed from the exhibit halls at the National Restaurant Association's show in Chicago, Illinois. Even though now available in nearby Orlando, your Editor has yet to savor its historic flavor. And trust me, seeking out the ale would be solely an exercise in historical research. We await any reader's review of the refreshment. Really! “IF WE BUILD IT, THEY (THE ENEMY) WILL COME” Dr. George Daughan brings the pre-War of 1812 arguments about starting the United States Navy into sharp focus in his new book, If By Sea: The Forging of the American Navy – From the Revolution to the War of 1812. In a news article in the Daily Press, servicing Newport News, Virginia, Daughan's explanation regarding the attitudes of Washington and Adams (eventually Federalists in outlook) and Jefferson and Madison (Democratic Republicans) reflects in large measure arguments voiced today between those who seek broader offensive and defensive military options and those who do not. Although we have not seen the book, and would welcome a review, Jefferson initially argued that creating a Navy would do little more than entangle the young country in war. As the slow United States of America Department of the Navy GUNMAKER SIMEON NORTH STANDARDIZING INTERCHANGEABILITY, CIRCA 1813 Gun maker Simeon North is credited by the American Precision Museum in Windsor, Vermont, as the first government contractor in the United States to recommend to the War Department that government manufacturing contracts require interchangeable parts. That was on April 16, 1813. He got the contract he bid on. At the beginning of the War of 1812 North owned a gun manufactory in Middletown, Connecticut. His contract called for 20,000 flintlock pistols. The interchangeability provision is hailed as a strong step toward mass production, a significant hallmark of the American industrial dominance of the late 19th and early 20th Century. North's invention of the earliest primitive milling machine replaced the hand-filling in the shaping of metal parts and made interchangeability possible. Each pistol cost the Army $7.00 in 1813. Economists say that's about $84.00 today. Does that sound about right? Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 4 late April. The Journal will keep you informed. BICENTENNIAL WATCH: RUSHING THROUGH PORT CLAIBORNE'S PAST NIAGARA FALLS COUNCIL COMMITS $2 MILLION TO LEGACY PROJECT “Hurry” seems to be the watchword in Port Claiborne, Ontario. Dan Anger, a local historian with several books to his credit, is rushing through the past to highlight Port Claiborne's War of 1812 history. The Lundy's Lane Historical Museum is one of the principal beneficiaries of a decision of the City of Niagara Falls Council to commit $2 million to the Lundy's Lane Battlefield Legacy Project. The Councilors action is a visible expression of local support for a project hoping to seal more than $11 million from Canadian federal and provincial resources in advance of the Bicentennial. The area on the Niagara Peninsula was a crucial battleground during the war and visitors will get more enhanced views of the battleground on which the British commander exclaimed: “They're Regulars, By God,” when approached by the forces commanded by General Winfield Scott in July 1814. Bicentennial planning is well underway on both sides of the border and Anger and his wife, Virginia, curator at Port Claiborne Historical and Marine Museum, seek to put Port Claiborne “on the map.” According to a recent story in the Welland Tribune, Anger is intrigued by the “scruple of conscience” provisions in the Militia Act of 1808 which exempted religious pacifists from military duty in British North America. They are also examining the role of this community in the larger Laura Secord story and the paramilitary raids launched from the American side upon the Sugarloaf Settlements during the War. PERIOD AUTHORS SERVE ON MICHIGAN'S WAR OF 1812 BICENTENNIAL COMMISSION Two War of 1812 scholars have been appointed by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm to serve on that state's Commission for the War of 1812 Bicentennial. Brian Dunnigan and Phil Porter were appointed by the Governor this Spring. Mr. Dunnigan, interim director at the University of Michigan William L. Clements Library in Ann Arbor, lives in the Mackinac Island area. Mr. Porter, from Sheboygan, is the Director at Mackinac State Historic Park. Both have penned numerous War of 1812 pieces and serve this community well. Another appointee is Mr. Richard G. Micka, from Monroe who is co-chairman of the Monroe County War of 1812 Bicentennial Experiential Tourism Subcommittee. The first meeting of the Commission was held in How many of you have taken the time to read John A. Minahan's juvenile fiction, Abigail's Drum (NY: Pippen Press, c1985), to your grandchildren? It tells the story of two sisters from Scituate, Massachusetts, who saved their town from marrauding British seamen but beating on the “drum.” Delightful. Grandchildren are fun, too! HONORING AND CARING FOR WAR OF 1812 GRAVE SITES One of the principal objectives of the General Society of the War of 1812 is the caring for the graves of the veterans of the War. The General Society has a long and honorable reputation in the pursuit of these efforts and where appropriate and permitted the Journal seeks to keep the broader War of 1812 community abreast of these activities. An occasional feature will be the mention of these efforts and so herein is the hope that members of the General Society will keep the Journal informed. In the meanwhile: Northfield, Minnesota: The headstone of Isaac Barrick, marked with his initials, was unearthed in an abandoned cemetery in Northfield by his Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 5 descendents assisted by a local genealogist. Isaac was a lad of 15 when he enlisted to serve and was assigned, probably because of his age, to duties as a fife major. His descendants hope to form an association to restore and maintain the old Prairieville Cemetery, now all but impossible to walk through, thick with weeds and other growth. anniversary of this critical Congressional action passed. Alas and alack! There was only one mention of the action Congress took that day. Buffalo, New York: There he was; 50-year-old militiaman, Job Hoisington, standing his ground as almost 1,000 British raiders attacked and burned Buffalo on December 30, 1813. His mutilated body was identified by his wife after the battle. When his remains were moved from his initial resting place in Cold Spring Burying Ground to Forest Lawn in 1850, something was missing: his head. The ghost of Job is said to roam his old neighborhood. This May area redevelopment preservationists seeking to honor this brave man placed a marker near Porter and Plymouth Avenues, in Buffalo. Now, rest easy, Job! New Delhi Television, Limited, founded in 1988, is India's first and largest private producer of news, current affairs and entertainment television on the sub-continent. Westport, Connecticut: The 3.3-acre Lower Green's Farms Colonial Burying Ground contains War of 1812 veterans and other grave sites dated as early as 1730. Local authorities hope soon to add this area and adjoining property within an historic district. In a process perhaps unique to Connecticut, property owners adjoining the cemetery will be allowed to vote with the local authorities on whether the area will become an officially designated historic district. It is indeed a slow and deliberative process, but should be concluded this Fall. With the support of the cemetery's owner, grave stone restoration is underway and will continue. Unfortunately available space and the Editor's learning curve took over and it was obvious that the article would have to slide to a later issue. THE WORLD REMEMBERS? The Eighteenth of June has come and gone. As any complete War of 1812 chronology will show, on that day the United States Congress voted to declare war against Great Britain in 1812. The Journal of the War of 1812 monitors the Internet activities through numerous search engines that provide War of 1812 events, news and blog comments worldwide. The Editor expected to see hundreds of citations commemorating the passage of the day as the The anniversary of the war was not recorded in any of the scanned daily sites or blogs except, and yes Virginia..., the New Delhi, India (that's India) NDTV.com's “Today in History” feature. We at the Journal have more work to do. Oh yes, thank you NDTV.com whereever you are. A SPECIAL APOLOGY As the planning for this issue of the Journal was being worked up, your Editor communicated with Eric E. Johnson, one of our Editorial Advisors. I intended to publish Part 1 of his fine article “Cartels, Hostages and Reprisals.” For this I humbly apologize. Look for this topic in the Fall 2008 issue of the Journal. THE WAR OF 1812 PUZZLER SPECIAL MISSION FROM MASSACHUSETTS Letters of Marque vessels Rambler, John Jones and Tamaamaah kept company on a special mission for Boston merchants. What was their mission, where did they go, and what was the result? No answers this quarter. Readers can submit a 100-150 word answer for publication. If you solve this Puzzler and are selected to have your essay published subscribers will get a year's renewal free; if not a subscriber, you will receive the following four issues free. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 6 Good Luck! 45th Infantry, raised late in the war, saw no enemy action. MASSACHUSETTS AND THE WAR OF 1812 At the beginning of the War of 1812, Massachusetts had many citizens that agreed with the Federal government in Washington that Great Britain deserved and should receive a drubbing. Many of these remembered the role the Bay State had played in the American Revolution and although individually were thirty years older, they were ready to pick up the musket again. However, many others did not agree and were not willing to rush off to war. Political opposition was centered in the General Court (the state's legislature) and in the governor's office. Federalists greatly outnumbered the Jeffersonian Democrats and opposed this rash action on political, religious and economic grounds. The Federalist Governor, Caleb Strong, leading the opposition to the war, refused to call out the state militia and it went downhill from there. Samuel Eliot Morison, in his Maritime History of Massachusetts (Boston: 1960) remarked that the war affected equally both “her pocket and her heart.” The war was simply “immoral,” “unjust,” and “hypocritical.” (Sound familiar?) But this general feeling could not suppress the enthusiasm for the naval victories of the small but valiant US Navy. From the successes of the super frigate, USS Constitution, to the privateer victories which largely sustained the nonsmuggling economy, Massachusetts patriots took heart and in the end limited or ended the real discussion regarding disunion. While villages and towns provided many more sailors and privateers than soldiers, Massachusetts still was able to fill six US Infantry Regiments from within the state. Men from the 9th and 21st Infantry fought on the Canadian border from Sackett's Harbor to the Niagara region. The 33rd and 34th Infantry fought at Chateauguay and Plattsburg. Elements of the 40th Infantry were at Fort Sullivan in Maine and with Andrew Jackson at Pensacola, Florida. The As the war wore on, both sides felt renewed energy. The US Army was gaining experience, confidence and skill; the British were gaining the assets available to deploy to North America, both naval and ground forces. The naval blockade generally affected Massachusetts and was tightening. By either conviction or necessity, attitudes at least among the general citizenry changed toward the British. Blockading and coasting British ships sent more and more foraging parties ashore. But the greatest threat was to the Massachusetts District of Maine. The British invasion in July 1814 occupied the coast from Fort Sullivan in Eastport to Machias, Calais and beyond. Neither state forces nor the more active Maine militia could stem the British tide. Who was to say, maybe even Boston itself was next! What had our leadership brought on? Of course, too, was the disaffected diehards calling for a Convention at Hartford. In the end Massachusetts may have saved itself from itself. Events at far off Ghent, Belgium, certainly curtailed any British threat to more of the New England coastline, made mute the worst of the the ideas germinating in Hartford, and although it took several years after the cession of hostilities restored the District of Maine to Massachusetts. The significant results of the war for Massachusetts can be simply stated. Opposition to the war, seen by the general public as a victory, set in stone the demise of the Federalist Party and the further loss of influence of New England and Massachusetts on the national scene. The war also saw the long-term decline of Massachusetts dominance in the seafaring sector of the economy. Newburyport, Salem and other colonial ports had to evolve or die. Finally, the separation of the Republicandominated District of Maine from Massachusetts was accelerated and Maine was admitted to the Union in 1820. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 7 BEFORE THE BATTLE OF HORSESHOE BEND: Part II: Mobilization for War and Initial Moves By Charles R. Burns Editor: This is Part II of a fresh look at the Creek War of 1813-14. Author Chuck Burns previously outlined the critical phases of the war and now in this Part discusses General Jackson's preparation for and the conduct of his movement to contact against the Creek Nation in Mississippi Territory. Author Profile: Chuck Burns, a professional archaeologist, lives on Alabama's Coosa River with his wife Hayley and their two year old daughter, Charley. He is currently with the Alabama National Guard. Jackson Prepares For War Around the middle of September, news of the massacre at Fort Mims reached General Andrew Jackson in Nashville. At that time he was bedridden, suffering from a broken arm caused by a gunshot wound he received while dueling with Tennessee Senator Thomas H. Benton. Jackson was not completely taken by surprise when he received the information; he had been staying informed about British and Creek developments by scouts commissioned to watch the Creeks. The General had a number of scouts, including Sam Dale, who is recognized for his heroics during the canoe battle that took place on the Alabama River on November 12, 1813 and Sam Houston whose name is later synonymous with Texas independence.1 Jackson called into service two thousand volunteers and by October 12, he had assembled an army of twenty-five hundred. Jackson’s army consisted of an 800-man volunteer cavalry led by John Coffee, and a militia infantry comprised of frontiersmen. These frontiersman were not well organized or trained. However, they proved to be a good lot from which to acquire fighting men because of their ability to adapt to military conditions. They were generally armed with their own rifles, smooth bore muskets, and shotguns.2 Andrew Jackson was able to procure a shipment of 400 long rifles in transit to South Carolina from Pennsylvania. These well-crafted firearms fashioned by expert gunsmiths in Lancaster, Pennsylvania were to be used by traders as commerce with Indians. The Federal Government had recently issued a ban on gun trade with the Indians because of the conflicts at hand, and the shipment was stopped. Each rifle cost fifteen dollars bringing the total dollar amount for all the rifles to $6,000. The Tennessee treasury had set aside $2,800 dollars for the militia. This amount, along with the combined contribution of Governor Willie Blount and General Jackson, paid the difference. The militia was therefore equipped with some of the finest rifles made at that time. Augustus Buell reported, “[t]he voice of ever 1 Henry Adams, The War of 1812, ed. Major H. A. Deweerd (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891; reprint, Washington: The Infantry Journal, 1944), 118; Augustus C. Buell, History of Andrew Jackson: Pioneer, Patriot, Soldier, Politician, President, Vol. 1 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1904), 294. 2 Willie Blount to Jackson, September 25, 1813, Bassett, Correspondences, I: 321-22; Adams, 118; Buell, 296-7. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 8 rifle in the four hundred was afterward heard…” throughout the duration of the war.3 The staging ground for Jackson’s campaign was just south of Huntsville on the Tennessee River at Ditto’s Landing. It was from this point that Jackson’s army would march southward into Creek territory. But, due to a failure to procure supplies that included basic foodstuffs such as bacon, flour, and corn meal, Jackson was in no position to effectively advance. Jackson had anticipated a shipment of supplies from Nashville to reach him by way of the Tennessee River, but the water level was so low the supplies could not be moved. He gave orders for his mounted soldiers, led by John Coffee, to find food along the banks of the Black Warrior River in present day Tuscaloosa County, Alabama, southwest of their position at Ditto’s Landing.4 Coffee traveled a distance of about 100 miles along the bank of the River, burning the abandoned homes of the Black Warrior Indian towns and collecting approximately 300 bushels of corn, while Jackson pushed his infantry to the southeast for twenty miles, over what he referred to as “Americas Alps” and established Fort Deposit. This fort, situated on the Tennessee River, was to serve as a supply procurement area. It, was to receive supplies from what was known as “Holston” county and “Madison” county. While anticipating supplies that never arrived, Jackson received word that hostile Creeks along the Coosa River near a place named Ten Islands were preparing to wage war on friendly Creek living near by. This message was sent by a Cherokee Chief known as Pathkiller. Before leaving Fort Deposit to attend to the situation near the Ten Islands, General Jackson announced to his troops that the reason for them leaving their families and homes to suffer “so many privation…was to avenge the cruelties committed upon our defenseless, and un-offending frontiers by the inhuman Creeks, instigated by their still more inhuman Allies.” And, on October 24, Jackson’s army, suffering from fatigue and hunger, advanced in hopes of finding food along their way. Jackson retorted, “I am determined to push forward if I live upon acorns.”5 Jackson made it evident that he viewed the campaign against the Creek Indians as a battle that was part of a much larger conflict with the British, or as he called them to his troops, “inhuman Allies.” Jackson’s objective was to put down the Creek uprising in an effort to reach the Spanish port of Pensacola Florida where Great Britain had established a supply base. Jackson accused the British of inciting the Creek’s willingness to make war and supplying them with the means to do so, from this base. The United States’ Gazette printed a letter penned by Lieutenant Colonel John Bower that reported on September 10, a British schooner sailed by a “well known free-booter” named “captain Jonson of Bahama, who has made his fortune by preying on the commerce of France, Spain and the United States…” delivered a large amount of ammunition, blankets, and clothes to Pensacola, and that 3 Buell, 259. 4 Adams, 118; Buell, 295; David Crockett, A Narrative of the Life of David Crockett of the State of Tennessee (Philadelphia: E. L. Carey and A. Hurst, 1934; reprint, Introduction by James Shackford and Stanley J. Formsbee, Knoxville: The University of Tennessee press, 1973), 83. 5 Albert J. Pickett, History of Alabama and Incidentally of Georgia and Mississippi from the Earliest Period (Charleston:Walker and James, 1851; reprint. Montgomery, AL: River City Publishing, 1962), 553; Adams, 118-9; Herbert J. Doherty, Richard Keith Call: Southern Unionist (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1961), 6; Frank L. Owsley, Jr., Struggle for the Gulf Borderlands (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2000), 64; Jackson to Lewis, October 24, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence I: 336. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 9 these materials were to be used by the Creek Indians.6 As Jackson marched south, over more mountainous terrain, he paused to establish Camp Wills at Wills’ Creek, near present day Gadsden, Alabama. By this time John Coffee and his mounted men had rejoined with Jackson. While at the camp, Jackson allowed his troops to forage for provisions because they were suffering from hunger. The General also dispatched 200 cavalrymen under the command of Colonel Dyer, to attack the town of Littefutchee located on Canoe Creek, twenty miles from the camp. Dyer’s Cavalry reached Littefutchee at four o’clock in the morning and set the town on fire. The Cavalry returned with twenty-nine prisoners, among them women and children. A separate detachment that had been sent out in search of corn, returned with two blacks and four Indian warrior prisoners. The black prisoners, it appears, were allied with the Indian warriors of Littefutchee. The prisoners were sent to Huntsville. David Crockett notes that while encamped at Wills’ Creek, (which he called “Camp Mills”) John Coffee was promoted from the rank of Colonel to General.7 From the camp at Wills’ Creek, Jackson’s army advanced toward the Ten Islands region on the Coosa, located near present day Henry Neely Dam, in Ohatchee, Alabama. After marching for several days the army reached its destination and was in close proximity of Upper Creek villages, one of which was the town of Tallushatchee, where Jackson would soon set into motion one of the more horrific battles of his campaign.8 War Is Waged, The Battle Of Tallushatchee Orders To John Coffee. November 2, 1813 Genl. Coffee with one thousand of his Brigade, will with all practicable dispatch cross the Coosa river at the fish-dam ford; and forthwith with one half of his force proceed to Tallushatchee and destroy it: The other half of his force, so soon as he crosses the river he will dispatch under a discreet officer of the Ten-Islands, with orders to scour the intervening country of all hostile Creeks, and to form a cover for the force immediately under the command of Genl. Coffee. In performing this service Genl. Coffee will cause to be observed the strictest order and circumspection; varying the above order, as in his discretion may seem proper, so as not to depart wholly from the objective view. The commanding general will expect to hear from Genl Coffee in the course of the ensuing night, if practicable that he will form a junction with him by sunrise tomorrow. By order of the commanding general.9 Many hostile Creek warriors had reportedly assembled in the town of Tallushatchee, just a few miles southwest of present day Jacksonville. Coffee and 920 soldiers, combined with a company of 6 Doherty, 6; United States Gazette, December 15, 1813, p. 818. 7 Shackford, 24; Pickett, 552-3; Crockett, 87. 8 Shackford, 24. 9 Jackson to Coffee, November 2, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence, I: 340. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 10 Cherokees and Creeks, began to advance on the town. This American Indian company was led by Cherokee Colonel Dick Brown. They wore white feathers or deer tails on their heads to distinguish them as “friendly” Indians. Also among the Indian company were three Natchez men, one of whom was Jim Fife. Fife is most recognized for his efforts during the events leading to the Battle of Talladega, which will be discussed later.10 When Coffee reached within a half mile of the town, he and his men could hear the inhabitants beating drums and yelling as they prepared for war. One could only imagine the haunting sounds of the warriors’ yells accented by the throbbing of drums, and how, in the hour before sunrise, intimidating it must have been. Jackson was aware of this psychological threat; before leaving Fort Deposit he announced to his troops, “Great reliance will…be placed by the enemy, in the consternation they shall be able to spread through our ranks, by the horrid yells with which they commence their battle; but brave men will laugh at the subterfuge by which they hoped to alarm them.” The town of Tallushatchee was comprised of approximately 100 families and 420 warriors. On the morning of November 3, 1813 Coffee and his men surrounded the Creek town and rushed into battle around daybreak.11 Coffee divided his detachments into two separate columns. His cavalry, under the command of Colonel John Allcorn assumed the right, and the left was composed of mounted rifleman commanded by Colonel Newton Cannon. Coffee marched with Cannon’s column. General Coffee ordered the two columns to encircle the town simultaneously and join the heads of both columns in front of the town. Coffee ordered Captain E. Hammond and Lieutenant Andrew Patterson’s companies to advance within the circle formed by the two columns, to draw the Creeks from their homes. Hammond fired a few shots in order to catch the attention of the Creek warriors. Immediately following his shots, the Creeks made their charge. David Crockett stated, “…they raised the yell, and came running at him like so many red devils.” Then Hammond pulled back, leading them directly into Colonel Allcorn’s right flank. The right flank fired their weapons and then made a charge on the Creeks. And at that point, the Creeks retreated to their homes, where they would resist the best they could until Coffee’s army destroyed them.12 Crockett explained, “We began to close on the town by making our files closer and closer, and the Indians soon saw they were our property.” The town became soaked with blood as Coffee’s men cut through it like a raging river. Most of the Indians, aware defeat was inevitable, wanted to be taken prisoner. Indian women fearing for their lives desperately grasped at the soldiers in an effort to give themselves up; and according to Crockett, the Indians that surrendered in that manner, were in fact, taken as prisoners. Some warriors, choosing not to surrender ran for safety into a nearby house, where, as will be pointed out momentarily, proved to be a grave error.13 10 Crockett, 87; Buell, 304; “Indian Wars in Alabama,” Alabama Historical Quarterly 13 (1951): 130; Pickett, 553; Jackson to Willie Blount, November 4, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence, I: 341. 11 Pickett, 553; Jackson To The Troops, October 24, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence, I: 337-8; “Indian Wars in Alabama,” Alabama Historical Quarterly 13 (1951): 130. 12 James Parton, The Life of Andrew Jackson (Boston: Fields Osgood and Co., 1981), 436-7. 13 Crockett, 87-8. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 11 An interesting aspect of the Battle of Tallushatchee was that the Creeks chose to use the bow and arrow as their instrument of warfare. The bow and arrow was a weapon that had long since been abandoned due to the introduction of firearms by European traders desiring deerskins. The reason for using an inferior weapon when they had firearms at their disposal was a direct result of Tecumseh’s suggestion to abandon the adopted aspects of European/American culture and return to traditional customs. And though Tecumseh influenced the Creek Warriors, they only followed through with his directions to a certain extent. The Red Sticks fought the battle with a bow and a quiver full of arrows, but waited until they fired their first shot with a rifle before releasing any of the arrows at their enemy. They continued firing arrows until they were presented with an opportunity to reload their rifles.14 David Crockett witnessed for the first time in his life a man killed by an arrow. Crockett stated that as he, along with others, pursued Creek warriors seeking refuge in a house, a “squaw” sitting in the doorway, “…placed her feet against the bow she had in her hands, and then took an arrow, and, let fly at us, and she killed a man ….” Afterwards, Crockett along with the other soldiers became so engulfed with rage they shot twenty musket balls through her body. Crockett explained that during their rage they began to shoot the Indians like “dogs” and torched the house, burning the forty-six warriors inside. A young boy who had been shot to the ground near the blazing house, had, as Crockett explained, “… grease …stewing out of him” due to the immense heat coming from the fire. Crockett noticed that boy did not allow himself to cry out in anguish and stated, “So sullen is the Indian, when his dander is up, that he had sooner die than make a noise, or ask for quarters.”15 Lieutenant Richard Keith Call also recounted events of the battle’s aftermath, explaining that he witnessed slain mothers still grasping their dead children to their chest, bodies consumed by fire, and dogs eating what remained of their masters. Call concluded by stating, “heart sick I turned from the revolting scene.”16 James Parton suggests, in The Life of Andrew Jackson, that General Coffee placed importance on the study of military history. His battle strategy was reminiscent of that used by Hannibal at the Battle of Cannae more than 2,000 years prior to the brutality at Tallushatchee. Coffee drew his enemy’s attack to the center of his line, where then he pulled the line back, forming a horseshoe shape or semicircle around the Red Sticks, and then, at that time, closed in around the Indians, keeping the sides of the “horseshoe” firm so not to allow the Creeks to break through.17 There were a total of 186 Creeks recorded dead, eighteen of which were women. Coffee’s army suffered only five dead, two by way of arrow and 41 wounded. The surviving 84 women and children along with fourteen injured warriors were imprisoned in Huntsville, Alabama. The following day 14 “Indian Wars in Alabama,” Alabama Historical Quarterly 13 (1951): 131; John Reid and Henry Eaton, The Life of Andrew Jackson, Major General, in the Service of the United States, Comprising a History of the War in the South, from the Commencement of the Creek Campaign, to the Termination of the Hostilities before New Orleans (Philadelphia: M. Carey and Son, 1817, reprint, Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 1974), 50. 15 Crockett, 88-9. 16 Doherty, 6. 17 Robin Reilly, The British at the Gates (New York: G.P. Putman's Sons, 1974), 112; Harry L. Coles, The War of 1812 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1965), 197. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 12 General Jackson reported to Governor Willie Blount, stating, “We have retaliated for the destruction of Fort Mims” and General Coffee “executed this order in stile.” Jackson also mentioned that, “both officers and men behaved with the utmost bravery and deliberation.”18 Andrew Jackson’s report to Governor Blount portrayed the event as a great military achievement, when in fact the battle amounted to little more than a massacre. Though Coffee engaged a well planned and disciplined military attack on the Creeks at Tallushatchee, the troops well outnumbered the Warriors and made quick work of the event. Jackson romanticizes the battle in order to elevate it beyond the slaughter that it was. The accounts of the battle provided by Crockett and Call were contrary to Jackson’s assessments, they accurately represented the cruel and startling truth of the battle by providing insight to its horrific nature. The events described by Call and Crockett are as ominous as those of the Fort Mims Massacre.19 The battle left in its wake a disheartening and repulsive amount of carnage and destruction, but from this cruel consequence of war came an event that touches the soul. Among the Indians taken prisoner by General Coffee was a young boy who was attempting to nurse from the body of his dead mother. The surviving Creek women refused to take care of the child, it was of their belief the child was better dead than alive being that he no longer had any family. Andrew Jackson showed compassion toward the boy, stating, “charity and Christianity says he ought to be taken care of….” Jackson named the boy Lincoier and became his guardian. At the close of the war the General brought the boy to the Hermitage where he was cared for affectionately by he and his wife Rachel.20 This act of kindness exhibited by Jackson helps to soften the Tennesseans’ reputation. It brings into question Jackson’s sentiments toward the American Indians. At the time of the Creek War, American Indians were viewed as savage people, the term savage shows itself time and again through the writings of the period. Yet, despite the glaring racism against native populations of America during the 19th century, Jackson adopted an Indian son. After the dust had settled on the battlefield of Tallushatchee, Coffee’s men returned to Fort Strother to discover it had not yet been supplied with food. General Coffee’s men had gone for several days on half rations. Hunger was becoming one of the army’s biggest enemies, so, Crockett and others returned to Tallushatchee to forage for sustenance. They discovered a potato cellar underneath the house they burned to the ground the day before. The burning flesh of the Indians had dripped into the cellar and stewed the potatoes, Crockett explained that he and the other men were all as “hungry as wolves,” and though they had rather not consume the potatoes, they were compelled by hunger to do so anyway.21 (Editor – Part III of this excellent narrative will be continued in the next Journal.) 18 Reid & Eaton, 50; “Indian Wars in Alabama,” Alabama Historical Quarterly 13 (1951): 130; Jackson to Willie Blount, November 4, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence, I: 341. 19 Shackford, 18. 20 Glenn Tucker, Platoons and Patriots, Vol. 2 (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1954), 454; Jackson to Mrs. Jackson, December 19, 1813, Bassett, Correspondence, I: 400-01; Reid & Eaton, 395-6. 21 Crockett, 89-90. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 13 THE MASSACHUSETTS EXPERIENCE Massachusetts, despite Governor Caleb Strong's opposition to the war, had a powerful influence on its outcome. Six US infantry regiments were raised there and a full component of privateer crews constantly plied the coast. William Hull brought the USS Constitution to Boston in 1812. The District of Maine was invaded by British forces in July 1814. This is a portrait of Captain Isaac Hull of the USS Constitution. Hull and his ship, just one of many he commanded, remain part of the Massachusetts story. Visit the Constitution in Charlestown. Whether fact or fiction, whatever happen when British raiding party came ashore at Scituate, Massachusetts, the Bates sisters, daughters of the lighthouse keeper, and their drum remains part of the lore of the War of 1812 in Massachusetts. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 14 WAR LEADER PROFILE Isaac Hull, 1773-1843 U.S. Navy Officer This Connecticut Yankee was about 10 to 12 years old when he first went to sea and by age 20 was already a ship's master. The U.S. Navy was looking for experienced men. In 1798 he accepted a commission as a Lieutenant and in March of that year an assignment on the USS Constitution. His skilled were honed and sharpened during the Quasi-War with France and in the Barbary conflict under Edward Preble. In addition to the Constitution, he served on several other pre-war vessels including First Lieutenant on the frigate John Adams, master of the schooner Enterprise and of the brig Argus. He was a Master Commandant by May 1804 and Captain by April 1806. In the years immediately preceding the War of 1812 he commanded both the Chesapeake and the President. The declaration of war found him in command of the Constitution and under orders to join Commodore John Rodgers at New York. Hull sailed on July 5, 1812, from the Chesapeake Bay where his ship had just completed an overhaul. Off New Jersey he encountered his first wartime challenge. On July 16 five sail appeared and Hull, unable to verify their nationality but suspecting they were British, immediately cleared for action. Becalmed, the Constitution tried to escape from the squadron which coincidently included the HMS Guerrière. Hull employed well-known but difficult tactic to keep his ship out of cannon range of the squadron. By towing and kedging, Hull kept his ship ahead of the British throughout the first day. A squall next next day aided him to put even more distance between the ships and by the third day the nearest British vessel was 12 miles away. This was a vastly superior British force and if required to engage the Constitution would surely have been brought down. Seamanship, teamwork and endurance were the keys to success off New Jersey. Knowing the British were between him and Rodgers in New York, Hull diverted to Boston in search of both orders and supplies. Boston was but a temporary refuge because Hull knew that he could be blockaded there as easily as other American ports. In early August he headed for Canadian waters and off the Gulf of St. Lawrence took several British ships who had not heard of the declaration of war. As the season wore on Hull turned his attention to the Bermuda area where he could intercept British ships returning from the West Indies. About 600 miles due east of Boston, Hull encountered on August 19, 1812, the British frigate, HMS Guerrière (Captain James R. Dacres, 38 guns). Depending upon which biographer you read Hull's victory was a brilliant hard fought 35-minute fight, a tribute to American seamanship, or a clumsy 4-hours slug fest during which the lucky Hull and his lucky ship, the Constitution, emerged the victor. There is some evidence that Hull rewrote his report to demonstrate the brilliance of the victory. But victory it was, nonetheless, and Hull was the hero of the moment, possibly the war, and surely of the generations that followed the continuing exploits of the gallant ship. There were victory galas all along the east coast. Congress awarded Hull a gold medal. Following the victory, Hull was further “awarded” the command of the Portsmouth Navy Yard in New Hampshire. Few readers know of the period practice of paying the Yard Captain a percentage of all contracts executed at the yard. Hull did very well. He married Ann McCurdy Hart in 1813. In the immediate postwar years he was a member of the Board of Naval Commissioners. He sailed to the Pacific in the 1820s and to the Mediterranean in the 1830's both times as a Squadron Commander. In poor health, overweight, and nearly blind he returned to the United States in 1841. He passed in 1843. Sources: Fowler, William M., Jr. Jack Tars and Commodores. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1984. Maloney, Linda M. The Captain from Connecticut: The Life and Naval Times of Isaac Hull. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1986. Martin, Tyrone G. A Most Fortunate Ship. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1980, Reprinted Norwalk: Easton Press, 1990. Richmond, Helen. Isaac Hull: A Forgotten American Hero. Boston: USS Constitution Museum, 1983. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 15 VISIT 1812 “Old Ironsides” and the USS Constitution Museum The USS Constitution is a national treasure. Nothing one can say in a short article can do it justice. Launched in 1797, it is manned by active duty US Navy personnel. It is still an active commissioned ship on the Navy List. “Old Ironsides” is berthed in the historic Charlestown Navy Yard, in Boston, Massachusetts. Also at the Yard is the USS Constitution Museum. The mission of the Museum is to collect, preserve and display objects related to the sailing frigate USS Constitution; to teach about her origins, her role in the early republic, and her continuing story; and to explore the spirit and ideals of the emerging nation. The ship is open for touring and the Museum complements the tour. Here one can get a fuller story and the fascinating details of the Frigate's past. At the Museum the visitor will find hands-on exhibits allowing one to raise a sail, climb to the fighting top, or turn the great wheel. There are innovative computer games placing you in command of the great ship, a priceless collection of arts, maritime treasures and historic naval documents, and, periodically, costumed actors sharing the seafaring life. Look for the Museum across the dock in Building 22. Formerly a pump-house for the adjoining dry dock, a wood-working shop, a pattern-making shop and a sail loft at the Navy Yard, the building has housed the Museum since 1976. The Museum has an excellent gift shop offering a wide selection of scrimshaw and porcelain, ship models and memorabilia, books, and the inevitable T-shirts and post cards. The Charlestown Navy Yard is managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service as a unit within the Boston National Historic Park (Boston NHP, 15 State Street, Boston, MA 02109). The Yard also offers tours of the World War II destroyer, USS Cassin Young, the 1830's ropewalk, the foundry, a marine railway, the traditional shipways, and other yard sites. The Museum is wheelchair accessible. Hours differ based on the season. It opens at 9:00 am, but closes at 6:00 pm during the Summer, 5:00 pm in Spring and Fall, and 4:00 pm in Winter. It is closed on Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. Admissions are charged. As always, it is best to call in advance: 617.426.1812. Parking is available at the site. When driving North or South on Interstate 93 in Boston, there are signs leading to Charlestown Navy Yard and the USS Constitution. Coming from the West on Route 90 (Massachusetts Turnpike), go North on Interstate 93 to pick up the signs to Charlestown Navy Yard. There is also ample public transportation. MBTA Water Shuttle runs daily in good weather; call 617.227.4320 for details. The museum is a 10-minute walk from the MBTA Subway's North Station on the Green or Orange Line. From Causeway Street turn left over the Charlestown Bridge and follow the Freedom Trail to the Museum. The Yard is also served by Bus Route 93 within the MBTA. Calling for the latest MBTA schedules is advisable (617.722.3200). Visitor Advisory: The Yard is preserved as an industrial area. There are on the site many uneven surfaces, railroad tracks, moving cranes and other industrial activities. Visitors, especially children and the elderly, should avoid the edges of piers and dry docks. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 16 The Patriot War Part Two: Army, Navy, Marines, ... and Dismissal By Colin Murphy (Editor: In Part One, Mr. Murphy provided the international strategic setting of this conflict and explained the American national interests and concerns. Part Two introduces the principal characters on the ground and follows their activities and interactions with both US national and Spanish authorities. There is a “war” in here, too.) The tumult of veiled and open expansionist rhetoric focused on East Florida caught the ear of a likeminded, 72 year old Georgian. George Mathews, a Revolutionary War veteran, and by 1810, former general of the Georgia militia, former governor of Georgia and former Congressman who had hopes of extending his public career and cementing his legacy as a national idol. Mathews, too, saw how seemingly easy it was for the “Revolutionists” in West Florida to take control and how quickly the United States accepted the territory as a protectorate. He began to develop a similar scenario for East Florida and sought out those he thought would also be interested. For most of 1810 Mathews traveled along the border of the Floridas and Georgia, on both the Spanish and American sides, to see what type of feeling he got from the inhabitants.1 The United States was already at work on a scheme that was similar to the West Florida action and to what George Mathews was surmising. Which was to simply find a way to have the territory handed over to the American government. The American agent to the Choctaw Nation, Colonel John McKee had been in contact with Vincent Folch, the nearly treasonous Spanish governor of Pensacola. McKee visited Washington to apprise the President of his dealings with Folch. McKee told Madison that Folch had made numerous overtures to the United States for such a handover, even writing his superior in Havana informing him that it would be best if Spain just ceded the Floridas to America.2 Mathews had similar information but he optimistically included in his statement a near guarantee that he could rest East Florida from Spain and through his many political connections arranged a meeting with Madison. Madison was more than happy to meet the old soldier and in January 1811 the two met in the executive mansion in Washington. Madison and his cabinet were thrilled. They made Mathews the United States’ commissioner to the Floridas and enthusiastically presented Mathews’ plan to Congress, which, in a secret session, passed a resolution in support of the President’s view and on January 15, 1811, Madison signed it. The resolution stated that, “considering the influence which the destiny of the territory adjoining the southern border of the United States may have upon their security, tranquility, and commerce, . . . the United States . . . cannot, without serious inquietude, see any part of the said territory pass into the hands of a foreign Power.” To assure this the president was authorized to take “all or any part” of East Florida through agreement with the local authorities, or, if it was believed that a seizure by a “foreign Power” of the territory was immanent, the president could use the armed forces to occupy the territory in a preemptive strike. However, if preemptive military occupation were the case, the occupied real estate would still be “subject to negotiations.”3 If the territory was peaceably handed over with a stipulation that, once the perceived crises had passed there could be a “re-delivery of the country at a future period . . . to the lawful sovereign.”4 1 2 3 4 James G. Cusick, The Other War of 1812: The Patriot War and the American Invasion of Spanish East Florida (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2003), 27. Ibid., 27-28. Julius W. Pratt, Expansionists of 1812 (Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1957), 74 James Monroe, “The Secretary of State to General George Mathews and Colonel John McKee.” 26 January Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 17 On January 26, 1811 Secretary of State James Monroe officially informed General Mathews and Colonel McKee that they had been appointed “commissioners for carrying into effect certain provisions of an act of Congress relative to the portion of the Floridas situated to the east of the river Perdido.” Their mission was to begin immediately but it was to be accomplished “with that discretion which the delicacy and importance of the undertaking requires.”5 The mission was to be done as quietly as possible and in a way that would not implicate the president or the government of the United States and also with the hope that all could be accomplished without, or at least before, it being recognized by Great Britain. Monroe’s letter also sets forth instructions to the commissioners concerning certain particulars towards Spanish authorities, people and property in order to try to maintain an air of benevolence in order to be able to grasp once the deed was done. Spanish officials were to be allowed to remain in their particular office, reasonable government debts to the people would be assumed by the United States and all lawful land titles would be honored. Spanish soldiers could enter into the United States Army if they wished, but if not, their transportation to another Spanish territory would be provided for while all military stores that fell into the possession of the United States were to remain the property of Spain. Monroe also made it an important point for the commissioners to make it known to the residents, especially the Spanish Catholic population, “the universal toleration which the laws of the United States assure every religious persuasion” to “[quiet] the minds of uninformed individuals, who may entertain fears on that head.”6 Mathews and McKee headed south and planted their operations in the town of St. Mary’s, Georgia which was “a lusty frontier town where smugglers and raiders, pimps and prostitutes, robbers and adventurers, soldiers and seamen, though disliked, associated with and were catered to by more respectable elements of the town.”7 It was also a station for American gunboats and near by, on a muddy spit of land, was the modest U.S. Army post at Point Petre (Peter today) that had about one hundred and fifty men of a tattered infantry regiment. The government made further preparations. The Navy Department ordered Captain Hugh Campbell to send five additional gunboats to the St. Mary’s station from Charleston and in May of 1811 a company of sixty United States Marines arrived from Washington and encamped on the southern tip of Cumberland Island which is at the mouth of the St. Mary’s River just about a half of a mile from Amelia Island. All this activity did not go unnoticed and “the Spaniards were doubtless alarmed at the first appearance of the troops” wrote Marine Corps Commandant Lt. Colonel Franklin Wharton, “but I supposed are now reconciled.” 8 The wonder is to what did he think they felt reconciled to. Perhaps, because the government troops had not attacked Spanish territory yet the Spanish were reconciled to the idea that they were there for defensive, even peaceful purposes? Or were the Spaniards reconciled to a fate of eventual invasion and defeat by a neighbor that building up a force that would quickly overpower the forces they could call upon. Diplomatically Mathews and McKee kept up a constant stream of letters to Folch in an attempt to have him hand over the Floridas. Three times Mathews’ personal assistant, Colonel Ralph Isaacs met with Folch pushing insisting that the United States would accept to protect East and West Florida until the rightful sovereign requested their return. Folch insisted that he had tried to convince his superiors but they, being buoyed by news of success from Spain against the French, ordered Folch to hold them at all 5 6 7 8 1811, American State Papers, Foreign Affairs, 3:571. Ibid. Ibid. Rembrant W. Patrick, Florida Fiasco: Rampant Rebels on the Georgia-Florida border, 1810-1815 (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1954), 44. Lt. Colonel, Commandant Franklin Wharton, USMC, to Captain John Williams, USMC, June 26, 1811, National Archives and Record Administration, Record Group 127, Letters Sent By the Office of the Commandant of the Marine Corps, Washington, D.C. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 18 cost.9 Mathews’ and Madison’s hopes for a quiet and gentle hand over of Florida faded. This did not deter Mathews. He believed that the occupation of East Florida was essential to the interests of the United States and for the safety of the people of his state of Georgia. To accomplish this he would have to create a revolution from within East Florida similar to the successful one in West Florida. To accomplish this he would need to find a suitable person to assume authority and a body of men to take a significant risk as soldiers of this revolution, or as they became known as “Patriots.” Mathews openly proselytized on the northern and southern side of the border but he attracted few followers. Weak Spanish authority had allowed many to grow wealthy and few though the risks worth taking. What Mathews needed was “a well-placed resident of Spanish-Florida.” He found John Houston McIntosh, a well-known Georgian who had purchased land in Florida in 1803 and was, technically a Spanish subject. Together they devised a simple plan. They would incite a revolution, place McIntosh as the new, legitimate local authority and Mathews would just so happen to be nearby as an agent of the United States to accept transfer of the territory. 10 Just the way Madison and Congress had approved. Somewhat. Now that he had a leader he needed Patriots. Still, even with a legitimate, Spanish subject landowner Mathews was amazed how few of the Spanish citizens saw the need or had the desire to commit what some may think is treason. So Mathews looked north. In Georgia there were plenty of men with the need of their country and state in their hearts and it would only take a little prodding, or bribery, with promises of fifty acres of land or more, depending on current social status, and the possibility of employment within the new government to start to draw men to the cause. Besides the rising number of Patriots he could count on, Mathews could look to the U.S. armed forces to aide him in his efforts. After all Monroe assured him that, if in the execution of the instructions given him, based on the resolution of Congress, the forces would be “afforded [him] upon [his] application to the commanding officer of the troops of the United States on that station” and if he needed naval assistance he would “receive the same upon [his] application to the naval commander.”11 Commanding the troops at the station at Pt. Petre was Lt. Colonel Thomas Adam Smith. Smith had been ordered to Pt. Petre in January of 1811 for the express purposes of placing himself at the complete disposal of McKee and Mathews to guard territory handed over to the two men by local authorities. 12 Smith accepted the situation for what it was and considered himself ordered to cooperate with Mathews even if it was not exactly how the resolution and his orders had stated. Commanding the growing Naval and Marine force in the area was Captain Hugh Campbell. He had been previously in command of the Charleston station but was ordered to take command near St. Mary’s in November of 1811. Though, over the previous eleven months, Campbell had been ordered to transfer gunboats, ammunition and other stores to the area, he had received no explicit orders on how to act in conjunction with Mathews as the plot unfolded. Over the next five months Mathew, McKee and McIntosh worked to solidify their support but as the time of action drew near a complication arose. Lt. Col. Smith had to leave Pt. Petre and his subordinate; Major Jacint Laval was placed in command. Mathews and Laval knew each other well. The two shared a small dwelling in St. Mary’s which gave Laval had been witness, often unwillingly, to the inner workings of the developing conspiracy. Laval did not hold the plan in high regards and had a different view of what the orders of the government were. When Mathews approached Laval for the use of his 9 10 11 12 Patrick, 33. Charlton W. Tebeau, H History of Florida (Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press, 1971), 106. James Monroe, “The Secretary of State to General George Mathews and Colonel John McKee,” 26 January 1811, American State papers: Foreign Affairs, 3: 571. Cusick, 34. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 19 men, Laval denied the request. The Major saw nothing in his orders, or the letters from the government to Mathews that allowed Mathews to use American force to invade another country’s territory and he was right. They could be used to protect land handed over to the United States, not take it. A growing dislike and distrust began to grow between Mathews and Laval. Mathews stewed in his anger while Laval held his ground as long as he could. In early March, 1812 as Mathews and the Patriots were getting prepared to launch their campaign Mathews finally badgered Laval into submission in a public scolding on the streets of St. Mary’s. Laval consented to let Mathews have fifty of his men. However, Laval soon rescinded his pledge of support once he learned that the plan called for his men to act as volunteers in civilian clothes and not as U. S. Army soldiers. Mathews was furious. He sent a scathing letter to Secretary Monroe claiming misconduct, mismanagement and even a suggestion that Laval, because of his French birth, may have different designs for the Floridas, even though Laval was “man of ’76” like Mathews. Mathews felt that “had it not been for Laval, East Florida would already be independent of Spain.”13 Mathews hope for naval support was in better shape, but not at all to the extent he hoped. Captain Campbell was still unsure of his position in all this. He too had received instructions to protect American interests but wondered if those interests extended to the conquest of foreign soil. He informed Mathews that he would participate to the extent his orders allowed. What those orders were, he did not really know. On February 29 he wrote to Secretary of the Navy, Paul Hamilton seeking clarification. Campbell wrote that he would do what he believed was for the public good but he “should feel much more Gratified in Being Honored with Instruction.”14 By the second week of March, a “large collection of Georgians and Floridians, with all the woodchoppers and boatmen in the neighborhood of St. Mary’s, met . . . and organized a provisional government, and chose John Houston McIntosh Esq., Director” who appointed Colonel Lodowick Ashley in charge of the Patriot Army.15 Their plan was to cross the border, raise the standard of the Patriots, proclaim independence and gather support to move on St. Augustine. St Augustine had a significant population that could provide a sizable militia, close to three hundred Spanish soldiers and was protected by the famous Spanish fort Castillo de San Marcos which had stood against enemies since the founding of the city. Now, with the lack of support from the Laval’s regulars from Point Peter the Patriots had to determine a new course of action. One that would have a more modest goal. On March 12 the Patriot army, numbering somewhere near one hundred and forty men crossed the St. Mary’s River and occupied Rose’s Bluff which happened to be the plantation of William Ashley, brother of the Patriot military commander. From here the Patriots decided the best course of action, due to the lack of military support was to secure the town of Fernandina on Amelia Island. Amelia Island was protected by ten Spanish soldiers and some old canon that that had to be dug out of shifting sandbanks. The Spanish commander of Fernandina, Lt. Justo Lopez called a council of war and asked the residents what should be done. They decided to oppose any attempt to take the town. They immediately began to prepare their town by build breastworks and mounting the old cannon. Then they waited. On March 17 the Patriots boarded several boats and began to move on the river towards Fernandina. In the harbor, Captain Campbell had brought his five gunboats into line as a show of force that was done in a way he would describe as “a quite friendly manner.” He had decided that his participation was only to 13 14 15 Cusick, 91-92. Captain Hugh Campbell to Secretary of the Navy Hamilton, February 29, 1812, Christopher Dudley, ed., Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History, Volume I (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1986), I: 87. John Lee Williams, The Territory of Florida: or Sketches of the Topography, Civil and Natural History of the Country, the Climate, and the Indian Tribes, from the First Discovery to the Present Time (Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press, A Facsimile Reproduction of the 1837 Edition, 1962), 193. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 20 ensure any vessels in the harbor, which there were many, would not be used against the Patriots and that his men had “orders not to fire a shot Unless first fired upon” for the “Effect of preventing Blood.”16 Seeing the boats full of men and American Navy gunboats off their shore swiftly changed the minds of the citizens and commander of Fernandina. When Colonel Ashley landed Lopez accepted him and offered the town up for surrender. The terms of surrender were established in a manner to least offend as many concerned parties as possible as the Patriots hoped to gain support from the populace while somehow trying not to enrage the Spanish or their British ally. To placate the resident the articles of capitulation called for the respect of private property, a continuance of the lumber cutting economy of the region by those who had claims at the time and all valid land claims would be respected. Those who wished to stay could without repercussion and those who left had until May of 1813 to sell their property at market value even if the United States entered into a war with Spain. To keep the British happy the trade in and out of Fernandina would remain free of U.S. duties for thirteen months and all vessels were ensured safe passage. To look benevolent to the local Spanish authorities the Spanish soldiers would be allowed to march out of town with all military honors so long as they did not take part in any actions against the Patriots as long as the current conflict persisted.17 Also within the document of surrender were the stated intentions of the Patriots to cede the captured territory to the United States after twenty-four hours of occupation. It was just as Mathews dreamed, a successful revolution of Floridians willing to hand over the territory to the nearest agent of the United States. The following day Mathews would go to Fernandina and accepted the territory as American soil. More good news for Mathews arrived on the 17th in the form of the return of Lt. Col. Smith’s return from his furlough to Pt. Petre. He immediately resumed command of the U.S. troops there and, as stated in a letter to the Secretary of War, “in obedience to my instructions of the 26th of Jan’y. 1811, I have sent a detachment of fifty men to receive and defend in the name of the United States the town of St. Fernandina and the island of Amelia.”18 Also arriving at Fernandina was the sixty-man detachment of U.S. Marines under Captain John Williams. On the 18th the Patriot soldiers, the U.S. Army troops and the Marines formed in parade in Fernandina’s town square for the formal handing over of the town to Mathews. The Patriot flag, a white banner with a silhouetted charging soldier with a Latin phrase, that has been stated in many ways the most accepted on being vox populi, lex suprema, was lowered and the American flag was hoisted. The excited Mathews proclaimed to all gathered, “I go to St. Augustine, and from there our victorious men move on Mobile and Pensacola. But we won’t stop. On to Venezuela! We’ll rout the autocratic Spaniards and plant the flag of freedom over all of South America.”19 But about the same time Mathews was basking in his glory Secretary of State Monroe was at work rescinding Mathews’ instructions. News of Mathews’ scheme had reached Washington and the administration saw it as a breach of his powers. Also, war with England was certainly approaching and war with Spain, though weak, had to be avoided. Monroe’s letter would remove Mathews as the American agent to Florida and place Georgia’s Governor David Mitchell in charge of Florida affairs. Between the 18th of March and the 4th of April the Patriots remained in Fernandina with the hopes of more men joining them. Some did come but not as many as the Patriots had hoped but by the 4 th they had to continue their revolution, with or without mass support. The Patriot army moved south with 16 17 18 19 Campbell to Hamilton, March 21, 1812, Dudley, I: 88. Williams, 194-195. Pratt, 100-101. Patrick, 106-107. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 21 Mathews at their heels for the instances for when they came across event the slightest resemblance of a settlement they could formally cede the “conquered” territory to the United States. Right behind Mathews were the various detachments of Soldiers to protect the new territory. The Marines remained in Fernandina and Captain Williams became the military governor of the town. By the 12th they had reached the free African American settlement of Fort Mose (Moo-Say), also known as Mossa Old Fort, which was only two miles from the walls of St. Augustine. The Patriots were close in proximity but far away in hopes of taking the city and its looming stone fortress. A stalemate ensued in the proximity of St. Augustine. The Patriots could not take the town and the Spanish garrison inside was to weak to sortie out and engage the Patriots. On the morning of the13 th the Spanish made their first open act of resistance to the invasion. A Spanish gunboat anchored within range of Ft. Mose and opened fire. Inside the fort were Patriots and Lt. Col. Smith with his soldiers. He had the American flag hoisted and the firing stopped. The Spanish were willing to fire upon the Patriots but in an attempt to avoid all out war they would not fire on American forces. Here the invaders waited, unsure of their next move. Lt. Col. Smith wrote to the U.S Adjutant and Inspector, on April 26, requesting four pieces of large artillery in order to have any hope for the taking of St. Augustine and even then it may be questionable as he had only one hundred and nine men and the Patriots only had ninety three.20 Hoping to find some way of breaking the stalemate the Spanish Governor Juan Jose de Estrada sent emissaries to the Seminoles asking their chief, Chief Payne and his brother Bowlegs for assistance. Cautious about entering into a white mans war the brothers bided their time. They knew of the American lust for land and the implications that may have but they also made their living selling livestock and other agricultural goods to the Americans. Eventually they approached the Patriots to see what their revolution may have to offer to the Seminole people and offered their assistance. Shockingly, they were rudely and condescendingly told by Mathews to, essentially, go home and mind their business! This offended the proud leaders and Seminole people and, to the undoubted happiness of their escaped slave members and friends, decided they would work against the Patriots. In late April, while Mathews was absent from Fort Mose, a shocking letter arrived. Mathews would be dismissed and replaced by Governor Mitchell and the U.S. government repudiated all the Patriots activities. McIntosh was puzzled. He wondered how the government could abandon the Patriots after being such an integral part of their formation but resolved to maintain the revolution. Lt. Col. Smith was also dismayed as he and his puny force was now 100 miles inside of foreign territory without hopes of reinforcements. Captain Campbell was elated when he heard the news. He declared himself to be “the happiest of mortals.”21 The Spanish were elated and the anti-administration press had a field day with the news of the invasion, cession and now abandonment of the government’s aggressive policy. By July 1, an official investigation began in Congress concerning the Administrations role in Florida However, the replacing of Mathews, who upon learning of his dismissal head north to Washington to plead his case, with Governor Mitchell was a lateral step by Monroe. He replaced one committed expansionist with another. Officially Mitchell was to hold what was already in American hands and to only move further against the Spanish if the British attempted to occupy Florida. This would conveniently make it all now seem like a defensive action of the State of Georgia and not the United States. On May 4 Mitchell wrote to Lt. Col. Smith informing him that he was now under his command and he should remain where he was until further orders or in the case he had to retire due to attack. With Mitchell also came a sizable number of militia from Georgia that added to McIntosh’s growing number 20 21 Lt. Colonel Smith to U.S. Adjutant and Inspector, April 26, 1812, T. Frederick Davis, “United States Troops in Spanish East Florida, 1812-1813,” Fort Mose. com, fortmose.com/pw_part1,html (accessed March 3, 2007). Cusick, 106. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 22 of Patriots. McIntosh’s army was growing larger due to the outlandish promise of land tracts up to 3,000 acres and a tacit acceptance of plundering of private property. This would lose any moral high ground claimed upon the principle of freedom and liberation of Florida and lead most of the Patriot Forces to disintegrate into bands of pillagers attacking without discrimination. (Editor – The conclusion of Mr. Murphy's Narrative will appear in the next issue of the Journal.) PLAN NOW TO ATTEND Twelfth National War of 1812 Symposium Star-Spangled Banner Flag House, Baltimore, MD Saturday, October 11, 2008 Talks on the War of 1812 careers of presidents William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor; the Battle of North Point, a secret U.S. Navy mission to Nova Scotia to recover slaves taken by the British, the privateer General Armstrong, role of ethnic groups in the Battle of Baltimore and a panel on the upcoming Bicentennial of the War of 1812 will be among the highlights of the Twelfth National War of 1812 Symposium to be held at the Star-Spangled Banner Museum at the Flag House in Baltimore, Saturday, October 11, 2008 from 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM. The Star-Spangled Banner Flag House is located at Pratt and Albemarle Streets, next to Little Italy near Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. Attendees will be able to tour the 1793 home of flagmaker Mary Pickersgill, maker of the Star-Spangled Banner that flew over Fort McHenry, Baltimore, during the British bombardment, September 13–14, 1814. The day will include a catered lunch, with the traditional informative lunchtime roundtables led by the day’s speakers. Note: In writing for tickets, please let us know of any special dietary needs, if applicable. Price is $37.50 per person with checks made out to the War of 1812 Consortium, Inc., and sent to Charles P. Ives III, 802 Kingston Road, Baltimore, MD 21212. Note: In order to attend payment is due by October 4, 2008. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 23 THE DOCUMENTS William King's Dissent of Dissent and the Defense of Patriotism Editor's Note: Massachusetts opposed the War and wedded themselves to the Federalists. William King (1768-1852), a Republican from the District of Maine, always chose a different course. After a year of war the General Court was not happy with King's activities in support of the Madison Administration. In this document he is answering his critics and laying out the case for patriotism in the early republic. Bath, June 21, 1813 Sir, Your letter as chairman of the joint Committee of the Legislature of Massachusetts I received this day. In your enquiry whether I hold any Military Commission under the President of the U.S., I answer that I have not the honour of holding any such Commission; I am not insensible however at a crisis like the present, to hold a Commission under an office so determined to protect the right and uphold the character of our Country, must be flattering to any American. You also desire to be informed if I have accepted any agency or concern under the U. States in relation to the distribution of arms or enlisting or organizing any Soldiers for the service of the U. States, or for Commissioning officers for the Service? To which I reply that I have not had any agency or concern in relation to the distribution of Arms. - With respect to the arms that have been distributed in this District, - The Volunteers that tendered their services to the President, for the defense of the Country, and have been accepted and organized, have been furnished with arms on application to the proper officers of the Gen'l Government. As it respects organizing soldiers for service of the U. States, I have much pleasure in stating that soon after the commencement of the present war, when the services of the detached militia of this State was withheld from the General Government, I aided the war department in organizing such a Volunteer military force, as was considered necessary for the defense of this District, the commissions to the officers was passed through my hands for that purpose; this I did without any promise of Compensation on their part, or any expectation or desire on mine to accept of any. As the Legislature will no doubt be advised of the result of your enquiry, and as I presume you will be much gratified in availing yourself of the present opportunity of doing Justice to the Patriotism of the people in this District, it is with real satisfaction that I state to you for their information that was considered necessary for the defense of this District, the services of such a number of other Companies were tendered to the President, and not accepted as would have completed three Regts more had they been wanted. Believing that a War in defence of the personal liberty of our Seamen, a class of our fellow citizens that have so recently, and so repeatedly proved to their Country that they so well deserve it – to be just and necessary, I have in conclusion Gentlemen only to request you to be assured, that as a Citizen of the U. States I have duties to perform, as well as those of a Citizen of this state, and while I shall endeavour not to neglect the latter, the former will most unquestionably be attended to. I am Gentlemen Respectfully Your Ob. Servant - Wm. King [To:] Hon. Saml. Putnam, Chairman of a Joint Legislature Committee of the Sources Smith, Marion Jaques. General William King: Merchant, Shipbuilder, and Maine's First Governor. Camden, ME: Down East Books, 1980. This letter is from the collection of King Papers owned by Jane Stevens of Bath, Maine, who gave Smith permission to reproduce it in 1980. p. 173. Henry, Merton G. “William King.” M.A. Thesis, Bowdoin College, 1950. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 24 Don't Miss a Single Issue of The Journal of the War of 1812 Mail this form to: The War of 1812 Consortium, Inc. c/o Star Spangled Banner Flag House 844 E. Pratt Street Baltimore, MD 21202 SUBSCRIBE TODAY Individual Subscription: Name: Address: City/State: Institutional Subscription: Name: Address: City/State: Gift Subscriptions To: Name: Address: City/State: Gift Subscription From: Name: Address: City/State: SUBSCRIPTION RATES One Year, Four (4) Issues $12.50 U.S. Addresses $14.50 Canadian Addresses $16.50 Foreign Addresses $17.50 Institutional ________ ________ ________ ________ Two (2) Years, Eight (8) Issues $25.00 U.S. Addresses ________ $29.00 Canadian Addresses ________ $33.00 Foreign Addresses ________ THESE PRICES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AFTER DECEMBER 1, 2008!! Note: Make checks payable to The War of 1812 Consortium, Inc., c/o Star Spangled Banner Flag House, 844 E. Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202 . All payments must be in U.S. Dollars drawn on a U.S. Bank Note: Two-year subscriptions are available only for individual subscribers. Institutional subscriptions are $17.50 per year for one year only. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 25 WAR OF 1812 CHRONOLOGY August through October Our second installment. This is the prime fighting season and could easily include more. We exclude the pre-war events this time - Editor. Events in 1812: Aug 05: Skirmish at Brownstown Aug 08: Brock departs for Detroit area Aug 08: Skirmish at Maguaga (below Detroit) Aug 13: USS Essex captures Br sloop Alert Aug 15: Fort Dearborn (Chicago) Massacre Aug 16: Hull surrenders to Brock at Detroit Aug 19: Am Frigate Constitution defeats the Br Frigate Guerriere Sep 03: Pigeon Roost (Indiana) Massacre Sep 06: Tecumseh attacks at Fort Wayne Sep 08: US abandons Fort Madison (Iowa) Sep 10: Am capture British Brigs Detroit and Caledonia Sep 13: Russia offers mediation between US and GB Sep 21: Forsyth's raid on Gananoque, UC Oct 04: Action near Ogdensburg, New York Oct 07: Winchester arrives near Fort Defiance Oct 13: Battle of Queenston Heights, UC Oct 18: USS Wasp defeats the Br Sloop Frolic, is then captured by Br Frigate Poictiers Oct 25: USS United States defeats Br Frigate Macedonian Events in 1813: Aug 02: Proctor's assaults Fort Stephenson, Ohio Aug 07: Schooners Hamilton and Scourge founder on Lake Ontario Aug 10: Naval engagement between Chauncey and Yeo, USS Julia and USS Pert captured Aug 14: Br Brig Pelican defeats Am Brig Argus Aug 30: Fort Mims, Mississippi Territory, Massacre Sep 05: Am Schooner Enterprise defeats Br Brig Boxer Sep 10: Battle of Lake Erie Sep 27: Harrison lands in Canada Sep 28: “Burlington Races” Sep 30: Americans reoccupy Detroit Oct 01: Skirmish near Chateaugay, LC Oct 04: Skirmish near Chatham, UC Oct 05: Battle of Thamesville, UC (Br defeat) Oct 26: US defeat at Battle of Chateauguay, LC Events in 1814: Aug 02: Br. siege at US-held Fort Erie begins Aug 03: Action at Conjocta Creek (Near Black Rock, New York) Aug 04: US repulsed at Mackinaw Island Aug 08: US and GB peace commissioners meet at Ghent, Belgium Aug 09: Treaty at Fort Jackson ends Creek War Aug 10: Br. raid on Stonington, Connecticut Aug 14: Br schooner Nancy destroyed Aug 15: Drummond's failed night assault on Fort Erie Aug 19: British land st Benedict, Maryland Aug 24: Am defeated at Battle of Bladensburg; British enter Washington, D.C. Aug 27: Fort Washington, Maryland, blown up by retreating US garrison Aug 28: British capture Alexandria, Virginia Sep 01: Am sloop Wasp defeats Br sloop Avon Sep 01: British occupy Castine, Maine Sep 03: Br. capture USS Tigress and Scorpion Sep 04: Armstrong resigns as Secretary of War; Monroe appointed as acting Secretary of War Sep 04: Commencement of Plattsburg Campaign Sep 05: Skirmish at Rock Island Rapids, Illinois Sep 06: Skirmish at Beekmantown, New York Sep 11: Battle on Lake Champlain, NY Sep 12: Battle of North Point, Maryland Sep 13: Bombardment of Fort McHenry, MD Sep 14: First assault on Fort Bowyer, Alabama, repulsed Oct 19: Battle of Cook's Mill (Lyon's Creek) Oct 26: MacArthur's Raid through the Thames Valley begins, continues until Nov 17 Events in 1815: Oct 28: USS Peacock arrives in NY from Pacific cruise Post War Events: 1818: Oct 20: US and GB enter Convention on occupation and use of Oregon area. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 26 PUBLISHER'S PROFILE The University Press of Kansas on warfare from the mid-eighteenth century to the present.” The following is published in the Journal courtesy of the University Press of Kansas: The Press currently has three War of 1812related books in print: “The University Press of Kansas publishes scholarly books that advance knowledge and regional books that contribute to the understanding of Kansas, the Great Plains, and the Midwest. Founded in 1946, reorganized in 1967, and again in 1976, it represents the six state universities: Emporia State University, Fort Hays State University, Kansas State University, Pittsburg State University, the University of Kansas, and Wichita State University. Niagara 1814: America Invades Canada. Richard V. Barbuto. “Barbuto meticulously details tactical operations, bloody battles at Chippewa and Lundy's Lane, and siege operations at Fort Erie, placing the campaigns in the wider context of the war, and not hesitating to criticize the commanders on both sides.” -Publishers Weekly. 432 pages, illustrated $39.95 cloth. “Established as a consortium by the Board of Regents, the Press is governed by a Board of Trustees, who are the chief academic officers of the six universities and who appoint faculty members from each institution to serve on the advisory Editorial Committee. The Press is located on the west campus of the University of Kansas. “Profiled by The Chronicle of Higher Education as 'a distinctive model of success in turbulent times,' the Press focuses generally on history, political science, and philosophy. More specifically, it concentrates on presidential studies, military studies, American history (especially political, cultural, intellectual, and western), US government and public policy, legal studies, and social and political philosophy. “The current Modern War Studies series provides a forum for the best of the new military history. The scope of this series is global, comparative, and comprehensive. It embraces topics as diverse as operations, biography, strategy and politics; civil-military relations; institutional, organizational, and social history; and the impact of technology Winfield Scott: The Quest for Military Glory. Timothy D. Johnson. “Well-written and meticulously researched. This is a masterful biography that will appeal to laymen and scholars alike.” -- Journal of Military History. “The definitive study. Johnson's distinguished work gives a long-deserved but neglected credit to 'Old Fuss and Feathers.'” -- Kirkus Reviews. 328 pages, illustrated $35.00 cloth. America's First Battles, 1776-1965. Charles E. Heller and William A. Stofft. “An important contribution both to the literature of war and to the analysis and making of defense policy.” -- Washington Post Book World. “Must reading for the serious students of history whether military or civilian.” -- Military Review. Editor's Note: This work contains a fine analysis of the Battle of Queenston Heights, the “First Battle” of the War of 1812. 432 pages, $16.95 paper. Contact the University Press of Kansas at 2502 Westbrooke Circle, Lawrence, KS 66045-4444 (Tel: 785-864-4155 or at www.kansaspress.ku.edu). Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No.2, Page 27 War of 1812 Events Calendar EVENT SPONSORS: The Journal of the War of 1812 will list your event free of charge. For a listing contact the Editor at: the1812archive@gmail.com July 18-20: Historic Battle of Prairie du Chien, Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin. For more information: John Fenner, jwfenner@hotmail.com (920-499-1215) or Michael Douglas, mpdouglas@whs.wic.edu. July 25-27: Wasaga under Siege: A War of 1812 Experience. Nancy Island Historic Site, Wasaga Beach, Ontario. For more information visit: www.wasagaundersiege1812.com. July 25-27: Drums Along the Maumee, Fort Meigs, Perrysburg, Ohio. For more information contact Fort Meigs State Memorial, PO Box 3, 29100 W. River Road, Perrysburg, Ohio 43522, www.fortmeigs.org. 800-283-8916. July 26-27: The Battle of Fort William, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada. Includes a War of 1812 event. For information contact Krista Power, Events Coordinator, Fort William Historical Park, 1350 King Road, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7K 1L7, krista.power@ontario.ca. 807-473-2357. August 9: 13th Annual Battle of Bladensburg Encampment, Riversdale House Museum, Riverdale Park, MD. Contact Ann Wass, riverdale@pgparks.com. August 9-10: Siege of Fort Erie. Re-enactment of one of the War's bloodiest battles. Old Fort Erie, Ontario Canada. Contact www.oldforterie.com. 905-871-0540. September 6: A Day of Remembrance: 100th Anniversary of the Fort Meigs Monument, Fort Meigs, Perrysburg, Ohio. See contact information above. September 12-14: Defender's Day and Star Spangled Banner Weekend, Fort McHenry, Maryland. For more information contact Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine, 2400 East Fort Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21230; 410-962-4290. September 20-21: War of 1812 North American Grand Tactical, Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum, St. Leonard, Maryland. Contact: Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum, 10515 Mackall Road, St. Leonard, Maryland 20685. www.jefpat.org. 410-586-8557. October 10-12: Mississinewa 1812, Mississinewa Battlefield, Marion, IN. Contact: Mississinewa 1812, PO Box 1812, Marion, OH 46952, 800-822-1812 or war1812@aol.com. October 11: Twelfth National War of 1812 Symposium, StarSpangled Banner Flag House, Baltimore, MD. Registration fee. Contact: Charles P. Ives, III, 802 Kingston Road, Baltimore, MD 21212, or see announcement in this issue of the Journal. October 17-18 & 24-25: Garrison Ghost Walk, Fort Meigs, Perrysburg, Ohio. See contact information above. November 1-2: Muster on the Wabash, Vincennes, Indiana. For more information contact David Weaver, PO Box 81, Vincennes, IN 47591. vincenneshs@dnr.in.gov. 812-882-7422. December 14: Holiday Open House, Fort Meigs, Perrysburg, Ohio. See contact information above. Journal of the War of 1812, Volume 11, No. 2, Page 28 HELP US. REPORT YOUR EVENT FOR A TIMELY LISTING. Journal of the War of 1812 An International Journal Dedicated to the last Anglo-American War, 1812-1815 The Star-Spangled Banner Flag House 844 E. Pratt Street Baltimore, MD 21202, USA Address Service Requested NON-PROFIT ORG U.S. POSTAGE P A I D PERMIT NO. 3272 BALTIMORE, MD