Читать книгу Some Account of the Public Life of the Late Lieutenant-General Sir George Prevost, Bart - E. B. Brenton - Страница 7

Table of Contents

The character and conduct of individuals in high and responsible situations, will naturally and necessarily be the subject of free and open discussion. The conduct of a soldier is more particularly exposed to this scrutiny. His success or his failure is a matter of such powerful interest to his country, that he generally receives even more than his full measure of approbation or of blame. Notwithstanding all the difficulties of forming a correct judgment on the merits of military operations, there is perhaps no subject upon which public opinion expresses itself so quickly and so decidedly. Disappointed in the sanguine hopes which they had entertained, and mortified by the consciousness of defeat, the public too frequently imagine cause for censure, and without a competent knowledge of the facts necessary to enable them to form a sound and satisfactory judgment, unhesitatingly condemn those who have perhaps passed in their service a long life of anxiety and labour. But while, in the moment of irritation, they are thus disposed to impugn the conduct of their military servants, they are no less ready, on more deliberate inquiry, and a fuller understanding of the facts, to grant them a candid and generous acquittal. These observations are peculiarly applicable to the case of the late Lieutenant-General Sir George Prevost, who, after having devoted to his country thirty-five of the best years of his life; after having distinguished himself in many gallant actions; and after having preserved to the crown of Great Britain some of its most valuable foreign possessions, was called upon, at the close of his honourable career, to answer charges which vitally affected his reputation, and which he was prevented by death from fully and clearly refuting.

Painful as it was to the friends of Sir George Prevost to allow a single stain to rest upon the memory of so brave and distinguished a soldier, more especially when they possessed the means of removing every doubt as to his conduct, they yet considered an appeal to the candour and justice of his country as unnecessary. The violent prejudices which at one period existed against the late Commander of the Forces in the Canadas were gradually wearing away; his memory had been honored by a just tribute of his Sovereign's regret and approbation; and the scenes in which he had been so conspicuous an actor, had ceased to be a matter of general interest. Under these circumstances, the relatives of Sir George Prevost would confidently have entrusted his reputation to the unprejudiced judgment of posterity, had they not seen, with equal regret and indignation, a late attempt to revive the almost exploded calumnies and misrepresentations of which he had been the victim. That the Quarterly Review[1] should have lent its pages to an attack like this, will, upon the perusal of the present volume, excite the surprise of every candid person; and it is chiefly for the purpose of correcting the mis-statements into which the Reviewer has been led, that the following pages are presented to the public.

Before entering more particularly upon the subject of Sir George Prevost's conduct, so wantonly attacked in the article above alluded to, it may not be thought improper briefly to advert to his father's services and to his own early history. From his military career, previous to his appointment to the chief command in British North America, it will clearly appear that he was not without reason selected by his Majesty's Government for the discharge of that important trust.

Major-General Augustin Prevost, the father of the late Sir George Prevost, was by birth a citizen of Geneva: he entered the British service as a Cornet in the Earl of Albemarle's regiment of Horse Guards, and was present at the battle of Fontenoy, where he was wounded.

Having attained the rank of Major in the 60th regiment in 1759, he had the honor of serving under General Wolfe, and received a severe wound in the head, whilst gallantly forcing a landing, twenty miles above Quebec, under the immediate command of General Carleton, afterwards Lord Dorchester. Upon the reduction of Canada, Major Prevost was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel, and served with reputation at the capture of Martinique and the Havannah. In 1775, he was appointed to the command in East Florida, and, in 1778, he eminently distinguished himself by his defence of Savannah, against the attack of a very superior force of French and Americans, under the Comte d'Estaing and General Lincoln. The garrison consisted of only 2,300 men, while the force of the besiegers amounted to 8,000, supported by a fleet of twenty-two sail of the line. Such, however, was the determined energy of Major-General Prevost, and of the British soldiers and sailors under his command, that the enemy were compelled to abandon the enterprize, after thirty-three days' close siege.[2]

In 1780, Major-General Prevost, after having served twenty-two years in North America and the West Indies, returned to England, to enjoy the pleasing consciousness of having always discharged his duty with zeal and effect. His health was much impaired by a long residence in climates unfavorable to an European constitution, and, on the 6th May, 1786, he died, at Greenhill Grove, near Barnet, in the sixty-third year of his age.

In 1765, Major-General Prevost married, at Lausanne, a daughter of M. Grand, of that place;[3] and, on her husband's departure to America, Mrs. Prevost accompanied him thither. George, their eldest son, was born while General Prevost was stationed in the province of New Jersey, on the 19th May, 1767. Being designed by his father for the military profession, he was placed with that view at Lochée's academy, at Chelsea, and his education was finished at Colmar, on the continent. He obtained his first commission in the 60th regiment, and being removed upon promotion to the 28th foot, he joined that corps at Gibraltar in 1784. He obtained his majority in 1790, and early in 1791, he took the command of the 3d battalion of the 60th regiment at Antigua. In March, 1794, he was promoted to a Lieutenant-Colonelcy in the 60th, and, in 1795, he proceeded to Demerara, and from thence to St. Vincent's, at that time attacked by the French. He was there actively employed in suppressing the Carib insurrection, and in resisting the French invasion, and at the storming of the Vigie he commanded a column. In October, 1795, he was ordered to Dominica, to relieve Lieutenant-Colonel Madden in the command of the troops in that island; but in January, 1796, he resumed the command of the 3d battalion of the 60th regiment at St. Vincent's, where he was twice severely wounded in successfully resisting the enemy's progress towards the capital of the colony, after the defeat of Major-General Stewart at Colonary. In consequence of his wounds, Lieutenant-Colonel Prevost obtained leave to return to England. The sense which the inhabitants of St. Vincent's entertained of his services was warmly expressed in an address from the Council and House of Representatives in that island.[4]

On his arrival in England, Lieutenant-Colonel Provost was appointed Inspecting Field Officer. In January, 1798, he obtained the rank of Colonel, and proceeded in the same year to the West Indies as Brigadier-General. In 1798, he was removed from the command of the troops at Barbadoes to St. Lucie, as Commandant, where he was afterwards appointed Lieutenant-Governor, in compliance with a request from the inhabitants.[5]

Brigadier-General Prevost continued to perform the duties of Governor of St. Lucie until the peace of 1802, when that colony was restored to the French. The address which he received from the inhabitants of the island on his departure, fully evinces the popularity which he had acquired;[6] while the letters addressed to him, and to Colonel Brownrigg, Secretary to H.R.H. the Commander in Chief, by Sir Thomas Trigge, at that time Commander of the Forces in the West Indies, satisfactorily prove that he merited the confidence reposed in him by Government.[7]

In July, Brigadier-General Prevost arrived in England, when the government of Dominica was immediately offered to him by Lord Hobart. Having accepted the appointment, he embarked for that island in the following November, and landed there on the 25th of December, 1802.

In the following year, he volunteered his services on the expedition against St. Lucie and Tobago, and served as second in command under Lieutenant-General Grenfield, who in his general order, after the capture of Morne Fortunée, thus mentions his conduct upon that occasion:—

"To the cool and determined conduct of Brigadier-general Prevost and Brigadier-General Brereton, who led the two columns of attack, may be attributed the success of the action; but to Brigadier-General Prevost it must be acknowledged, that to his counsel and arrangements the Commander of the forces attributes the glory of the day."[8]

The important services of Brigadier-General Prevost upon this expedition, received numerous tributes of approbation from distinguished military characters;[9] and even the French Commander could not refrain from expressing the esteem and admiration with which he regarded his generous enemy.[10] Upon the successful termination of this affair, Brigadier-General Prevost returned to his Government at Dominica, where nothing worthy of notice occurred until the 22d February, 1805, when an unexpected attack was made by a French squadron from Rochefort. The result of that attack was highly creditable to the valour and military talents of the Governor, who after having, with the few troops under his command, disputed inch by inch the landing of the French force, amounting to 4,000 men, and covered by an overwhelming fire from the ships, succeeded in effecting a retreat to the fort of Prince Rupert. The French Commander in Chief, after vainly summoning him to surrender, reimbarked the whole of his troops, and sailed to Guadaloupe.[11]

The terms in which H. R. H. the Commander in Chief was pleased to express his sense of General Prevost's conduct upon this occasion, were highly gratifying to his feelings.[12] In consequence of his gallant and successful defence of the Colony, General Prevost received a communication from the Speaker of the House of Assembly,[13] conveying to him the thanks of that body, and informing him that a Thousand Guineas had been voted by them for the purchase of a sword and a service of plate, to be presented to him in testimony of their gratitude and approbation.[14] A similar testimonial to the conduct of General Prevost upon this occasion was given by the Patriotic Fund, who voted him a sword of the value of one hundred pounds, and a piece of plate, of the value of two hundred pounds, "for the distinguished gallantry and military talents which he had displayed."[15] From the West India Planters and Merchants General Prevost likewise received a piece of plate to the value of three hundred guineas.[16]

In July, 1805, General Prevost returned to England.[17] Soon after his arrival he was created a Baronet, and was subsequently appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Portsmouth.

In February, 1808, he was selected to command a brigade destined to reinforce Nova Scotia, where he succeeded Sir John Wentworth as Governor, and in December, 1808, he left Halifax, in order to assist in the reduction of Martinique. The expedition sailed from Barbadoes on the 28th of January, 1809, and on the 30th, the troops were landed on the island of Martinique. Sir George Prevost was second in command under General Sir George Beckwith, and to him the management of all the active operations was confided. The result of this expedition was, that the French troops were driven into Fort Bourbon, where they held out until the 24th of February, when the surrender of that fort completed the conquest of the island.[18]

Upon the conclusion of this short but brilliant campaign, Sir George Prevost passed a few days at Dominica, where he was received with many demonstrations of joy. Addresses were upon this occasion presented to him by the House of Assembly of Dominica, and by the merchants and inhabitants of St. Christophers.[19]

In the month of April the army returned to Halifax, and from this period until his appointment to the chief civil and military command in British North America, in 1811, upon the resignation of Sir James Craig, Sir George Prevost remained in Nova Scotia, esteemed and beloved by all ranks of the inhabitants. On his departure for his new government, he received the most gratifying addresses from the inhabitants of Halifax,[20] and from the clergy of Nova Scotia, &c. &c.[21]

Upon the arrival of Sir George Prevost at Quebec in 1811, he found much dissatisfaction and discontent existing in the Lower Province. The inhabitants were divided into two parties, termed the English and the Canadian, and the feelings of hostility with which they viewed each other, had unfortunately not been allayed by the policy which the late Governor in Chief, Sir James Craig, had thought it necessary to adopt during his administration. To such a degree had this party spirit been carried, and so doubtful had he been of the disposition of the Canadians, that it had been thought inexpedient to call out the militia, lest they should make an improper use of the arms to be intrusted to them. Under these circumstances, it was evidently the duty of Sir George Prevost to conciliate, by every means in his power, the confidence and affection of the Canadians, more particularly as in case of hostilities with America, it would have been impossible to preserve Lower Canada without the cordial support of its inhabitants. Sir George Prevost therefore did not hesitate to adopt a system which the true interest of the Province seemed so imperiously to require. He anxiously endeavoured to unite the two adverse parties, and to soothe the irritation which not only threatened the tranquillity of his government, but even the safety of the colony itself. In the distribution of the patronage which he enjoyed, he resolved to be guided solely by a consideration of the public good, and when offices became vacant, he bestowed them, with a due regard to the merits of the individuals, indifferently upon the English and the Canadians.

The beneficial effects of these measures became every day more apparent. The Governor in Chief speedily acquired the confidence of all ranks of people, who submitted with cheerfulness to the privations and sacrifices which they were soon afterwards called upon to endure. In numerous instances he received from the inhabitants, both collectively and individually, the strongest proofs of their zeal; and he had the satisfaction of seeing them united in their attachment to his government, at a time when the preservation of the colony depended upon such feelings.

Having thus given a brief sketch of the situation in which the Governor in Chief found the Province of Lower Canada upon his arrival, and of the views and objects which he entertained respecting it, we shall proceed to point out the conduct which he pursued, when, from the aspect of affairs, it became evident that hostilities with America could not be long delayed. No sooner had Sir George Prevost assumed the chief command of the Canadas, than he became sensible of the necessity of placing those provinces in the most efficient state of defence; and he therefore applied himself with the utmost vigour and vigilance to call forth all their resources. It is difficult to believe that the unwearied exertions of Sir George Prevost, with a view to this important object, should have been altogether unknown to the writer in the Quarterly Review. But supposing him to have been ignorant of them, yet without access to the private and confidential correspondence which took place between Sir George Prevost and his Majesty's Government, or to the communications which passed between him and the officers under his command, it was impossible that the Reviewer could form a correct opinion upon the subject. And yet he has not hesitated boldly to assert, that, "in the winters of 1811 and 1812, although the designs upon the Canadas were openly avowed in the American Congress, except the embodying of the militia of the Lower Province, Sir George Prevost made not the slightest preparation for defence."[22] The following statement will show the degree of credit to which this assertion of the Reviewer is entitled.

In the month of September, 1811, Sir George Prevost arrived in Canada, and in the same month, proceeding from Quebec to the district of Montreal, he inspected the different forts and military positions in that neighbourhood, and on the American frontier. Soon after his return to Quebec in the November following, he communicated confidentially with the Adjutant-General of the forces in England, upon the apprehended hostilities with America. In December he proposed to Lord Liverpool, then Secretary of State for the Colonies, the raising a corps of Fencibles, from the Glengarry settlement in Upper Canada; and in his correspondence with Admiral Sawyer, who commanded on the Halifax station, he requested that a ship of war might be sent, on the opening of the navigation, to the St. Lawrence. In the month of February, 1812, another communication was made to the Secretary of State's Office, in which Sir George Prevost expressed a hope, that the proceedings in Washington would justify him, in making preparations to repel the threatened attack. Those preparations had been commenced as early as November, 1811, by forwarding arms and ammunition to the Upper Province. During the winter of 1811 and 1812, and the spring of the latter year, frequent communications passed between the Commander of the forces and Major-General Brock, who commanded in Upper Canada, respecting the preparations which would be necessary in the event of a war. It was proposed to reinforce Amherstburgh, and Fort George; and supplies of provisions, cavalry-arms, accoutrements and money, were directed to be conveyed to Upper Canada. Accoutrements and clothing for the militia in the Canadas, were requested from the British Government. Another schooner was directed to be built, to increase our marine on Lake Erie. Captain Gray, Deputy Assistant-Quarter-Master-General, was despatched to the Upper Province, in order to assist in forwarding these defensive preparations; and Captain Dixon, of the Royal Engineers, was directed to proceed to Amherstburgh, to inspect the works of that fort, which the Commander of the forces had ordered to be put in a tenable state. The propriety of strengthening and fortifying York was submitted to Government; and the commanding engineer was directed to make the repairs, which his report on the different forts and posts in Upper Canada, had stated to be necessary. In addition to these measures, a reinforcement from the 41st regiment, and five companies of the Newfoundland Fencibles, left Quebec in the month of May for the Upper Province.

On the 31st March, Sir George Prevost addressed a private and confidential letter to Major-General Brock, in which his sentiments respecting the approaching war, and the policy to be adopted in meeting it, were clearly detailed. One passage in this letter merits a more particular notice, since it is highly important, not only as repelling the accusation of the Reviewer respecting the want of preparation for the war, but also as containing an answer to another charge, which will afterwards be noticed. The paragraph in the letter is as follows: "You are nevertheless to persevere in your preparations for defence, and in such arrangements as may, upon a change in the state of affairs, enable you to employ any disposeable part of your force offensively against the common enemy."

Independently of all these various communications with the officer commanding in Upper Canada, respecting the measures to be pursued in the event of war, and of the supplies of men, arms, money, stores, and provisions, which, with a view to that event, had been afforded to Upper Canada; much correspondence had previously taken place, and many difficulties had been removed with regard to the supply and transport of the Indian presents to the Upper Province, upon the due furnishing of which very materially depended the support which we might expect to receive from the Indians, in case of a rupture with America.

From this statement, drawn from the original correspondence, and from official documents, it is evident, that even in contemplation of hostilities, an event by no means certain, and which the British Government were so far from thinking probable, that they discouraged any measure of extraordinary expense to meet it, the Commander of the forces did, as far as rested with him, during the winter of 1811 and 1812, and for months prior to the declaration of war, make every preparation for defence, consistent with the means which he possessed. All the requisitions of Major-General Brock which the Commander of the forces had the power to grant, were promptly complied with; nor was the slightest intimation ever given by that invaluable officer, that any measure, either suggested by himself or which ought to have occurred to the Commander of the forces, for the preservation of the Upper Province, in the event of its being attacked, had been overlooked or neglected. The same vigilant foresight will be found to mark the conduct of Sir George Prevost in the Lower Province. One of the first measures of his government, in contemplation of war, was an application to the legislature of Lower Canada, in February, 1812, for an act to new model the militia laws, and which might enable him to call forth a proportion of the population into active service. Averse as the Canadians had hitherto been to grant any power of this description to former Governors, and repugnant as many of the clauses which it was intended to introduce into the bill, were to the habits and feelings of the people, such was the deserved popularity acquired by Sir George Prevost, from the conciliatory policy, which, as before stated, he had adopted towards the Canadians, immediately upon his arrival amongst them, that he obtained from the Legislature nearly all that he had required. Before the end of May, 1812, a sum exceeding 60,000l. was placed at his disposal for the militia service; and he was authorized to embody 2,000 Bachelors, between the age of eighteen and twenty-five years, for three months in the year; and in case of invasion, or imminent danger of it, to retain them for a year. In case of war, he was empowered to embody if necessary, the whole militia of the Province. Under that law, a force of 2,000 men, from the finest and most efficient class of the militia, was embodied on the 13th May, so to remain for three months, unless the then state of affairs should render it expedient to retain them longer. A corps of Canadian voltigeurs, under the command of Major De Salaberry, of the 60th regiment, consisting of between 300 and 400 men, had likewise, been raised and disciplined; and 400 recruits for the Glengarry Fencibles, had, before the 1st June, been assembled at Three Rivers, in Lower Canada. The advantages arising from thus embodying the militia prior to the war, were incalculable, and it may be confidently asserted, materially contributed to the preservation of the Canadas.

The American Government, deceived by the erroneous information which they had received respecting the disaffection of the Canadian population to Great Britain, had calculated upon meeting with considerable support from the people in their invasion of the Province. They had been told, and they believed, that the militia would not serve, or, if embodied, would be worse than useless. The embodying, arming, and training of 2,000 of the most active portion of the population, for several weeks before the war was declared, was a severe disappointment to the American Government; and was one of the causes of that determined resistance, which they afterwards experienced in every attempt to penetrate into that Province. This militia force also enabled the Commander of the forces to detach a larger portion of the regular troops, than he could otherwise have been justified in parting with, to the Upper Province; while, at the same time, it afforded him the means, on the breaking out of the war, of guarding the different passes and roads into Lower Canada, with a description of men perfectly well acquainted with the nature of the country, and with the mode of warfare necessary for its defence. The line of frontier in the Lower Province was thus most effectually guarded by Sir George Prevost's able disposition of this new force, together with the assistance of the regular troops; and every prudent precaution consistent with his means, and with the instructions he was constantly receiving from England, to avoid all unnecessary expense, was taken. The precautionary measures which were pursued upon this occasion, by the Commander of the forces, met with the full approbation of His Majesty's Government, expressed in a despatch from Lord Bathurst, of the 6th November, 1812, in which his Lordship informed Sir George Prevost, that "the preparations for defence which he had made upon the first intimation of eventual hostility with America, and which he had since so vigorously continued, had met with the Prince Regent's entire approbation."

After charging Sir George Prevost with negligence, in not preparing to meet the threatened hostilities, the Reviewer proceeds to hazard an opinion, that the occupation and fortifying of Coteau du Lac, and Isle aux Noix, which he terms the keys of Lower Canada, was a measure which Sir George Prevost ought to have adopted, in preference to all others; but which he entirely overlooked and neglected.[23] The fact is, that the occupation of Coteau du Lac, as is well known to every military man acquainted with the Canadas, could only be useful as against the enemy advancing from Lake Ontario, or the shores of the St. Lawrence, above Montreal. No such force could be expected to descend the river from the lake, so long as we had the command of it, as we undoubtedly had, not only at the commencement of the war, but for several months afterwards; and as little was it to be apprehended as collecting on the shores of the river. The information which the Commander of the forces was constantly receiving of the intended movements of the enemy, and of the real and immediate object of their attack, was too correct to leave him in any doubt as to their attempting the Lower Province in that direction, or to induce him to diminish the small means he possessed, for the defence of more important points, by the occupation of posts which at that period could afford him no additional security. Coteau du Lac, was not therefore occupied as a post, either before the war or for several months afterwards, but its real importance was neither overlooked nor disregarded, as the Reviewer has stated. It was examined and reported upon by different officers, sent to inspect the line of frontier extending from Lower Canada to Lake Ontario, immediately after the declaration of war, and particularly by Colonel Lethbridge, who was afterwards in command there. In possession of Kingston, and commanding the waters of the lake, and with the knowledge possessed by Sir George Prevost, of the force and designs of the enemy, no military man in the Canadas, would have thought it necessary, in the then state of affairs, that Coteau du Lac should be occupied. When subsequent events clearly shewed the intentions of the enemy to invade Lower Canada from Lake Ontario, and when the means of Sir George Prevost were better adapted for defending the whole line of that frontier, Coteau du Lac was occupied and fortified; and had it not been for the defeat which part of General Dearborn's army met with from Lieutenant-Colonel Morrison's division in descending the St. Lawrence, that post would have presented a formidable obstacle to the advance of the enemy.

The importance of Isle aux Noix, as a post, has been considerably lessened[24] since the defence of the Canadas by the French, in consequence of the facility with which Lower Canada may now be entered by the various routes which the intercourse between that Province and the United States has created. Isle aux Noix had long ceased to be either the only, or principal barrier between the two countries. The occupation of this post was not therefore deemed necessary as a precautionary measure before the war; nor was it until some time afterwards that Sir George Prevost was enabled to put it in a state of defence. As soon, however, as the reinforcements and supplies from England gave him the means of more effectually guarding all the avenues to the Lower Province, Isle aux Noix became the object of his consideration. In consequence of the condition in which it was then placed, and of the force stationed there, two armed schooners of the enemy fell into our possession, and laid the foundation of the marine which was afterwards formed for carrying forward the operations on Lake Champlain. There cannot be a stronger proof of the little importance which the enemy themselves attached to this post in the early part of the contest, than their never making the slightest attempt to obtain possession of it.

Having thus stated what Sir George Prevost did not do, by way of preparation for the defence of the Canadas before the war, the Reviewer proceeds to point out what was done by him after the commencement of hostilities. And here we find the same want of candour which distinguishes the remarks to which we have already adverted.[25]

In order to form a correct opinion of Sir George Prevost's conduct at this period, it will be necessary to advert to the system which he adopted on the commencement of the war, and to the motives which induced him to pursue it.

The declaration of war by the United States of America, it is well known, was finally carried in Congress, after long debate, and a most violent opposition, by a comparatively small majority. The northern and eastern states, whose interests, it was acknowledged, were most affected by the British orders in council, the ostensible and avowed cause of the war, were constantly and strenuously opposed to hostile measures. It was apparent to every person at all conversant with what was passing in the United States at this time, that a contest undertaken in opposition to the sentiments and wishes of so considerable a portion of the Union, and for an object which Great Britain might, without any sacrifice of national honor, so easily concede, as she was, in fact, about to do, at that very period, must necessarily be of short duration. This was the opinion entertained by the most sensible and well informed men in the northern and eastern states, as well as in the Canadas, and in that opinion Sir George Prevost concurred. It will likewise be seen, that the sentiments of His Majesty's Government on this head were in unison with those of the Commander of the forces. Under these circumstances, and with these impressions, it became the obvious policy of Sir George Prevost, upon the breaking out of the war, to avoid whatever might tend to widen the breach between the two countries, and to pursue a line of conduct, which, while it should effectually tend to defeat the object of the American Government in their attack upon the Canadas, should also serve still further to increase the dislike and opposition of the northern and eastern states, to those measures of aggression against the British Provinces, which they had constantly predicted would be attended with discomfiture and disgrace. In his adherence to this defensive system, Sir George Prevost was encouraged and supported, as it will speedily be shewn, not only by the approbation of the British Government, but likewise by the concurrence of those who were best qualified by their knowledge and situation to form a correct judgment on the propriety of the measures which he was pursuing. This policy was also the more necessary, in consequence of the inadequacy of the means possessed by the Commander of the forces to repel the threatened attack of the Americans at the commencement of the contest. The whole of the regular force at that time in the Canadas did not amount to 5,000 men; the law for embodying the militia had only been recently passed; and the population, which had been previously considered as not well affected, had neither been armed nor accustomed to discipline for many years. The military chest was exhausted, and there was little prospect, that for some months at least, considering the exertions which Great Britain was then called upon to make in Europe, any supplies either of men or money could be afforded for the defence of her Dominions in North America. These difficulties neither depressed nor discouraged the ardent and active spirit of Sir George Prevost. Although he fully coincided in opinion with that able and judicious officer Sir James Craig, that in the event of a war with America, Quebec should be the object of primary consideration; yet the defence of the whole line of frontier between the Canadas and the United States, occupied his early and serious consideration. That frontier comprehended a distance of more than 900 miles, every part of which he determined to dispute inch by inch, and to defend by every means in his power.

It was in pursuance of the defensive line of policy which had been so wisely determined upon, as well with reference to his own resources, and the character of the enemy with whom he had to contend, as to the views and instructions of the British Government, that the Commander of the forces immediately after the commencement of the war, gave general instructions to those in command under him, to abstain from any unnecessary and uncalled for act of hostility upon the American territory. Notwithstanding these general instructions, much was of course left to the discretion of those who received them, in availing themselves of any fair opportunity of retaliating upon the enemy the aggressive warfare they might attempt, by attacking, wherever it might be done with any reasonable prospect of success, the contiguous forts and possessions of the Americans.

The private letter of 31st March, 1812, to Major-General Brock, from which an extract has already been made, evidently shews, that Sir George Prevost never meant to restrain the officers in command under him from acting upon the offensive, whenever circumstances were such as would justify their departure from the defensive system. Of these circumstances they were the best judges. That this was the light in which Sir George Prevost's instructions were viewed by Major-General Brock, appears by the following extract from a letter addressed by him to the Commander of the forces, on the 3rd July, 1812, at which time he was fully aware of the defensive line of policy which had been adopted:

"The account received, first through a mercantile channel, and soon after repeated from various quarters, of war having been declared by the United States against Great Britain, would have justified, in my opinion, offensive operations. But the reflexion, that at Detroit and St. Joseph's, the weak state of the garrisons would prevent the Commanders from attempting any essential service connected in any degree with their future security, and that my only means of annoyance on this communication, was limited to the reduction of Fort Niagara, which could be battered at any future period, I relinquished my original intentions, and attended only to defensive measures."

That Captain Roberts, the commanding officer at Fort St. Joseph's, acted from a sense of this discretion thus entrusted to him, there cannot be a doubt, as in his official letter to the Adjutant-General, announcing the capture of Michilimachinac, he does not allude in the slightest degree to his having acted contrary to his orders. The approval of his conduct in general orders is likewise a convincing proof that Sir George Prevost considered that he had acted up to the spirit of his instructions whatever they might have been, and that he had used a sound discretion respecting them.

It however clearly appears by the above letter, that Captain Roberts acted altogether from the orders he received from Major-General Brock, who was fully aware, as it has been already shewn, of the sentiments of Sir George Prevost, and who did not hesitate to give Captain Roberts the discretionary order, which led to the attack and capture of the fort.

It will be seen from the preceding pages, that the approaching hostilities with America had been the subject of frequent communication between Sir George Prevost and Major-General Brock, for several months prior to the commencement of the war; and that, in more than one letter to which reference has been made, the precautions necessary to be taken, and the system and line of defence to be adopted in the event of war, had been clearly and distinctly pointed out. Possessed then, as Sir George Prevost knew General Brock to be, of his sentiments on this subject, and aware that he would receive from the North West company, from whom he had himself derived the information, the earliest intelligence of the actual declaration of war, an immediate further communication of his sentiments was unnecessary. On the day, however, on which the intelligence of that event reached Quebec, the 25th June, 1812, a letter was despatched to Major-General Brock from the Adjutant-General, communicating the information; and as soon as the important arrangements respecting the Lower Province, and particularly those for the defence of Quebec had been completed, Sir George Prevost proceeded to Montreal. Upon his receiving at that place a despatch from Mr. Foster, our late minister at Washington, with an official notification of the war, he immediately afterwards, (on 7th July,) and within a fortnight after the first intelligence of it had reached him at Quebec, sent off his first despatch to Major-General Brock. This was followed by another on the 10th of the same month by Colonel Lethbridge, who was sent to take the command at Kingston; and in both these letters every instruction and information which Sir George Prevost's situation afforded, or enabled him to give, were sent to the Major-General. That these despatches did not reach General Brock until the 29th of the month was owing to circumstances over which Sir George Prevost had no control. It must be observed, however, that General Brock received the despatches several days before he set off to join the army opposed to General Hull, although the Reviewer[26] gives his readers to understand that it did not arrive until after General Hull's capture.

The above statement will afford a full and satisfactory answer to the misrepresentations of the Quarterly Reviewer,[27] and to the unwarrantable insinuation by which they are accompanied, if indeed any answer were wanting to assertions in which the writer has directly contradicted himself. The Reviewer states, "that Sir George Prevost sent no instructions whatever to General Brock for some weeks after he received intimation of the war:"—and further, "that he, General Brock, was only restrained from the measure of attacking Fort Niagara, by the perplexity of his situation, in being left without orders." It is singular that the writer should have forgotten, that only five pages before, he had stated[28] that "on the receipt of the intelligence of the American declaration of war, Major-General Brock, who commanded the troops in the Upper Province immediately despatched discretionary orders to the British officer in charge of Fort St. Joseph's, to act either offensively or otherwise against the enemy at Michilimachinac, as he should find advisable." If General Brock was justified in giving these discretionary orders to act offensively as circumstances might require, it follows that he must have considered a similar line of conduct open to himself; and yet, in the face of this statement, the Reviewer gravely endeavours to persuade his readers, that General Brock was in perplexity with regard to the measures which he should pursue.

The Reviewer's insinuation, that Sir G. Prevost sent no instructions to General Brock for some weeks after he received intimation of the war, with the intention of leaving that officer to act on his own responsibility, cannot be passed over in silence. It has been already proved, by incontrovertible facts, that the contemptible motives thus attributed to the Commander of the forces, could not possibly have existed in his mind; and the attempt to impute to him a conduct so dishonorable ought therefore to be marked with the severest reprobation. No two persons could more sincerely respect and esteem each other than these gallant and high-minded individuals. Sir George Prevost had early evinced his opinion of General Brock's merits and talents, in a private communication to him of the 22d Jan. 1812, several months before the war; and the reply of General Brock to that communication, was sufficient evidence of the sentiments he entertained towards the Commander, under whom he expressed himself to be so desirous of serving. Indeed, the utmost confidence and cordiality prevailed between these officers, as is amply manifested in the correspondence before referred to; and wherever a difference of opinion did exist, General Brock never hesitated to yield to what he expressed and considered the superior knowledge and experience of the Commander in Chief.

The conduct of Sir George Prevost in his communications with General Brock, after receiving intelligence of the war, was not attended with any of those consequences which the Reviewer has asserted. Upon this head General Brock's correspondence with the Commander of the forces is conclusive.

The first letter from that officer, after the receipt of the intelligence of the war, is dated the 3d July, at Fort George; the extract from which, already given, is a convincing proof, that whatever might have been his intention in moving from York to Fort George, he was not restrained from the measure of attacking Fort Niagara by any deficiency of instructions from the Commander of the Forces.

The next letter from General Brock is from Fort George, dated 12th July, and states that the enemy were constructing batteries at the different points of the frontier; that he was making exertions to counteract their views; and that the arrival, that morning, of the Royal George and the vessels under convoy, bringing various pieces of ordnance, would give him a decided superiority. Not a single word is said in this despatch of any wish or intention on the part of the Major-General to invade the American territory. Major-General Brock's next letter of the 20th July states, that the enemy had evidently diminished his force, and appeared to have no intention of making an immediate attack. This letter also communicated the intelligence of General Hull's invasion of the Province. It likewise contained details of General Brock's means of defensive warfare, and expressed some apprehension for the fate of the troops under his command, should the communication be cut off between Kingston and Montreal; which apprehension was entertained by him on the supposition, as he stated, that "the slender means possessed by Sir G. Prevost would not admit of diminution, and consequently that he could not look for reinforcements." The same letter acknowledged the receipt of the Adjutant General's communication from Quebec, of 25th June, of the declaration of war. In the succeeding despatch from General Brock to Sir G. Prevost, dated 26th July, from Fort George, that officer writes as follows: "I have not deemed it of sufficient importance to commence active operations on this line by an attack on Fort Niagara; it can be demolished, when found necessary, in half an hour, and there my means of annoyance would cease. To enable the militia to acquire some degree of discipline, without interruption, is of far greater consequence than such a conquest."

The next letter from the Major-General, dated from York, the 28th July, principally relates to the approaching meeting of the legislature, and mentions his intention of detaching a force for the relief of Amherstburg. A letter from the same place, written on the following day, communicates the surrender of Michilimachinac, and particularly acknowledges the receipt of Sir George Prevost's despatches of the 7th and 10th July, written after the declaration of war, and before alluded to. General Brock also states his intention of embarking immediately in the Prince Regent, (the vessel which had been built and equipped since the month of March preceding), for Fort George, from whence he should speedily return to York. On the 4th August, a short letter was addressed by General Brock to Sir G. Prevost, from York, principally upon the proceeding of the legislature, regarding the militia laws, and on the following day he set off for Amherstburg, from whence he did not return until after the glorious termination of Hull's invasion. It was, therefore, from a consideration of the nature of his resources, and of the necessity of maturing and husbanding them, and from a conviction that Niagara would easily fall whenever he should be inclined to attack it, and not from any doubt arising from want of instructions, that General Brock abandoned the attempt.

It was in further pursuance of the line of policy adopted at the commencement of the war, that Sir George Prevost, upon the receipt of despatches from Mr. Foster, acquainting him with the proposed repeal of the Orders in Council by the British Government, immediately opened a communication with Major-General Dearborn, commanding the American forces on the frontier of Lower Canada, for the purpose of concluding an armistice, until the Congress should determine upon the proposals transmitted to them by Mr. Foster. An armistice of about three weeks did accordingly take place; and whatever might be the advantage arising from it to the American commanders and their troops, from the time and opportunity it afforded them of increasing their means of attacking the Canadas, it is obvious that the cessation of hostilities was of far more importance to Sir George Prevost, by enabling him to mature his preparations for defence. In fact, at the very time the armistice was negotiating, a regiment had arrived in the river from the West Indies; and after the conclusion, and during the continuance of it, considerable reinforcements of men and supplies were forwarded to Upper Canada, where they armed before the resuming of hostilities, and materially contributed towards defeating the attempts which the enemy afterwards made to invade that province.

Intelligence of the conclusion of the armistice was despatched to General Brock on the 12th August, by Brigade-Major Sheckleton, and must have reached him at Amherstburg before he left that place for Fort George, where he arrived the 6th September; but, whatever may have been General Brock's opinion of the policy of the measure, we do not find in his letter of the 7th September to Sir George Prevost, that the receipt of that intelligence had at all interfered with any intention he had previously entertained of "sweeping" (according to the Reviewer's assertion) "the Niagara line of the American garrisons, which he knew were then unprepared for vigorous resistance."[29] In fact, as that letter states, the armistice was to terminate the next day; and so far was General Brock from being in a situation to act offensively, that he states his expectation of an almost immediate attack, and of his having sent to Amherstburg to Colonel Proctor, as well as to Colonel Vincent at Kingston, for reinforcements, to enable him to meet it; expressing at the same time his hope, that if he could continue to maintain his position for six weeks longer, the campaign would terminate in a manner little expected in the United States.

Upon the expiration of the armistice, Sir George Prevost resolved to continue, for a time at least, and until his resources would better enable him to pursue a contrary line of conduct, the same defensive system which he had previously determined upon; and which he had been originally induced to adopt, in consequence of the peculiar circumstances in which he was placed at the commencement of hostilities, and of the war having been undertaken, on the part of the United States, so much in opposition to the opinions and wishes of a considerable portion of its population. In a private letter from Sir George Prevost to General Brock, of the 2d August, 1812, upon the subject of the proposed armistice, he particularly refers to the opinion of Mr. Foster, respecting the policy of the defensive system. "Mr. Foster," he says, "submits the propriety of our abstaining from an invasion of the United States' territory, as only in such event could the American government be empowered to order the militia out of the States." As a further ground for this line of conduct, and a confirmation of the propriety of his own opinion in adopting it, he quotes in a subsequent communication to General Brock, of 30th August, 1812, the opinion of his Majesty's Government on the subject. "The King's Government having most unequivocally expressed to me their desire to preserve peace with the United States, that they might uninterruptedly pursue, with the whole disposeable force of the country, the great interests committed to them in Europe, I have endeavoured to be instrumental in the accomplishment of those views; but I consider it most fortunate to have been enabled to do so without interfering with your operations on the Detroit. I have sent you men, money, and stores of every kind." It cannot be matter of surprise that Sir George Prevost should persevere in his defensive system, even after the termination of the armistice, and when from the manner in which the Government of the United States had received the communication of the repeal of the Orders in Council, it was evident that they meant to continue the war for other objects; for it ought to be considered, that up to that period, the only reinforcements of troops received by him were the 103d, nearly a boy-regiment, and the first battalion of the Royals from the West Indies, the latter incomplete, from the capture of part of their numbers, on board of one of the transports, by an American frigate. In consequence, however, of this addition to the force in the Lower Province, Sir George Prevost was enabled immediately to strengthen the army in Upper Canada, by detachments from the 49th regiment, Royal Newfoundland Fencibles, and Royal Veterans; but it must be evident that the total accession of strength in both Provinces was not sufficient to warrant a departure from a system, which had been adopted after the fullest deliberation, and upon a just calculation of the means necessary to meet the American warfare. The grounds of Sir George Prevost's opinion on this head had been stated to General Brock, in his letters to him of the 7th and 10th July, before referred to; and as a further confirmation of the necessity of adhering to it, in his communication to General Brock, of the 17th September, Sir George Prevost acquaints him, that in his last despatches from Lord Bathurst, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 4th July, 1812, he is told by him, "That his Majesty's Government trusts he will be enabled to suspend, with perfect safety, all extraordinary preparations for defence, which he may have been induced to make, in consequence of the precarious state of the relations between Great Britain and the United States."—As this opinion of the British Government was evidently founded upon their belief, that the revocation of the Orders in Council would either prevent war, if not declared, or lead to an immediate peace, had hostilities commenced, it was plain that no further reinforcements could be expected to be even ordered from England, until accounts should arrive there of the reception which the intelligence of the revocation of the Orders in Council had met with from the Government of the United States. As this could not well be before the end of September, there was not the slightest prospect of any addition being afforded to the force in the Canadas before the ensuing year; and it was therefore certain, that the Commander of the forces would until that period be completely left to his own resources for the defence of those Provinces.

To husband those resources became, under these circumstances, his imperious duty. The posture of affairs in Lower Canada, as he had stated to General Brock, in his letter of the 17th September, particularly on the frontier of Montreal, required every soldier in that Province, and no further reinforcements could be sent by him to the other. Not aware of any advantage which could arise from offensive operations against America, to compensate for the loss they might occasion, and for the consequent insecurity to the Provinces which he was defending, Sir George Prevost continued to urge upon General Brock, and after his death, upon his successor, General Sheaffe, the necessity of adhering to a defensive system; nor does it appear from any part of the correspondence between these officers and Sir George Prevost, that they had any particular object in view, which that policy restrained them from pursuing. Previous to the armistice, and to the capture of Hull's army at Detroit, General Brock had in his letters of 3d and 26th July, 1812, before referred to, given his reasons, which were evidently independent of the consideration of any instructions from Sir George Prevost, why he did not meditate offensive operations against the American frontier; and subsequent to the capture of Detroit, and after his arrival at Fort George in September, it has been clearly shewn, that his situation and means precluded him from such measures, except at a great risk, and for the accomplishment of inadequate objects.

The correctness of this statement appears from a letter addressed by General Brock, to Sir George Prevost, on the 13th September, 1812, from Fort George; in which he says, "that although he had learnt from deserters, (but which information he had reason afterwards to think, as he acknowledged, was not altogether correct), that great dissatisfaction prevailed amongst the American troops on the Niagara frontier, and that therefore much might be effected against such a body at that moment; that keeping in mind his excellency's instructions, and aware of the policy of permitting such a force to dwindle away by it's own inefficient means, he did not contemplate any immediate attack." Two strong inferences naturally arise from this letter—the one, that General Brock must have considered the instructions received from Sir George Prevost, as to defensive measures not positive, as the Reviewer has thought fit to state them to have been, but discretionary; the other, that General Brock himself, was convinced of the policy of abstaining from offensive operations against an enemy circumstanced as the Americans then were. That this policy was a wise one, was manifest from the result. Had any attack been made on Fort Niagara, or had that general sweeping of the American garrisons on the frontier, (which the critic seems to think so easy an achievement) been attempted, there cannot be a doubt but that this invasion of the American territory, before the enemy had made an attack upon our own frontier, would have united the whole population, not only of the states bordering upon that line, but of every other part of the union, in the prosecution of the war. The militia already assembled upon that frontier, and who were known to be dissatisfied, and anxious to return to their homes, would in the event of an attack upon their territory, not only have cheerfully remained to repel the aggression, but would have been further obliged to pass the frontier, for the invasion of Canada; which, without such an attack on our part, they could not have been compelled to do. Aware of this circumstance, it was the policy of the American Government, to hold out lures to our officers, commanding on the frontiers, to induce them to commence an offensive warfare. Sir George Prevost, however, saw through their design, and fortunately disappointed it. The consequence was, that finding their militia could no longer be kept together, and that the season was fast approaching, when all offensive operations must cease, the American commanders urged the troops on that line, to that ill-concerted expedition, which ended in the battle of Queenstown, and which, though attended with the irreparable loss to the British forces of their gallant Commander, terminated in the disgrace and defeat of the American army; and was thus the means of preserving, at least for that campaign, the Province of Upper Canada. Brilliant as had been the success of our arms at the battle of Queenstown, and complete as had been the overthrow of the enemy, they still remained in sufficient force on the opposite territory, to make an immediate attack upon their frontier, notwithstanding the dismay with which the critic seems to think the Americans were filled,[30] something more than hazardous. Out of the small force of less than 900 regular troops which we had on the field that day, nearly 100 of them were killed or wounded, and many were necessarily engaged in guarding the prisoners, whose numbers amounted to more than our own regular force. The enemy had received reinforcements in their line during the day of the action, and others were constantly arriving. Under these circumstances is it to be wondered at, that Major-General Sheaffe should not have listened to the suggestions of any of his officers, if such were made, and the fact is more than doubtful, to cross over immediately after the action, when according to the Reviewer's sagacious opinion, "Fort Niagara might have been taken, and the whole of the Niagara line cleared of the American troops!"

Such an attempt might indeed have averted the insinuation levelled by the critic against General Sheaffe and Sir George Prevost as lovers of armistices, but would have evinced great want of military judgment and prudence in General Sheaffe, and have hazarded all the advantages gained by the gallant and able conduct of his lamented predecessor, and strengthened and confirmed at Queenstown by himself. General Sheaffe was, therefore, wisely contented with having foiled a second attempt of a superior force to invade the Province; and, anxious to secure its future preservation, he willingly acceded to a proposal for an armistice, which he knew, under the circumstances of his situation, would be of incalculably more benefit to himself than to the enemy. It must be evident to every one at all conversant with military subjects, that to those who are carrying on a defensive warfare, which their inferiority of force and means of every description has obliged them to adopt, a suspension of hostilities must be infinitely more beneficial than to the opposite party. General Sheaffe was fully aware of the importance of this measure to the safety of the province, which on the death of General Brock was entrusted to him, since he was in daily expectation of receiving supplies of clothing, and other articles which were indispensable for the militia, who had become much dissatisfied from the want of those articles. Reinforcements of troops were also on their way to him; and, in fact, these supplies and reinforcements did arrive during the continuance of the armistice, and materially contributed to foil the further efforts of the enemy to invade the Province. It may also be added, that the armistice was further expedient in the first instance, when its duration was limited to three days, for the purpose of affording time for carrying into effect the proposed exchange of prisoners, the removal of those that were wounded, and the passing over to the enemy's side the militia paroles. Some portion of time was also necessary for performing, without any hostile interruption, the last tribute of respect to the memory of the gallant Commander who had then lately fallen. The subsequent prolongation of the armistice to an indefinite period, although it was in the power of either party to terminate the same by thirty hours notice, perfectly coincided with Major-General Sheaffe's system of defensive warfare, and permitted him to leave Fort George for a short time, and proceed to York, where his presence was indispensable for the purpose of being sworn in, and assuming the civil government.

It has been thought necessary to say thus much in vindication of this measure, from a sense of justice to a gallant and meritorious officer, although it was adopted without any reference to, and without the consent or approbation of Sir George Prevost. The Reviewer has indeed thought fit to characterize the armistice[31] as one for which no reason, civil or military, was ever assigned; whereas it was notorious to the army employed on the Niagara line that General Sheaffe was influenced in this step by the motives and circumstances already stated, all of which were immediately communicated by him to Sir George Prevost. If any thing further were necessary to be adduced in vindication of the policy of the defensive system, of which these armistices formed a part, and which the Reviewer has thought fit so groundlessly to denominate short-sighted and ill-judged, although attended with results so favourable to the safety of both Provinces, it will be found in the complete approbation expressed by his Majesty's Government. In Lord Bathurst's despatch to Sir George Prevost, of the 4th July, 1812, written before the intelligence of the declaration of war, by America, had reached England, his Lordship says, "The instructions given by you to Major-General Brock and Sir John Sherbrooke, cautioning them against any premature measures of hostility, or any deviation from a line of conduct strictly defensive, meets with the full approbation of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent."

In a subsequent despatch of the 10th Aug., Lord Bathurst approves of the general principles upon which Sir George Prevost intended to conduct the operations of the war, by making the defence of Quebec paramount to every other consideration, in the event of invasion. In a later despatch of the date of the 1st October, 1812, his Lordship says, "I have it in command from his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, to convey to you his most unqualified approbation of the measures which you have adopted for defending the Provinces under your charge, and of those to which you have had recourse for deferring, if not altogether preventing, any resort to actual hostility." On the subject of the armistice, he adds, "The desire which you have unceasingly manifested to avoid hostilities, with the subjects of the United States, is not more in conformity with your own feelings, than with the wishes and intentions of his Majesty's Government, and therefore your correspondence with General Dearborn cannot fail to receive their cordial concurrence."

In a further despatch from Lord Bathurst, dated the 10th October, 1812, acknowledging the receipt of the letter from Sir George Prevost, which announced the surrender of General Hull, with his army, to General Brock, and communicating his Royal Highness the Prince Regent's approbation of the conduct of General Brock, his officers and troops, on that occasion, his Lordship adds—"I am further commanded by his Royal Highness to say, that in giving every credit to Major-General Brock, and the army under his command, he is fully sensible how much your exertions and arrangements have contributed to the fortunate conclusion of the campaign in Upper Canada." In Lord Bathurst's despatch of the 16th November following, he says, "The measures which you have taken for obstructing the navigation of the Richelieu, by the erection of works on the Isle Aux Noix, appear well calculated to impede the advance of the enemy in that quarter."

Testimonials like these, so highly honorable to the zeal and ability displayed by Sir George Prevost, are sufficient of themselves to afford a complete answer to the Reviewer's assertions. That writer's remark, with regard to "the practical illustration of the tendency"[32] of Sir George Prevost's defensive system, is directly in opposition to the facts, both as respects the conduct of Colonel Procter, in consequence of his orders, and the effect produced by that conduct upon the minds of the Indians. In proof of this assertion, it is only necessary to advert to the two expeditions, of Captain Muir to Fort Wayne, in September, 1812, and of Lieutenant Dewar to the Fort of the Rapids of the Miami, in October following. The former of these expeditions tended, for some time at least, to retard the preparations which the enemy were making for their second advance to the Detroit frontier, which terminated in the defeat and capture of General Winchester and his army, while both expeditions afforded to the Indians a strong proof of our desire to co-operate with them, as far as was consistent with the security of our own Provinces, and of the Michigan territory. Neither of these expeditions would have been undertaken, had not Colonel Procter's orders been discretionary instead of positive. It is certainly true, that Sir George Prevost did wish to discourage the employment of the regular troops under Colonel Procter, in offensive operations jointly with the Indians; because such a course of proceeding was neither consistent with the instructions he had received from his Majesty's Government, nor compatible with the military resources of his command. At the same time he merely recommended to Colonel Procter a cautious line of conduct, chiefly directed to the preservation of the district committed to his charge; and it is evident that Colonel Procter's use of the discretion thus entrusted to him, had the effect of retaining the willing services of the Indians during the whole period of our remaining in possession of the Michigan territory, and up to the time of the unfortunate retreat and consequent capture of Colonel Procter's detachment at the Moravian village.