of whose assistance great hopes were held out by Martin, the former governor.1 However, storms delayed the arrival of the transports till long after the Loyalists had risen prematurely and been dispersed, and when the commanders, General Clinton and Admiral Parker, attacked Charleston (28 June), rather than come away without attempting anything, the squadron was repulsed with considerable loss, an unexpectedly unfordable creek preventing the troops from co-operating. Ultimately (1 August) the discomfited force joined Howe at New York, where he would have had them concentrated at the outset as the point of chief strategic importance.2 Howe had brought from Halifax 10,000 men. Finding Manhattan Island strongly fortified and the enemy prepared to oppose his intended landing on Long Island, he began by passing the Narrows (2 July) and landed on Staten Island almost unopposed. But August was well advanced before the arrival of the Hessians enabled him to start his attack with 25,000 men. Washington had under 20,000 men, the largest detachment being on Long Island, holding strong entrenchments at Brooklyn but in a precarious situation. With the British squadron, now under Lord Howe, the general's brother, controlling the navigable waters, its retreat was liable to be intercepted, even if the narrowness of the East River forbade ships to remain at anchor between the batteries on its banks.3 The attack began by the British landing on Long Island on 22 August. Five days later Howe attacked the wooded heights which covered the approaches to the Brooklyn lines, his main body making a wide turning movement round the American left, while his centre and left attacked in front. The outflanking movement succeeded completely and the Americans had some difficulty in regaining the lines. Some of Howe's infantry indeed pressed the retreat so closely that they were with difficulty called off from storming the lines.* Howe's caution is easier to understand than to justify. Memories of Bunker's Hill probably made him reluctant to try rushing American entrenchments, but a prompt attack on defenders still disordered by retreat might well have succeeded. Certainly Howe should never have allowed Washington to withdraw his whole force across the East River on the night of 29-30 August unmolested. Adverse and unusual winds may account for the Navy's failure to profit by the defencelessness of the troops when in transit, but nothing can extenuate General Howe's lethargy, for, though warned of the move in time to catch the rear-guard, he never stirred, and Washington's temerity escaped the punishment it had merited.5 Brooklyn had cost the British under 400 casualties, the Americans 1 Corresp. of George III, 1, 266-7. 2 Howe to Germain, 24 April, C.O. v, 93. 3 Duncan, H., Journals, N.R.S. xx, 117 seqq. Howe to Germain, 9 Sept., C.O. v, 93; Rutland MSS, ш, 6. HOWE CAPTURES NEW YORK 723 over 1000 besides 1100 prisoners and thirty guns, but far more might have been achieved. Howe's subsequent operations did little to retrieve the lost chance, although Washington offered him another golden opportunity. New York, standing at the southern end of a long and narrow island with navigable channels on both sides and the narrowest egress to the north, was indefensible against troops who might land anywhere, but again Washington held on dangerously long. After a fortnight's delay Howe passed his troops across the East River to Kipp's Bay, three miles above the city (15 September), having distracted his opponents by naval demonstrations elsewhere.1 Covered by ships' guns the landing was successfully effected, the defenders being completely surprised. To corner the 4000 men in New York Howe had only to plant himself astride the narrow island, but he waited for a second trip by his flotilla and thereby allowed them to escape with the trifling loss of 400 men and the seventy guns in the riverside batteries. Next day (16 September) a sharp action between the British light troops and an American reconnoitring party ended with the retreat of the Americans to their entrenchments on Haarlem Heights. These Howe reconnoitred but found too strong to be forced by a frontal attack, while water covered both their flanks.2 For the next three weeks he did nothing but fortify his position and write despondently to Dartmouth's successor, Germain, of the impossibility of doing anything more that year, of the improbability of Carleton approaching near enough to assist him, and of the large reinforcements, especially of warships and extra sailors for manning boats, needed for the next year's campaign. Then, however, he apparently realised that by transferring his troops by water to the country east of the Bronx River he could sever Washington's communications with Connecticut and turn his position. On 12 October the new move began, the troops passing through the dangerous Hell Gate channel.3 Valuable time was wasted by landing at a point from which no advance was possible, and when the troops finally landed (18 October) at Pell's Point and advanced slowly northward all surprise was gone: Washington had shifted his main body to White Plains, where he entrenched a strong position to bar Howe's progress. Still, the American troops were much spread out, for 3000 men were left to hold Fort Washington near King's Bridge and deny the use of the Hudson to the British, and Howe could concentrate superior numbers against the White Plains force. However, though his despatches are full of the necessity for forcing on a decisive battle, he was unaccountably unenterprising. Despite an initial success against the American right (28 October) he failed to press his advantage, and by waiting for reinforcements from New York let Washington 1 Duncan, H., Journals, N.R.S. xx, 127–9, also N.R.S. vi, 28–32. Stuart, p. 88. 3 N.R.S. XX, 131. decamp into the hills farther north (1 November). Howe did not even try to engage his rear-guard, declaring that as the Americans were plainly determined to avoid battle, pursuit was useless.1 Instead he moved westward to the Hudson (6 November), thereby isolating Fort Washington which he intended to attack in order to secure direct communication with New York and open the navigation of the Hudson. A naturally strong position had been well fortified, but its retention risked the loss of the whole garrison, which succumbed on 16 November to a threefold attack from north, east and south, the British casualties being under 500. A division under Cornwallis was so promptly pushed across the Hudson to attack Fort Lee (just opposite Fort Washington) that Greene only just extricated his garrison and had to leave 100 guns behind (18 November), whereupon Cornwallis advanced rapidly through New Jersey, driving Washington before him. The Americans were now much discouraged by their inability to withstand the British advance, desertion was thinning their ranks, and Cornwallis encountered little serious resistance. At the Raritan River the fatigue of his troops, who had outmarched their supplies, compelled him to halt (1 December). However, seeing the enemy's plight Howe decided to push for Philadelphia, and Cornwallis, advancing again on 7 December, reached the Delaware at Trenton next day to find once more that Washington had just escaped across the river. Could Cornwallis have crossed, Philadelphia must have fallen, but the river was unfordable, every boat within reach had been removed, and the usual season for active operations was long past. Accordingly, Howe decided (14 December) to take up winter quarters. In selecting these he admittedly dispersed his troops unduly: as he himself wrote, "the chain is rather too extensive, but I was induced to occupy Burlington to cover the county of Monmouth in which there are many loyal inhabitants". In this he was indicating one of his chief difficulties: the Loyalists whom the ministry regarded as an asset, more often needed protection. To enter a district promising protection to all who would take the oath of allegiance often meant that, if military exigencies subsequently required its evacuation, the unprotected Loyalists either abandoned the royal cause in disgust or were subjected to a savage persecution which effectually deterred others from adopting it. Howe's neglect of military precautions was more culpable because he had detached two British and two Hessian brigades to occupy Rhode Island. Quite unwarrantable from the military standpoint, this weakening of his main force could be justified on naval grounds: Narragansett Bay was the best harbour on the coast, flanked the route from Halifax to New York and provided the troublesome 1 Howe to Germain, 30 Nov., C.O. v, 93. ARNOLD DELAYS CARLETON'S ADVANCE 725 American privateers with a splendid base. Moreover, Howe's scheme for the next year included, besides the main advance up the Hudson. to meet Carleton, an attack on Boston by a column from Rhode Island. When on 20 November he propounded this scheme to Germain, he could congratulate himself on having secured his end of the Hudson-Lake Champlain line. He was, however, far from satisfied with Carleton's progress. it The force destined for Canada, eight British battalions with the Brunswick and Hanau contingents, should have sailed in March 1776 but did not start till 7 April, and May was well advanced before the main body entered the St Lawrence. Directly the first reinforcements reached Quebec (6 May), Carleton had taken the offensive1 and driven Arnold back to Sorel. Thither, when further reinforcements arrived, he followed, winning a sharp action at Three Rivers (8 June), and by the end of June Canada had been cleared of the invaders. Burgoyne, now Carleton's second in command, suggested that, if the governor had shown greater enterprise or given him a freer hand, none of the Americans would have escaped, but, even as was, their discomfiture was complete and costly, and with it all signs of disloyalty in Canada vanished. Unluckily for the British Arnold himself had escaped and with characteristic energy had started to construct a flotilla to dispute the command of Lake Champlain, control of which was indispensable to any advance to the Hudson. To combat this Carleton had to provide a similar force; it was October before Arnold's control of the lake could be challenged, and though his whole flotilla was then taken or destroyed he had achieved his object and delayed the British advance. Carleton reached Crown Point on 14 October, but instead of pushing on to Ticonderoga, only fifteen miles away, he retraced his steps to St John's. The administrative difficulties of pressing on so late in the season were certainly serious, but the failure to take Ticonderoga3 prejudiced the prospects of the next campaign. Arnold's fight for Lake Champlain, aptly described by Admiral Mahan as "the strife of pygmies for the prize of a continent", had had far-reaching effects. But for Arnold, Carleton should have reached Ticonderoga in July and might have been pushing on towards Albany just as Howe's attack on New York was taxing all Washington's energies, and so have been in readiness to complete the isolation of New England early in 1777. As it was, the prospect of the long delay before "the Northern Army" could reach Albany contributed largely to Howe's changing his original plan for 1777, which change led directly to Saratoga and all its vital consequences. On 30 November Howe had still been meaning to make the advance on Albany his main operation, leaving a defensive force "to cover Jersey and keep the rebels' Southern Army 1 Dartmouth MSS, 1, 407. 2 Corresp. of George III, m, 382-6. 3 Stopford-Sackville MSS, ¤, 44. in check by giving a jealousy to Philadelphia".1 Three weeks later he was contemplating converting this detachment into the principal force to "act offensively against Philadelphia where the enemy's chief strength will certainly be collected", leaving only 7000 men on the Lower Hudson to cover New York and "facilitate in some degree the approach of the army from Canada". This he did not expect to reach Albany before September, and he clearly anticipated that by attacking Pennsylvania he would so effectually divert the enemy thither that Burgoyne would have little more than the natural difficulties to encounter,3 Howe's optimistic hopes of finishing the war in another campaign were to receive a sudden shock. The dispersion of the British cantonments inspired Washington to fall upon the left of Howe's line where Donop's and Rall's Hessians were holding Bordentown and Trenton. Ice had rendered the Delaware no longer a barrier, and on the night of 25-26 December Washington crossed, calculating on catching the Hessians off their guard. At Trenton he was completely successful: Rall, though warned, had taken no precautions, and the Hessians' outpost work and discipline were seriously at fault, for they were completely surprised, and over 1000 men surrendered tamely, having suffered barely fifty casualties, including Rall, whose negligence cost him his life. About 300 men escaped to Bordentown, the attack on which had miscarried, but Donop, instead of attempting to succour Trenton, retired precipitately to Princeton.* Cornwallis did his best to repair the mishap and hurried to Trenton, arriving late on 2 January to find Washington very strongly posted. As two of his brigades were not yet up, Cornwallis deferred attacking till morning, and Washington, who had been rather rash in lingering east of the Delaware, slipped away by night, marching wide round Cornwallis's left and across his rear, and thrusting aside one of the belated British brigades which he encountered near Princeton. Cornwallis, hearing the firing, promptly marched to the sound of the guns, but could not prevent Washington gaining the New Jersey hills, into which Cornwallis could not follow him without unduly exposing his troops to the very inclement weather. Indeed Howe now drew back his troops behind the Raritan, abandoning most of New Jersey. This withdrawal, though probably expedient, was politically disastrous, as it meant abandoning the Jersey Loyalists to their enemies, and Howe had to admit that the reverse at Trenton, which had greatly encouraged the enemy, had had more serious results than he had at first supposed: moreover, the rapidity with which 1 Howe to Germain, 30 Nov. 1776, C.O. v, 94. 2 Howe to Germain, 20 Dec. 1776, ibid. 3 Howe to Germain, 16 July 1777, ibid. Heister to Germain, 5 Jan., C.O. v, 94; Stopford-Sackville MSS, ¤, 53, 55; Corresp. of George III, III, 421. Howe to Germain, 20 Jan. 1777, C.O. v, 94. |