THE CAMPAIGN IN THE SOUTHERN COLONIES 747 as usual expecting "revolutions by means of friends to the British Government".1 The belated reinforcements arrived on 25 August with a new admiral, Arbuthnot, but shortly afterwards came the news of d'Estaing's appearance off Savannah, and in face of his superiority Clinton could only stand on the defensive. He seized the occasion, however, to evacuate Rhode Island, a step Rodney was to condemn next year as "the most fatal measure that could have been taken", though it added 4000 men to the available field force. In the middle of November d'Estaing's defeat and departure were reported, and with the seas thus cleared Clinton sailed for South Carolina on 26 December 1779 with 8000 men. Bad weather delayed his voyage and it was February 1780 before he landed, thirty miles from Charleston, and 29 March before he really began his attack. Well supported by the Navy3 Clinton pressed Charleston hard: Huger's cavalry, who were keeping open its communications, were routed on 12 April by Clinton's light troops under Tarleton, a brilliant if erratic leader; Fort Moultrie was taken on 6 May and five days later Charleston capitulated, over 6000 combatants becoming prisoners of war. But Clinton could not pursue this success; rumours that French troops were bound for America made him nervous for New York5 and compelled his return thither with 4000 men (5 June), leaving Cornwallis to command in the south with 8000 men all told, none too many for his task, for as in Spain conquests were easier to make than to retain, and the more territory the British recovered the more their offensive power was reduced. At first, however, things went well. Tarleton routed the only organised force still in the field (29 May), and when the hot season stopped operations South Carolina seemed secured. But before major operations could be resumed sporadic opposition had developed, and when, in August, Gates led 2000 "Continentals" whom Washington had detached to the south into South Carolina his advance, in Rawdon's words, "unveiled to us a fund of disaffection of which we could have formed no idea": many who had joined the militia mainly to obtain arms and ammunition deserted and guerrilla bands appeared everywhere. Sickness and the necessity of garrisoning various posts prevented Cornwallis from collecting more than 2200 men, whereas Gates had twice that force and was believed to have 7000. Nothing daunted, Cornwallis advanced and, meeting Gates near Camden (16 August), attacked and routed him completely, taking 1000 prisoners and seven guns and inflicting another 1000 casualties, his own loss being only 300. Two days later Tarleton 1 Germain to Clinton, 25 Aug. 1779, C.O. v, 98. 2 Stopford-Sackville MSS, 11, 191. Stuart, p. 168. • Biddulph Papers (Am. H.R. XXIX) and Russell's "Journal" (Am. H.R. Iv). • Stevens, B. F., Clinton-Cornwallis Controversy, 1, 272. surprised and routed Sumter, the most troublesome of the guerrilla leaders, and Cornwallis, greatly encouraged, entered North Carolina, simultaneously urging Clinton to take its defences in the rear by a diversion against Virginia. He had penetrated to Charlottetown, despite considerable guerrilla opposition, when he learned that on 6 October 1100 of his light troops under Major Ferguson, an able leader, in trying to cut off a party which had attacked the British outpost at Augusta, had been routed at King's Mountain by overwhelming numbers of riflemen from the backwoods. This reverse drove Cornwallis back towards Camden. Not only was his invasion of North Carolina checked, but the hostile elements in the occupied territories were greatly encouraged, and the guerrillas redoubled their activities. The invasion of the southern colonies seemed to be merely increasing the demands on the army; yet in default of vital points in the American position for which Washington must risk a decisive action, it is hard to suggest a more effective alternative policy: Cornwallis's operations had at least reduced the area from which crops could be exported to Europe to maintain American credit and purchase munitions. So unpromising indeed were the American prospects at this juncture that in May 1780 the French, believing that the American cause was nearly collapsing for want of troops,1 decided to despatch 6000 men under Rochambeau to America. The British Admiralty, though warned of Rochambeau's destination, failed to intercept the convoy, which had only seven sail of the line under de Ternay as its escort, and its safe arrival at Newport (12 July) rendered Clinton's situation far more anxious than when New York had only Washington to fear. However, before Rochambeau could join Washington, reinforcements from England enabled Arbuthnot to blockade Newport with ten battleships (21 July), while Clinton at once collected 6000 men to attack Rhode Island. But Arbuthnot and Clinton were on bad terms, delays over the transports gave Rochambeau time to secure himself against a coup de main and Washington meanwhile had concentrated his forces and was threatening Kingsbridge. But clearly it was Arbuthnot's dilatoriness and obstruction,3 rather than fear of Washington, that made Clinton abandon the attack on Rochambeau and return to New York to betake himself to his correspondence with Arnold, now in command at West Point, which important post he was for private reasons prepared to betray. These negotiations were still in progress when Rodney unexpectedly arrived at New York (16 September) with ten sail of the line from the West Indies. Rodney had passed a disappointing summer in the West Indies. 1 Chevalier, 1, 195. 2 Clinton to Germain, 14 Aug. 1780, C.O. v, 100. * Biddulph Papers; Clinton to Germain, 25 Aug. 1780, C.O. v, 100. RODNEY'S ACTIONS AGAINST DE GUICHEN 749 He had reached St Lucia (28 March) only a week behind de Guichen. On 13 April de Guichen left Martinique with twenty-three of the line carrying 3000 troops, hoping to reach Barbados while Rodney was still to leeward. But from St Lucia Martinique was easily watched and Rodney promptly got to sea, and by skilful seamanship gained the weather gage. On 17 April he was bearing down with his whole fleet concentrated against de Guichen's rear, the latter's van being to leeward and impotent to help. But Rodney's highly skilful tactics were too novel for some of his subordinates, whose ideas were fettered by the "Fighting Instructions", and their failure to understand his signals spoilt a brilliant manœuvre. The attack became hopelessly disjointed, and de Guichen realising his danger quickly broke off the action. His casualties were double Rodney's, but his fleet was intact, whereas had Rodney's orders been properly executed de Guichen must have been badly beaten. Twice more (15 and 19 May) Rodney managed to engage him: he had drilled his fleet now and there was no misunderstanding of orders, but de Guichen was a wary tactician and a good seaman, and, greatly aided on 15 May by a timely shift of wind,1 persistently evaded close action. In June a Spanish fleet reached Guadeloupe from Cadiz with 10,000 troops intended for the capture of Jamaica, but the Spaniards were hopelessly ineffective owing to epidemics and went tamely on to Havana; when the hurricane season came de Guichen, deaf to Washington's appeals, sailed for Europe with two-thirds of his fleet (16 August). If he had preserved his fleet, Rodney had effectually checked his designs on the British islands. Rodney's arrival at New York was a bitter blow to Washington who had been hoping instead to see de Guichen appear. It established the British naval supremacy solidly on the American coast and put an end to any danger to New York. It shows Rodney at his best as a strategist: looking beyond the local needs of his own command, and rightly disregarding its technical limits, he had carried his ships to the place where he judged that they were most needed. Unfortunately for England, when it came to being ready to sacrifice ships in forcing the passage into Newport Harbour in order to destroy de Ternay, Rodney flinched. Rochambeau had made Newport so strong that Young, Rodney's flag captain, wrote, "The favourable opportunity has been lost. I am heartily sorry we were not on the coast a fortnight sooner". Still, the passage had been wide enough for d'Estaing, while de Ternay's destruction must have involved Rochambeau's surrender and was well worth the loss of several ships.4 A successful combined naval and military attack might have changed the fate of the war, but Rodney would not risk it, and Clinton was always too weak to afford heavy casualties. 1 N.R.S. xxxпI, 58. 3 Ibid. 2 Ibid. XXXII, 79. Rodney returned to the West Indies (November 1780) to find that an unusually violent hurricane season had cost both British and French three battleships and swept the islands bare, greatly delaying any resumption of active operations. In December, however, news arrived of the British declaration of war against Holland (December). This was the chief outcome of the recent formation of the Armed Neutrality to oppose the British doctrines as to the right of search, contraband of war and other disputed points. Holland, no longer formidable at sea, was less troublesome as a declared enemy than as a very nominal neutral.1 For months past the Dutch island of St Eustatius had been the centre from which both French and Americans had conducted an extensive trade under cover of the Dutch flag, and its capture (3 February 1781) yielded an enormous booty and revealed how flagrantly Dutch neutrality had been abused. Rodney exulted over" the severest blow that could have been given America"," but St Eustatius led him to his most serious professional blunder. De Grasse was known to be coming out with reinforcements, and had Rodney concentrated all his twenty-one sail of the line to windward of Martinique, where the French would probably make their landfall, he might have beaten them before they could join their small squadron in Fort Royal. But instead, Rodney remained at St Eustatius with several ships and kept the remainder under Hood off Fort Royal5 to prevent the Fort Royal ships from descending on St Eustatius. "Never", wrote Hood, "was squadron so unmeaningly stationed." Outnumbered and to leeward he could do little when on 28 April de Grasse appeared. De Grasse might have crushed Hood's inferior force but avoided close action and contented himself with reaching Fort Royal, whereupon Hood drew off to rejoin Rodney. De Grasse had been lucky already. As he was leaving Brest (22 March 1781) with twenty-six sail of the line, Darby with twenty-eight was on his way to Gibraltar, now in serious straits for food," while the Spaniards had recently converted their blockade on the landward side into a definite attack. Darby and de Grasse passed within 100 miles without either attempting to seek the other out, when a victory might have decided far more than the fate of their immediate errands. Darby indeed apparently deliberately avoided meeting de Grasse lest he should drive him to join Cordova, then covering the attack on Gibraltar from Cadiz9 with thirty-six of the line. Cordova, however, remained inert while Darby brought his victuallers and store-ships into Gibraltar on 12 April, returning thereafter uneventfully to England. Meanwhile de Grasse, who had detached a squadron 1 Dartmouth MSS, ш, 246; Renaut, F. P., Les Provinces Unies et la Guerre d'Amérique (1924), chaps. vii-xv. 2 Stopford-Sackville MSS, II, 202. 4 Mahan, Types of Naval Officers, pp. 217 seqq. 6 Ibid. I, 24. 8 Castex, p. 290. 3 Ibid. 5 N.R.S. XXXII, 93. "Drinkwater, Siege of Gibraltar, chaps. iv and v. • N.R.S. XXXII, 33. CORNWALLIS'S OPERATIONS IN THE SOUTH 75I under Suffren to the Cape and East Indies (29 March), made an unusually rapid passage to Martinique, where his safe arrival not merely challenged Rodney's supremacy in West Indian waters but was to prove a turning point in the war. The crisis in America was indeed at hand. Washington was hard pressed to keep his army together and maintain the struggle. There had been two serious mutinies among his "Continentals", whose pay was many months in arrears and whose clothing and equipment were in a deplorable state. He had no money, he was short of supplies and ammunition; desertion had thinned his ranks. Rochambeau's inactivity had caused disappointment and grumbling, though his presence at Newport had imposed a severe restraint on Clinton and prevented him from profiting by Washington's difficulties, while the position of de Ternay's squadron justified Arbuthnot in disobeying Rodney's orders to detach ships to the West Indies, Clinton insisting that the army's situation would not allow of it. Even so Washington wrote, in April 1781, "we are at the end of our tether, now or never our deliverance must come".2 3 The movement from which the decision resulted started in the south. After his retreat in October 1780 Cornwallis remained inactive for some weeks, considerably harassed by the guerrillas whom success at King's Mountain had greatly emboldened. Moreover Greene, Washington's ablest subordinate, had superseded the discredited Gates, had rallied and reorganised the remains of his army, and, while avoiding action, had prevented Cornwallis from setting systematically about suppressing the guerrillas. In December Cornwallis was joined by 2500 men under Leslie whom Clinton had sent to the Chesapeake in October to serve as a diversion to favour Cornwallis and to carry on the policy, already proving effective, of destroying the enemy's resources. Cornwallis had, however, summoned Leslie to Carolina, intending on his arrival to resume the offensive. Clinton, meanwhile, having abandoned hopes of decisive action in the north, after Major André's capture had disclosed the plot with Arnold, spared no effort to assist Cornwallis, and not only approved Leslie's transfer, but further diminished the New York garrison by sending 1600 men under Arnold to the Chesapeake. Arnold landed at Jamestown on 20 December, raided Richmond and did so much damage generally that Washington sent Lafayette with 1200 men to tackle him and persuaded Rochambeau to detach 1200 Frenchmen to support Lafayette. To carry them thither Destouches, who had succeeded de Ternay, left Newport (8 March), but was followed and overtaken by Arbuthnot. Tactically, their encounter off the Chesapeake (16 March) was indecisive, for Destouches, who was being worsted, managed to break off, but his retreat to Newport left 1 Cf. Clinton to Germain, 16 Dec., C.O. v, 101. 3 Stevens, 1, 270. 4 2 Works, vm, 7. 4 Ibid. 1, 294. |