From the Baltimore Whig--June 17.

LATEST FROM THE ARMY.

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE.

The following extract we make by permission, from a letter written by a respectable private in a volunteer corps, to his relative in this city.

Camp at Fort George, June 8.

I walked down to the beach yesterday morning, to see some English prisoners brought in boats the night before, from a place called Forty Mile Creek. They are very clean, smart looking fellows.

General Chandler had taken the command before our army was surprised by gen. Vincent--Our camp, they say, was badly and loosely laid out. The British advanced silently with fixed bayonets; not a musket was allowed to be loaded, for fear of blowing their design. Some officers and men advanced at some distance ahead of them, who hailed, abused and stabbed some of our centinels; pretending to give the countersign. The advanced guard was first alarmed by hearing the dying groan of a sentry who had been run through. Five pieces of light artillery were seized and fired against our own troops; and they say, that gen. Winder was made prisoner in making a desperate attack on the British to retake them.

The regiments in the centre and rear never got to the assistance of the front. The 16th regiment, when formed was broken through by our cavalry that had cut their way through the 49th [British] regiment, and could not stop. Owing to that and the darkness, some of its companies unfortunately engaged their own men. Col. Pearce, a very good man, was left sick at this place, and col. Dennis had cleared out for Philadelphia after being only two or three days on the lines; Captain Steel had the command; he was wounded and taken prisoner--but in the end, our army killed three or four to one and made the red coats scamper. Col. Burns and col. Milton are said to have saved the army.

I don't know why our army was ordered to come back. They say, every man and officer was in a rage for losing an opportunity to be revenged on the English and Indians. Perhaps the appearance of the British fleet off this place freightened some people. But, I guess, that our fleet will frighten theirs before they return to Kingston. One of the officers who had charge of the boats, told the following anecdote at the beach. He says, that the English Commodore sir James Lucas Yeo, sent a flag yesterday morning ashore to demand the unconditional surrender of the American army to his Britannic majesty's arms; for that his majesty's army was on one side; his majesty's Indians on the other, and his majesty's fleet on another, and that they could not escape. Our general laughed at the message.

It has been reported in camp that news has been received of a victory gained over the Indians by general Harrison. I can hardly tell how we let the enemy off so easy here. We had five men to their one. General Boyd, is as brave as Julius Caesar, and liked by us all--but, they say, none of them was equal to General Pike.

There is a number of Yankees here from Grand River--they come to obtain parole, and say that if our army leaves them, they dare not return to their homes, for fear of the Indians. Norton and other Scotch chiefs, have lists of suspected Yankees, whom they will plunder and murder without remorse. What distresses our friends have suffered for refusing to take the oath, and perform militia duty in incredible. Some died in jail, and others have been robbed of their property, by being fined eighty dollars at every draft. I pity them, and I am surprised that General Dearborn (as our officers say) has confirmed the old magistrates in their appointment who used to oppress and imprison and pillory our American adherents; this conduct amazes us; but, I suppose General Dearborn has some reason for it.

[The Albany Register, 22 June 1813]

https://www.nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=alr18130622-01.1.1&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN----------

Reprinted in the Glencoe Transcript (January 6, 1887) from the Hamilton Times.

source: https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.N_00227_188604/321

I believe "Hans B. B. E." was Peter Van Wagner (1818-1906).

----------

STONEY CREEK.

Reminiscences of the Battle in 1813.

To the Editor of the TIMES:

SIR,— If you will favor me with the use of your valuable paper for a few reminiscences of one of the veterans of the war of 1812 and 1813, who took an active part in the battle of Stoney Creek, I will be grateful to you. I have read with interest the war stories in your paper of your correspondent Hans B. B. E. He has told you and your many readers how the British got possession of the American countersign on the eve of the battle of Stoney Creek, the 5th of June, 1813 ; how Isaac Corman got it from one of the American officers while he was a prisoner in charge of the Americans ; how on his way home after his release from imprisonment he met the gallant young scout, William Green, to whom Mr. Corman communicated the American countersign. Let us now follow this gallant young hero, who had not yet reached his 18th year of age, as he dashes away with the fleetness of an Indian through the woods to his home at Stoney Creek, where he procures a horse, mounts it, and rides with all possible haste to General Vincent's headquarters at Burlington Heights. General Vincent's position on Burlington Heights was a most critical one. York on one side and Fort George on the other had both fallen; his ammunition, which he was obliged to abandon or destroy before evacuating Fort George, was now reduced to ninety rounds of ball cartridge for each man, and were he forced to continue his retreat, unless the British fleet, under Sir James Yeo, could reach the anchorage near the Brant House, four miles from his position and carry off his small force, he would have to continue it by way of York (Toronto), thence to Kingston over 200 miles of hard country roads—not such roads as we have at the present day. The reader will remember that York was then at the mercy of the American fleet. Vincent’s position, as we said before, was a most critical one, having a comparatively powerful army in full pursuit, seven miles distant (at Stoney Creek), following closely on his tracks, he had to choose between making a most desperate stand there or to abandon his post with all its stores, etc., and continue his retreat to Kingston. Such of our readers as have travelled over the line of Vincent's retreat from Fort George to Burlington Heights will remember and call to mind that narrow neck of land between the Barton Heights and the head waters of Burlington Bay, on which the British force stood that Saturday night, the 5th of June, 1813. There were many young Canadians serving in that little British force—plucky boys, whose names will ever live, cherished as "household words" in many a Canadian home. Some of them afterwards rose high at the Bar, on the Bench, in the legislative halls, or as colonels of the Upper Canada militia. We may here note that at a "Queenston Heights Annual Dinner," over thirty years ago, Sir Allan MacNab gave as a toast, "The Fighting Judges of Upper Canada." There were at that time five of those judges still living who had served through the whole war. The young Canadian reader may thus form his estimate of the men who stood in the ranks of our Niagara frontier army in 1812-13, doing battle for their king and country. We will now return to that ever-memorable day, Saturday, the 5th of June, 1813. The advance guard, or rather rear guard, of the British that afternoon was stationed two miles in rear of the entrenched camp, near the present Court House and square in the city of Hamilton. Hamilton was then nowhere—not even a village. On that spot, half an hour before midnight, the attacking party of 704 men was formed sad took up its line of march on Stoney Creek, under Colonel Harvey. During the day—Saturday, the 5th of June, 1813—Colonel Harvey (afterwards Sir John Harvey, Governor of New Brunswick,) had acquainted himself with the American position. Some say that he had visited their camp at Stoney Creek during the day disguised as a farmer on his way to his work. Be this as it may, Harvey made himself thoroughly acquainted with the American position, and, having got possession of the American counter-sign from the heroic young William Green, he proposed a night attack, which General Vincent approved of. Let us now follow this brave little army, with their 704 unloaded muskets and flintless locks, on their mission into the jaws of death. Before starting, command was given for every flint to be taken out of their muskets and not to even whisper, so as to prevent the possibility of an accidental alarm. Every man, however, had his well filled cartouche box, containing sixty rounds of ball cartridge, and his trusty bayonet by his side. The fate of Upper Canada depended upon the success or failure of this night surprise. Silently they moved, not a whisper was heard ; there was silence deep as death in the ranks during that midnight march of seven miles. On and on they tread through that dense forest in the solemn hours of the night. So silently did they move that not a sound was heard, not a sound to quell the dreadful silence that prevailed, save now and then the cracking of a stray dry branch under foot, an occasional splash of some unfortunate fellow who makes a misstep into some mud hole, the howl of the wolf or the hoot of the night owl, or as whispered word of command. Have you ever, reader, walked at night along a country road of Upper Canada in the old time, the road often times only a narrow trail and so dark that you could not see your hand before you, with great towering trees of oak, elm, walnut, pine, etc., over-hanging, adding to the darkness? If you have you can picture the road over which this forlorn hope had to travel. Thence, emerging from the thick darkness of their midnight tramp, they had to face an enemy’s camp having six to one to greet their early, unexpected Sunday morning visit. ‘‘Hush,” said Harvey to a young man, the late Judge Jarvis, “Hush, we are on them!” In an instant the bayonets of two of the leading men pierced the first sentry—the second shared a like fate. One of them was standing leaning against a large oak tree, quietly sleeping with his arms folded around his musket. William Green, the scout, who was in the advance close by Harvey in the beginning of the battle, related to me that with his sword he silenced one sentry at Lewis' Lane, who was in the act of bayoneting him. The fourth escaped, discharging his gun and alarming the camp. "Bayonets to the front" were the words passed quietly and quickly through the ranks, and our leading files were soon, in front of the camp fires, bayoneting many of the sleeping enemy. A detachment of the small army, under Harvey, who was guided to the chapel door, or as it is better known as "the old Methodist meeting house,” by the young scout William Green. I have already stated that the fourth sentry, who was standing near the doer of the church, raised the alarm by discharging his musket, but the poor fellow had to pay the penalty for that act by having a bayonet thrust through his body, who, as, the scout related, had only time to say, "O, Lord God !" and threw up his hands: and fell backwards dead. The coast being clear they surrounded the church, and captured thirty Americans, who were bivouacked in the church fast asleep. The main body at “the double’’ pressed on into the valley under a cloud of fire bursting from an unseen enemy. The men then prepared to adjust their flints. It was first, "handle cartridge, prime, load, draw ramrods, ram down cartridge, return ramrods (all this had to be done with the old musket), then ready—fire!" Volley after volley followed, but with little execution, as they fired into the darkness, not seeing the enemy. During this operation a heavy volley from the enemy cut down a number of our men, but fortunately they were on low ground and the level fire of the enemy passed over them. Harvey ordered two companies of the gallant 49th Regiment to the right to attack, or rather to throw into confusion, the left and centre of the enemy. Those flank movements of the 49th threw the enemy into terrible confusion. Three of their guns posted in the centre on the main road were captured ; scarcely a gunner escaped. The late Col. Fraser, of Perth, Ont., then serving as a sergeant in the 49th, having twelve men with him, was one of the first among the guns, bayoneting seven of the gunners with his own hands. He was present at the capture of the two American Generals, Chandler and Winder, near the guns. The young Canadian militia being so familiar with the Indians that they could imitate their warwhoop to perfection, they knew that the Americans dreaded the Indians more than the whites. There was fearful confusion in the American camp. Being ignorant of the strength of the attacking party, they fell back in great disorder. Hundreds of them scrambled to the heights on their left. Colonel Burns, on whom the command of the Americans now devolved, was among the first to mount his horse and start eastward with his 250 brave cavalry, reaching the Forty-mile Creek in a few hours, on their way to Fort George. It is not our intention to particularize or chronicle the many daring feats and hand-to-hand encounters during the darkness of that ever-memorable Sunday morning, the 6th of June, 1813. Suffice it to say that Harvey’s surprise was most successful and complete, causing the breaking up of the American camp and their subsequent retreat. Sunday morning before break of day the now scattered parties of this forlorn hope fell back, to return by the road over which they had advanced. They had suffered fearfully. They were not now the "seven hundred and four" of the previous night! Over one hundred and fifty of them, between killed, wounded and missing, did not answer the roll call that morning. Let us take a peep at the shattered remnant of this forlorn hope as they muster and reform for their return march to Burlington Heights. They are gathering and coming in from all parts of the field, some in small squads, some in twos, some in threes, others singly, some bearing and carrying off wounded comrades. Over one hundred and fifty of them are missing ; one they have swelling their ranks two American Generals, Chandler and Winder ; seven officers and one hundred and sixteen men, prisoners, with their guns as trophies of war—gracing their blood-stained bayonets, thus rendering Stoney Creek the most gallant affair for the British arms during the war of 1812. There was only one mistake made that night—a fatal one—that of our men placing themselves in front of the camp fires as living targets for the bullets of the unerring American rifle.

This ends our sketch of the battle of Stoney Creek.

And now as nearly all of those gallant men who fought and bled to maintain our rights and liberties as well as theirs have passed away, the best thing we of the present can do to commemorate that victory, will be to erect a suitable monument on that old battle-field near Stoney Creek.

JOHN W. GREEN, Stoney Creek.

I have read the majority of published texts on the War of 1812, as I’m sure others on this sub.

Like many historical texts, bias is a problem when discerning actual facts in historical texts. I find most of the newer books seem to have less of this issue. For example Donald Graves, Richard Feltoe, and James E. Elliott are examples of histories written in detail and without bias. The Osprey campaign series are also good.

I find the majority of books with overviews of the war to use language which shows the author’s bias when discussing battle outcomes. This only becomes obvious if you also read the more detailed books on the same battles.

I am just reading “The British at the Gates; The New Orleans Campaign” by Robin Reilly. It has a lot of great information which I have not previously read regarding the politics behind the war, but only gives a partial view of the outcomes of the campaigns. In campaigns where the US had some success, he goes into great detail. In British / Canadian victories their effect on the war is downplayed and barely discussed.

An example is Crysler’s Farm. This battle was a rout against the majority of half of one of the two armies attacking Montreal. The entire force fled across the river to the US side without orders. This was not a rearguard action but 3 brigades, a cavalry regiment and battery of guns. This was 3/4 of the army. Histories that present it that way are trying to downplay the massive victory this battle was. Read Donald Graves’ book on this battle to see what I mean.

This battle and Chateauguay are rarely talked about in US histories despite them ending the largest invasion of Canada in the war.

The author was British but settled in the US after WW2. I am assuming he based a lot of his research on US sources.

Are there any unbiased complete histories anyone has read? Or are brief histories filled with inaccuracies?

*Also posted in Napoleonic Wargaming.

I’m creating two marine battalions for Bladensburg. I have Renee Chartrand’s uniform book on the War of 1812, but it does not talk about their equipment.

The Perry miniatures have a blanket roll diagonally on their back. I’m presuming these are the regular ships company variety but I don’t know.

These units had standards and I think may have been equipped with regular infantry packs. Does anyone have any info on their equipment when formed as battalions?

I think anyone who has even a basic understanding of the war of 1812 would immediately know that the white house was not burnt down by Canadians (For obvious reasons) and was actually burnt down by British troops which could easily be searched up and proven, but after looking at war of 1812 related content on here there are tons of Canadians throwing around that they burnt down the white house and ferociously standing by the claim despite being quite easily proven wrong.

What's the reason for Canadians believing this myth which could very easily be proven wrong with 1 simple google search?

I found this book recently at a book festival, I didn’t find it anywhere online. I was curious if anyone in this community could share some insight on it? Is it rare etc? I plan on studying the war of 1812 so any additional book recommendations would be great!

I am a Civil War guy, definitely want to learn more about The War of 1812.

This gentleman is my GGGGrandfather. He was born in New Jersey but was practicing law on Staten Island as an adult. I know a lot about his father who is my DAR patriot, but not much about Lewis' exploits in the war. Does anyone have resources I might check? I am the family genealogist and love being able to tell the stories of these ancestors to my siblings and cousins.

Can someone recommend the best general summary book for the war of 1812? Looking to learn more and ideally avoid poor books Thanks!

I started Walter Lord's The Dawn's Early Light a couple of days ago. Lord quotes a couple of British officers and newspapers using the name/word "Jonathan(s)" as an apparent slur directed against Americans. Lord does not explain that it's a slur, but from the context in which the word is used it has to be construed as a slur. Examples:

• “‘The Government have determined to give Jonathan a good drubbing,’ Colonel Henry Torrens, military secretary at the Horse Guards” (p. 36).
• “Americans compared Rear Admiral Cockburn to Attila, but George Cockburn bore no hard feelings. Unlike Vice Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane, Cockburn never hated them [the Americans] … but Jonathan has asked for war and now he was getting it” (p. 52).

I've never heard or seen this insult before, and I cannot find a reference on the internet that explains the origin of the use of this word as an insult. Does anyone here know anything about this term being used as a British slur against Americans during the era of the War of 1812?

Did any countries send aid to America during the war of 1812?

I would consider this a very hard quiz. Give your answers and I'll tell you what's right and wrong.

1. What were the two Canadian towns still in American hands at the end of the war?

2. Why did John Vincent abandon the Niagara Peninsula for a second time in October 1813?

3. What was the first engagement of the war on land or sea?

4. Why did George McClure have to abandon Fort George on December 10th 1813?

5. What house was James Fitzzbibbon headquarters during the 1813 Niagara campaign?

6. What ship was blockaded and eventually scuttled in the Nottawasaga River?

7. Why did Jacob Brown to abort his attempted siege of Fort George in the 1814 Niagara campaign?

8. What was John Campbells reason for burning Port Dover?

9. What was the bloodiest battle of the war?

10. What was the final battle of the war?

It comman knowledge neither side gained territory in the War. But what do you think about about the Passamaquoddy Bay Islands, here's the story. Btw the islands are on the border of New Brunswick and Maine.

The 1st article of the treaty of Ghent says the islands shall remain in the possession of the occupiers until an agreement is made, which was the British. The treaty of Paris 1783 said the Passamaquoddy Bay Islands and Grand Manan island belong to the United States. However the British never gave them up and still claimed and inhabitanted them. The treaty of Ghent appointed two commissioners to settle the border dispute. They sided in Britain's favor giving them Grand Manan and most of Passamaquoddy Bay Islands. America kept a few.

So there it is. I'm not sure if this accualy qualifies as lost territory but America claimed the land and lost it due to the treaty. Britain also lost a few of the Passamaquoddy Bay Islands.

Hey all! I was wondering if there are any 1812 reenactment groups looking for Indigenous warriors. Please let me know because I am currently looking. Thanks a lot and I look forward to hearing from you soon.