To Quebec: Triumph and Tragedy (1)

To the Gates of Quebec

“We Shall Be Undone”

In the Fall of 1775, the Americans launched an invasion of Canada. The defending British forces were concentrated in the western part of the province, especially at Fort Saint-Jean. In the eastern part of the province, Lieutenant-Colonel Allan Maclean safeguarded Quebec, a strategically valuable city and the seat of government.

Unbeknownst to the British, the American invasion was made in two parts. General Richard Montgomery led the main effort in the west. In the east, Colonel Benedict Arnold led a secretive expedition through the wilderness of Maine and southern Canada in a bid to take the city of surprise. His march was a remarkable achievement, and one of the most celebrated events of the war.

Strategic Situation: November-December, 1775 (click to enlarge).

Arnold’s expedition was nearly successful as British attention was focused elsewhere. At the time Arnold reached the St. Lawrence River, the city of Quebec was defended by only a handful of regulars. Maclean, and most of his men had moved west to Sorel. Meanwhile, a number of English merchants in Quebec scarcely hid their hopes that the Americans would take over. However, word of Arnold’s expedition leaked out, and the British removed all small craft from the south shore of the river. This stymied Arnold just long enough. By the time the Americans were across the St. Lawrence, Maclean and his men were back in the garrison. [1]

At this point, the city of Quebec was not in imminent danger, but its fall looked inevitable. Maclean lamented:

“…we have been now ten days invested so that we can get nothing into the Town, and our provisions are by no means Adequate to Maintain the Number of Inhabitants, and if we turn out some thousands, we run a very great risk of having the Canadian Militia Mutiny… But what above all gives me the greatest uneasiness is, that the very best Train of Artillery in Canada fell into the hands of the Rebells at St. John's, there is not a single piece of Brass Ordnance in the Whole Province that they have not got, and if they have got a ship that lay at Montreal with 2000 Barrells of Powder, which I am afraid is the case, we shall be undone…”

Fortunately for the British, the supply of gunpowder had been thrown into the St. Lawrence.

Also, the American army was on the point of dissolution.

----------------------------------------------------

“Patience and Perseverance”

Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery’s men had spent a miserable campaign in the swampy forestland around Fort Saint-Jean, during which time much of the army was debilitated by illness. Now the Canadian winter was at hand, and the men were without adequate clothing. Provisions were chronically in short supply and the army was essentially bankrupt. It didn’t help either that most of the Americans’ terms of enlistment were set to expire on December 31st, and the men longed to be with their families again.

Montgomery issued a proclamation at Montreal on November 15 in which he made “acknowledgment to the troops for their patience and perseverance during the course of a fatiguing campaign.” Rather than force dispirited men to campaign with him any longer, he offered “Passess, together with boats and provisions… for such as choose to return home…” However, he asked “the troops not to lay him under the necessity of abandoning Canada; of undoing in one day what has been the work of months,” and he hoped “that none will leave him at this critical juncture but such whose affairs or health absolutely require their return home…”

Montgomery also asked the men to extend their enlistments until April 15th, by which time new regiments could be raised in the colonies and sent into Canada. By way of enticement, he wrote: “Those who engage in this honorable cause shall be furnished completely with every article of clothing requisite for the rigor of the climate, blanket-coats, coats, waistcoat and breeches, one pair of stockings, two shirts, leggins, sacks, shoes, mittens, and a cap, at the Continental charge, and one dollar bounty.”

The response was disappointing. The Green Mountain Boys chose to return home, so too did Bedel’s Rangers, and most of the troops from Connecticut. At least many in Montgomery’s own New York regiments agreed to stick it out. Major John Brown also remained along with many of his men, and James Livingston retained a corps of Canadian troops (soon to be reorganized as the 1st Canadian Regiment).

Another unit that had planned on departing was Lamb’s artillery company. Cannoneer Robert Barwick recorded in his journal on November 18, “our Capt [John Lamb] Came up to know the minds of our Company about [en]Listing but there was scarce one of them that would consent to it, as they been so long from home and wanted to go Back.” [2]

Lamb’s men, however, seem to have been given the option to leave only after the other unwilling men were dismissed. Lamb’s men then “were told what Difficulty it was in getting down the Lakes in the winter[, and] they began to think it would be best to [en]list again…” Once the other units departed, the Americans suffered from a shortage of bateaux -- the one practical means of returning to New York.

Therefore, Barwick, in spite of his wishes, “went forwards to Quebec although I had but about 4 or 5 weeks to serve of my old inlistment.” Most of the company followed suit.

Montgomery then began to send the troops downriver aboard the vessels captured at Sorel.

----------------------------------------------------

“To Die with a Hero”

Lieutenant John Copp of the 1st New York Regiment left Montreal on December 1st and reached Quebec on the 6th. He wrote the following day, “We met herewith Colonel Arnold and his Detachment from Cambridge, he has about 600 men who have suffered innumerable hardships on their March hither. He is really a brave Man, and will no doubt, if his Life is spared, do honor to the American Arms. Great part of the Army left us when they were most wanted, but I flatter myself we shall be able to do without them. The more Danger, the more Glory. If Quebec is taken all is Ours…” [3]

But Copp admitted that the situation was hardly promising: “the place appears to be almost impregnable… This Evening our Bombardment is to go on, and the Artillery to begin their Attack in different places. Our Chief difficulty is in erecting Batteries, on account of the Frost having hardened the Ground too much for throwing it up.”

The same mix of optimism and fatalism appears in a letter written the same day by an officer stationed at Fort Saint-Jean (now an American depot):

“Heaven seems still to smile upon us… This is the time of the year when in common the rivers about here are froze up, but we have this day calm moderate weather, with a fair wind to carry down the boats with the powder… Gen. Montgomery landed at Point aux Trembles last Friday the 1st inst. on Saturday part of his Army marched for Quebec and he was to follow with the remainder the next day; This we call great news, & if it is true that fortune favours the brave, success must attend our General, for a braver man does not tread on America nor on English leather; to die with such a man is to die with a Hero indeed.” [4]

----------------------------------------------------

Notes:

1. Maclean left Sorel for other reasons and learned of Arnold's arrival on the St. Lawrence while returning to Quebec.

2. Barwick's journal appears in the series, Naval Documents of the Revolutionary War.

3. Source.

4. Source. The last passage is of course remarkably prescient. I got the chills when reading it.

Fruits of Victory

The guns at Fort Saint-Jean fell silent late on November 1, 1775. The next day was spent in negotiations, and the formal surrender took place on the 3rd.

The surrender ceremony was brief. At 10 AM the Americans assembled their regiments and marched to within 50 yards of the fort. There, according to an American artilleryman, “we halted and was all drawn up in a rank and stood there till the regulars got ready and marched out with all their arms and 2 field pieces.” [1]

The British troops are then embarked in a number of bateaux and taken into captivity. For them, it is a bitter defeat. One Juchereau dit Duchesnay, a militia officer, wrote bitterly to a friend, “Notre résistance nous a fait obtenir les honneurs de la guerre et la douce satisfaction d'être traînés à Connecticut: un coup de fusil au travers du corps à Montréal me ferait beaucoup moins de peine et de tort.” (Roughly: ‘Our resistance has obtained us the honors of war and the sweet satisfaction of being dragged to Connecticut; a shot through the body in Montreal would cause much less pain and harm’). [2]

The victorious American commander, Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery, soon pressed on to conquer the rest of Canada. By the 7th, most of Montgomery’s men streamed into the village of La Prairie, across from Montreal. On the 11th, a large contingent crossed from La Prairie to L'île St. Paul in the middle of the St. Lawrence. British Governor Guy Carleton realized the futility of trying to hold Montreal any longer, and he embarked the city’s garrison and a large amount of supplies on 11 vessels. Late in the day this flotilla heads down the St. Lawrence towards Quebec.

On the 12th, the city of Montreal entered into surrender negotiations with Montgomery. With Carleton gone, the city walls were defended by local militia. The Montrealers were primarily concerned about property rights and the continued free exercise of religion. The negotiations proceeded smoothly, and the surrender took place the following day.

Winter weather hit the area at this time, which caused much hardship for the Americans, as recorded by journalists:

• Aaron Barlow on November 7th: “The weather being cold makes it very uncomfortable living in tents.”
• Benjamin Trumbull on November 9th: “It begins to rain, the Ways are dirty and Slippery so that it is difficult to Walk without falling. The Whole Country is water and mud & not a dry Spot to be found.”
• John Fassett on November 12: “Went to a Dutchman’s house to get a dram… where were a number of Yorkers of the First Battalion, cursing and swearing and damning themselves and one another. It seemed like a hell upon earth. Fair weather but cold.”

----------------------------------------------------

While working on this project, I've painted a number of 15mm miniatures to represent soldiers from the British garrison and the American army. Some of these appeared in past posts; here are some that I don't believe I've posted before.

The Garrison. Pictured are troops of the 26th Foot, an officer of the 7th Foot with a brass 24-pounder, a Royal Artillery officer, and the officer's wife.

The Besieging Army. Pictured are one of Lamb's cannoneers with a brass 12-pounder, General Montgomery, and some Connecticut Continentals.

----------------------------------------------------

The victory at Fort Saint-Jean was a remarkable achievement for a Continental army that was not yet 5 months old.

The garrison that surrendered included the following:

• 7th Regiment of Foot: 259 men [3]
• 26th Regiment of Foot: 215 men [3]
• Canadian Gentleman Volunteers, Officers, and Militia: 75 men [4]
• Royal Artillery: 38 men [3]
• Royal Highland Emigrants: 19 men [3]
• Other Canadian Volunteers: 12 men [4]
• Native Americans: 2 men [4]

In addition to these land forces, the Americans captured a Royal Navy contingent led by Captain Hunter, and a group of carpenters and artificers, led by Captain Thompson.

The Americans also captured the half-sunk Royal Savage, a row galley, a number of smaller vessels, and a large train of artillery.

Notes:

1. From the “True journal of Barwick’s Company from New York to Quebec, August 4, 1775 to September 25, 1776.” Robert Barwick was a cannonneer in Lamb’s artillery.

2. From Hospice-Anthelme-Jean-Baptiste Verreau's (1873) Invasion du Canada.

3. From a return dated November 1, 1775, at Fort Saint-Jean. Published in A history of the organization, development and services of the military and naval forces of Canada from the Peace of Paris in 1763 to the present time. Vol. 1.

4. From a “Liste des Messieurs les Officiers & Gentilhommes Canadiens qui ont servit en qualite de Volontaires sous les ordres de Mr. Belletre & pris prisonniers dans la Garnison de St. Jean sous le Commandement du Major Preston.” Published in A history of the organization, development and services of the military and naval forces of Canada from the Peace of Paris in 1763 to the present time. Vol. 1.

A large Native American contingent was present at Fort Saint-Jean when the Americans first advanced on the fort. These men participated in a hard-fought September skirmish, but most left the garrison soon thereafter.

Final Bombardment of Fort Saint-Jean

The siege of Fort Saint-Jean dragged on for weeks. Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery, who led the American forces, was impatient to finish the siege, so that he could capture Montreal before winter set on. In the meantime it was hoped that a second American army, led by Brigadier-General Benedict Arnold, would capture the town of Quebec, thereby completing the conquest of Canada.

Early in the siege Montgomery identified a hill to the northwest as the key spot from which to threaten the fort. In early October, he “had a road cut to the intended ground and some fascines made.” [1]

However, his army disapproved of this plan and Montgomery “was informed by Major Brown that a general dissatisfaction prevailed; that unless something was undertaken, in a few days there would be a mutiny.” The army preferred to bombard the fort from afar -- especially the east bank of the Richelieu. Montgomery confessed in a letter to Major-General Philip Schuyler, that when he laid his plans, “I did not consider I was at the head of troops who carry the spirit of freedom into the field, and [who] think for themselves.”

The British took little action to thwart the Americans beyond the exchange of long-range artillery fire. Occasional sorties were made by armed boats, but these efforts ended once a battery was established east of the fort (October 11). On land, a party of Canadians, led by Captains David Monin and Samuel McKay, ambushed some Americans in the woods (October 9), but no sorties were directed against the American camps or gun emplacements.

By the end of October, Montgomery was ready to bring the siege of the fort to a close. He had been reinforced by mortars and ammunition captured at Fort Chambly, and some additional infantry companies from the colonies (specifically, the bulk of the 1st Connecticut and 4th New York regiments). On October 27-28, he abandoned the fortifications south of Fort Saint-Jean and brought his whole force to Grosse Pointe northwest of the fort. There, construction of a new battery overlooking the fort was begun on the evening of October 29.

Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolphus Ritzema of the 1st New York Regiment oversaw the construction:

“In the Evening I was ordered with 200 Men to erect a Battery [the Ground for which having been previously laid out by the Engineers] within 250 Yards of the Fort—In the Morning the Breast Work & Ambresurs completed”

The British soon learned what the Americans were planning:

“Captn Monin and Captn McKay went out this morning in hopes of getting a prisoner, and if possible to survey the Enemys position. An Officer & 25 Men were order’d to be in readiness to support them. They had been out a very little while, when they fell in with a Man who we afterward found was a straggler from a party of 200 Men, who were very near the same Spot [i.e., they captured one of Ritzema’s men]. The Man inform’d us there were 2,000 Men at the rapids (i.e., the lower Camp) and 50 Indians… He shew’d us the place of the Battery…” [2]

Because of the prisoner’s confession, the new battery quickly became a harrowing place for those that guarded it.

According to Aaron Barlow of the 5th Connecticut Regiment:

“The Regulars discovered our Battery. We guarded it with 100 men, I being one of the Guard. They flung upwards of 100 Bomb shells, some cannon and grape shot at us. Wounded one man, broke two guns. One bomb shell broke within 4 feet of me which made me almost deaf. I believe there were 20 shells broke within 2 rods of me. This night [October 29-30] we dragged four cannon and five mortars to this Breast work in order to play on the Fort.” [3]

The battery opened on November 1, and was joined by the guns east of the fort. Together, they devastated the fort.

A British officer recorded:

“Large pieces of the Wall were knock’d in. The Chimneys of the House in the South Redoubt were thrown down and the few Corners where some little Shelter from the Weather was to be had were now no longer tenable. A great many shot pass’d thro’ the parapets and some wounded Men behind them. 3 Men were kill’d and 4 or 5 wounded. A good deal of provision was destroy’d.—”

British counterfire was also deadly.

According to Benjamin Trumbull of the 5th Connecticut Regiment:

“On our Side one man was killed right out on the Platform, another had his Leg[,] foot and Thigh torn all to Pieces with a shell, had his Leg cut of[f] about nine o’clock as near the trunk of his body as possible, he bore the Operation with great magnanimity but did not Survive the Night. Three more were wounded but two of them very Slightily.”

Late in the day, Montgomery attempted to open surrender negotiations with the British. An officer in Lamb's artillery recalled:

“I received a message from General Montgomery, ordering me to cease firing till further orders; these orders were extremely disagreeable to me, when I saw some of my men bleeding before my eyes, and dying with the wounds which they had received. On our ceasing to fire, the General ordered a parley to be beat...”

The messenger Montgomery sent was one Lacoste, a Canadian militiaman captured at Longueuil. From him, the British learned that Governor Guy Carleton had been defeated and that there was no hope of relief. The garrison was left with enough rations for 8 days at 2/3 the usual allotment, not including those rations destroyed in the bombardment. The British agreed to a cease fire and pondered their few remaining options.

Notes:

1. A copy of the letter is available here.

The journal attributed to British Lieutenant John André seemingly confirms the wisdom of Montgomery’s assessment. He noted at the end of the siege:

“We may thank our Enemy in some sort for leaving us in such slight field Works the credit of having been only reduc’d by Famine… Their Batterys might with their numbers [of infantry] by means of Approaches have been brought much closer to our Redouts have overlook’d us, destroyed our breastworks, and by a slaughter from which there cou’d have been no Shelter, have render’d our holding out, a meer sacrifice of Men who might have been reserv’d for better Services.”

2. From a journal attributed to British Lieutenant John André.

3. Sources disagree on the composition of this battery. For example, Montgomery referred to "our battery of four twelve-pounders" (see here). Colonel Timothy Bedel wrote, "I have a battery of four twelve-pounders, one mortar, and three royals, fixing at my post" (see here). Ritzema claimed it consisted of four 12-pounders and six Royal Mortars. An officer with Lamb's Artillery company (likely Captain John Lamb himself) stated that it consisted of "three twelve and one nine-pounders, three mortars, and as many cohorns" (see here). For additional comparison, see this description of the American ordinance used during the siege.

New York Regiments of 1775

In 1775, the colony of New York raised four regiments of infantry and one company of artillery. These troops were assigned to the army commanded by Major-General Philip Schuyler and Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery, and they participated in the siege of Fort Saint-Jean and the assault on Quebec.

New York had considerable difficulty getting its men into the field, with the result that when the American invasion of Canada was launched, only 5 companies of the 1st New York Regiment were on hand. Many of the troops were awaiting either arms and equipment, or transportation north.

The problems then facing the colony are well-illustrated in a letter by the lieutenant-colonel of the 4th New York, written just 1 week before the invasion got under way.

"I arrived [in Albany] the 26th [of August], finding Captain Henry B. Livingston, with his Company, in a small house in Town. He wants many things, such as shoes, stockings, shirts, underclothes, haversacks, and cash, having advanced all himself that has been paid his men as yet. The day I arrived, came up the following Captains, with their Companies: Captain Herrick, Captain Palmer, Captain Horton, and Captain Mills, all without blankets, excepting Captain David Palmer; many of the men wanting shirts, shoes, stockings, underclothes, and, in short, without any thing fit for a soldier, except a uniform coat; and not more than thirty guns [i.e., muskets], with four Companies, fit for service. They are now on board of the small boats that brought them up, having no place for them to go into, as there is not one tent that I can find for our Battalion, and three Companies without blankets, and none to be had at this place. I do not know how to act or what to do with them; they begin to ask for cash and better lodgings, being much crowded in the small boats in which I am obliged to keep them."

Uniform coats seems to be one of the few items the colony was able to reliably supply to its troops. On June 28, 1775, the New York Provincial Congress ordered the purchase of 712 of each of the following types of short coats: blue broadcloth with crimson facings, light brown coarse broadcloth with blue facings, grey broadcloth with green facings, and dark brown coarse broadcloth with scarlet facings. [see here].

A number of writers have indicated that the above description refers to, in order, the uniforms worn by the four New York regiments. However, in a relatively recent uniform book, Marko Zlatich (1994) wrote that in practice the regiments were clothed as follows: blue faced scarlet (1st New York), blue faced crimson (2nd New York), a variety of coat colors faced green (3rd New York), a variety of coat colors faced blue (4th New York).

Lamb's New York artillery company wore blue coats with buff facings. [see here].

Uniforms of Lamb's Artillery Company (Left) and the 3rd New York (Right) According to Charles Lefferts.

3rd New York Regiment in Miniature. Following Zlatich, I've painted the regiment in a variety of coat colors (blue, brown, and grey) faced green. The miniatures are by Stone Mountain.

Reenactor Units:

• 2nd New York Regiment
• 3rd New York Regiment
• Lamb's Artillery Company

Second Skirmish at Petite-Rivière-du-Nord

An American army, under Major-General Philip Schuyler, advanced into Canada on September 4, 1775. Two days later it made what amounted to a reconnaissance-in-force against British-held Fort Saint-Jean. By September 10, reinforcements increased the size of his army from fewer than 1,000 men to 1,394 effectives. The new arrivals included parts of the 2nd New York and 4th Connecticut regiments, and a small number of cannon. [1]

Schuyler believed himself strong enough to begin siege operations against Fort Saint-Jean. His plan to divide the American force into three parts. One part would consist of infantrymen turned sailors and marines. A second part would consist of infantrymen and the army’s artillery. Together these first two parts would establish a base south of the fort and protect the American supply line. The third part would consist of a detachment of infantry that would circle around the fort and cut the British supply line. Schuyler anticipated that additional men and guns would arrive in the days and weeks ahead, at which point he would be able to begin attacking the fort itself.

Ritzema's Planned Advance (approximate path shown in light blue) and Actual Advance (in dark blue). Click to Enlarge.

Schuyler’s army advanced from L'Île-aux-Noix on the 10th, and landed late in the day at the abandoned “upper breastwork.” Schuyler, who was unwell, gave command of the expedition to Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery. Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolphus Ritzema commanded the detachment that was to cut the fort’s supply line.

While the infantry proceeded on land, two American row galleys, the Schuyler and Hancock, proceeded downstream. Each was armed with a 12-pounder cannon and 12 swivel guns. The galleys came under fire as they neared the “lower breastwork” from British forces on land and in the river.

The British commander at Fort Saint-Jean, Major Charles Preston, had anticipated a second American advance. To watch for such a movement, he had dispatched thirty some Canadian gentlemen volunteers and Indian allies under the command of Joseph-Dominique-Emmanuel Le Moyne de Longueuil. This force travelled upstream in two bateaux armed with swivel guns, and halted when it reached the abandoned lower breastwork. There, de Longueuil landed one part of his force, while the others remained in the boats.

Le Moyne de Longueuil

When de Longueuil's men saw the American row galleys, the land forces began a long-range musket fire, and the bateaux fired grape shot from the swivel guns.

According to the one of the Americans, “Our armed boats perceiving the fire on the lake, fired three twelve-pounders, one of which took the enemy' s principal batteau directly in the bow, and tore her from stem to stern; she immediately sunk, with all the men in her, amounting to thirty-five.” [2]

Clearly overmatched, de Longueuil ordered a retreat, and all but six of his land force embarked in the remaining bateau and headed for the fort. The retreating bateau was fired at by the galleys, but the men aboard escaped without injury. The six who remained behind were sieurs Boucherville, de La Bruere, Campion, La Madeleine, and Perthuis, and an Abenaki indian. These men occupied a small house near the lower breastwork and kept watch on American movements.

Meanwhile, Ritzema's detachment set off to make a night march around the fort. Ritzema was in front with a small vanguard. Behind him were 60 men of the 4th Connecticut, followed by 300 men of the 5th Connecticut, and finally 140 men of the 1st New York.

Ritzema had just reached the lower breastwork when the advance fell apart. The 5th Connecticut had been ambushed in the advance on September 6, and the evening gloom promised another attack. These troops panicked when they unexpectedly encountered another group of men in the woods. Soon they, along with most of Ritzema's other men, were in flight for the upper breastwork. The Americans thought that “they had been waylaid by a party of Regulars and Indians” [emphasis in original], but “not a gun had been fired, except one by a man of the detachment.” The men in the woods had been their own comrades. [3]

After some time, Montgomery, Ritzema, and other officers were able to reorganize the men and put them back on the march. However, they had advanced only about 1/4 mile when the Connecticutians panicked a second time after some random shells from Fort Saint-Jean burst in the woods.

After this second retreat, Ritzema was left with less than half of his original force. Ritzema resolutely pressed on, and his men struggled to keep up in the dark, swampy woods. Near midnight, Ritzema, now with only about 50 men, at last reached the lower breastwork. There, the Americans observed a fire had been lit in a small house, and they moved to surround it. Sieurs Boucherville and La Madeleine, who were outside the house, gave the alarm and fled. When the men inside the house ran out the door, they were met with a hail of gunfire. Sieur Perthuis and the Abenaki were killed, Sieur de La Bruere was shot in both arms (but escaped), and Sieur Campion got away unharmed.

Realizing how few men were still with him, Ritzema halted and waited for stragglers to appear. Meanwhile, his men stripped and scalped Sieur Perthuis and beheaded the dead Abenaki. [4] Sometime before 3am, Montgomery cancelled the operation and ordered Ritzema's men back to the upper breastwork.

The next morning [September 11] the senior officers announced, in a council of war, that they favored continuing operations against Saint-Jean. However, word then came that the enemy was on the move. According to one officer: “we saw their armed schooner [the Royal Savage], of one hundred and eighty tons, carrying twelve nine-pounders, coming towards us.” It was a critical moment: the American flotilla was no match for such a vessel. [5]

According to Ritzema, the New York troops “remained in their Ranks & shewed a ready Spirit to proceed,” but the Connecticutians panicked and fled to the bateaux. Ritzema, in a rage, wounded several fleeing men with his sword, and had to be restrained by a doctor from using his pistol, too. He concluded, “This infamous conduct so much dispirited the General that he ordered the whole to embark and to proceed to Isle au Noix.” [6]

Once again, an American movement against Fort Saint-Jean had ended in disappointment.

Montgomery complained bitterly in a letter to his wife:

“…such a set of pusillanimous wretches never were collected. Could I, with decency, leave the army in its present situation, I would not serve an hour longer. I am much afraid the general character of the people has been too justly represented. However, there are some whose spirit I have confidence in; they are taking pains with the men, and they flatter me with hopes of prevailing on them to retrieve their characters.”

He also feared that any chance that the Canadians would rise up en masse to support the Americans was now lost:

“ We were so unfortunate as to have some Canadians witnesses of our disgrace! What they will think of the brave Bostonians [7], I know not! My own feelings tell me they are not likely to put confidence in such friends.”

Notes:

1. I've had some difficulty discerning the exact composition of Schuyler's army on September 10. The following represents my understanding of the organization as of this writing (keep in mind that I'm working with a limited set of sources):

• 1st Connecticut: 2 companies, commanded by captains William Douglass and David Welch. Douglass commanded a row galley; it's possible that all of these men were used to man vessels in the American flotilla.
• 4th Connecticut: A part of the regiment, commanded by Major Samuel Elmore.
• 5th Connecticut: Most or all of the regiment, commanded by Colonel David Waterbury.
• 6th Connecticut: 1 company, commanded by Captain Edward Mott. These men were likely serving the American cannon and/or helping to man the vessels.
• 1st New York: A part of the regiment, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolphus Ritzema.
• 2nd New York: A part of the regiment. The officers that I have been able to place with the army at this time are Captain Christopher Yates, Captain Joseph McCracken, and Lieutenant Cornelius Van Slyck.

2. I haven’t been able to find any confirmation of this disaster among Canadian sources. Although the Americans suspected that most or all of the men aboard this vessel were killed or drowned, this is may have been a case of wishful thinking. The men in the boat were thought to have been either Canadian volunteers or British regulars. At the very least, it appears from Canadian sources that no seigneurs died in his incident.

Another mystery (to me) is when exactly this incident took place. One source implies that it occurred immediately before the skirmish on land, while others imply that it took place considerably earlier.

3. Montgomery believed that the men who inadvertently triggered the panic were stragglers. Another source claimed that they were a party guarding the flank of the American column.

4. The mutilation of the dead bodies was done in retaliation for similar acts attributed to the Indians. One American claimed that after the skirmish on the 6th, “they dug up our dead and mangled them in the most shocking manner.” Perthuis may have been wearing a red coat, for he was mistaken for a British regular. An observer wrote, “We stripped the Regular and found a very fine gun and sword--the gun with two Barrels the neatest I ever saw, a fine watch some money, and very neatly dressed.”

5. The Royal Savage had only recently been launched. It was unavailable to contest the American advance on September 6. Unbeknownst to the Americans, the Royal Savage actually carried only 3, 4, and 6-pounders.

6. Ritzema was convinced that the Connecticut troops were the chief problem. Montgomery, who was also a citizen of New York, found cause for complaint with the troops as a whole.

7. This is in reference to the Canadian slang word Bostonnais, which literally means person from Boston, but was used in reference to all Americans. It carried roughly the same meaning as Yankee does today to some non-Americans.

An Aside on Research

A few days ago, I posted a description of the first inaugural skirmish in the American invasion of Canada. For good or ill, the post was just a straightforward description of the skirmish itself. I didn't present a long list of sources or explain how and why my account differed from those of others. Because I intend to continue with this style of post for other incidents in the campaign, I feel I should provide a bit of background information.

When researching a project I rely more on online sources than print ones. In particular, I search Google Books, the Internet Archive, and lists of journals. I then make a library of .pdf files and "copy" and "paste" the relevant text into a single electronic document. Below is a listing of the first-hand accounts of the inaugural skirmish in the invasion of Canada. All of these were found in online, out-of-copyright books or Peter Force's American Archives.

• Richard Montgomery, general. Letter dated September 5 (but, when compared to other accounts, probably was not written before September 7).
• Benjamin Trumbull, soldier. Journal entry dated September 6, 1775
• Rudolphus Ritzema, officer. Journal entry dated September 6, 1775
• Philip Schuyler, general. Letter dated September 8, 1775
• Anonymous. Letter dated September 8, 1775
• James Van Rensselaer, officer. Letter dated September 14, 1775
• Anonymous. Letter dated September 16, 1775
• Philip Schuyler, general. Letter dated September 20, 1775
• [Guillaume?] de Lorimier, officer. Memorial dated December 1, 1777
• Guillaume de Lorimier, officer. Undated memoir.

Next, I do a little bit of writing, and try to establish what I want to say. I don't trust (with good reason) this initial take on the material, so I then read (and re-read) everything again. Reading and reflection on the source material gets spread out over months. The final write-up happens in an evening.

The product of these efforts is not exactly serious scholarship, but it's also not exactly inconsequential. My descriptions are grounded in primary sources, but my method of researching events is crude, and my writing lacks polish. Both strengths and weaknesses are in evidence when comparisons are made with typical military histories. By way of an example, consider the following description of this inaugural skirmish in Boatner's Encyclopedia of the American Revolution. Boatner's account is admirable in how he engages the interest of the reader with remarkably economical prose. However, the account also relies on some dubious sources, and my numbers in brackets refer to critical comments that follow.

“When the Americans approached on 5 Sept. [1], the place was defended by 200 regulars, several cannon [2], a small Indian contingent, and the British were building two 60-foot, 12-gun vessels. Maj. Chas. Preston was in command of the post…

“Montgomery’s command comprised about 1,200 men and a few cannon [3]; their advance was made in a small fleet of two sailing vessels (the sloop Enterprise and schooner Liberty), gondolas, bateaux, rowing galleys, piraguas, and canoes [4]. (Ward, W.O.R., 150) Troops involved were most of Waterbury’s Conn. Regt., four companies of Ritzema’s 4th N.Y. [5], and Mott’s small artillery section. (Ibid.)

“Schuyler caught up with his aggressive subordinate the morning of 4 Sept., (surprisingly) approved his action, and that night the invaders were at Ile aux Noix. Although the expected Canadian allies did not appear to reinforce them [6], Schuyler stripped his men of baggage and pushed toward St. Johns. Landing a mile and a half away, the Americans were advancing through the swamps to attack when a flank patrol was ambushed by 100 Indians under the command of a N.Y. Tory (Capt. Tice). A skirmish developed in the dense underbrush; the Indians were driven off, but the Americans lost 16 men and did not pursue. That night a man who was apparently sympathetic to the American cause visited Schuyler’s entrenched camp and convinced him that St. Johns was too strongly held for him to capture.” [7]

Comments:

1. Taken as a whole, the first-hand accounts listed above clearly indicate that the skirmish was on the 6th. The journals maintained by Ritzema and Trumbull are particularly convincing.

2. The British were stronger than stated. Compare, for example, this document, and this one with this rather detailed listing of British troop totals. The British also had considerably more than "several cannon."

3. Schuyler claimed to have had fewer than 1,000 men with him on the 6th. The "few cannon" did not include field pieces. From Ritzema's journal, entry dated September 6: “The General ordered the whole army without one Piece of Artillery, save two twelve Pounders in the Bows of the Gondolas, to embark for St Johns.”

4. Ritzema's journal, quoted above, in combination with this document, indicate that the Liberty and the Enterprise did not accompany this expedition. Rather, the only armed vessels were the Hancock and the Schuyler. Boatner might have noted, but did not, that the British also had the service of a variety of small vessels.

5. Ritzema's command consisted of five (not four) companies of the 1st (not 4th) New York. See this document, and his journal entry for September 4.

6. I have seen no evidence that a rendezvous was planned between Canadian and American forces at L'Île-aux-Noix. Certainly it would’ve been difficult for Canadians to get there in large numbers, as Fort Saint-Jean sat astride the only route. It wasn’t until the 5th that Schuyler announced his arrival in Canada (see here and here) and sent envoys to his Canadian supporters.

7. The man was Moses Hazen (compare this document with this one). Schuyler had long known that the fort was quite strong (see, for example, here), and it was not the cause of the American return to L'Île-aux-Noix. The true causes of the retreat can be found here, here, and in Ritzema's journal.

Skirmish at Petite-Rivière-du-Nord

The American invasion of Canada began on September 4, 1775, when an army commanded by Major-General Philip Schuyler encamped on L'Île-aux-Noix, in southern Canada. Two days later, this force sets out for Fort Saint-Jean. This advance against Fort Saint-Jean is intended primarily to probe the fort’s defenses and to encourage the support of pro-American Canadians. Schuyler’s force consists primarily of the 5th Connecticut Regiment (commanded by Colonel David Waterbury), a part of the 1st New York Regiment (commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolphus Ritzema), and “Mott’s” artillery company [1]. Mott’s men have no field guns; the only American cannon are two 12-pounders that are placed in the bows of the armed bateaux Hancock and Schuyler.

The Americans travel by boat down the Richelieu River and come within sight of the fort around 2pm. The Americans then make an unopposed landing on the western bank, a little more than 1 mile from the fort. Schuyler, who is sickly, remains on board one of the vessels; Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery is given command of the land troops. Montgomery forms a line of battle and orders an advance northward towards the fort. The ground over which the Americans march is swampy and wooded.

Seeing the American vessels, Major Charles Preston, commandant of Fort Saint-Jean, sends out a scouting party consisting of approximately 90 Indians. Around one-quarter of the men are Six Nations Iroquois, the rest are Canadian Indians, including Kahnawake and Kanesetake Mohawk, and some Hurons [2]. The Indian party is accompanied by Captain Samuel Tice of the Indian Department, and the de Lorimier brothers (Claude-Nicolas-Guillaume and Jean-Claude-Chamilly). This party conceals itself among the trees and sedge on the north bank of the Petite-Rivière-du-Nord, “a deep muddy brook” that feeds into the Richelieu [3].

Petite-Rivière-du-Nord (modern day Rivière Bernier), as recently imaged for Google Maps.

As the Americans advance, a detachment of about 50 men advances somewhat ahead and to the left of the main body. This detachment consists of Major Thomas Hobby’s and Captain Matthew Mead’s companies of the 5th Connecticut. When the detachment reaches the stream, they wade out into the waist-deep water. Suddenly, they are suddenly fired upon by the Indian party. A Kahnawake chief called Sotsichoouane charges into the stream and plunges a lance into one American and a knife into another. He is about to kill a third man when he is brought down by two balls. Captain Tice is also soon wounded. Nevertheless, the Americans reel back before the superior numbers.

The Ambush is Sprung.

The Connecticut troops in the main body are quick to respond. According to one private, “The Army immediately wheeled to the Left in order to Face the Fire of the Enemy, and charged them with great Spirit & Firmness.” The New Yorkers, however, are “little acquainted with wood-fighting” and fail to get into action. Nevertheless, the arrival of the Connecticutians is decisive: the Indian party falls back through the trees under cover of a scattering fire.

Indians losses were between 6 and 8 killed and as many wounded. The Americans had five men killed outright: Privates Patrick Kenney, James Shaw, Caleb Hutchins, Samuel Knap of Hobby’s company, and Corporal Elijah Scribner of Meade’s company. Eleven men were wounded, including three officers: Major Hobby was shot through the thigh, Captain Mead was shot through the shoulder, and Lieutenant Bazaleel Brown (Hobby’s company) was shot in the hand.

The Americans build a breastwork south of the stream. After a while, the British in Fort Saint-Jean open fire with their mortars. According to Montgomery, the men “showed a degree of apprehension that displeased me much” and some flee the breastwork. He therefore orders the men to reembark. After much confusion, his force lands about 1 mile upstream where a second breastwork is constructed. The Americans then settle down for the night.

Operations at Fort Saint-Jean: September 6, 1775 (click to enlarge).

At the new campsite, Schuyler receives an unexpected visitor: retired British officer and local resident Moses Hazen. Hazen provides intelligence to the Americans, and in return, Schuyler promises Hazen that his property will not be stolen or damaged. Hazen claims, perhaps duplicitously, that the British force in the fort is quite strong and that the Canadians will not aid the Americans. This dispiriting news, plus the poor performance of the troops and the lack of cannon, convinces Schuyler to return his force to Isle-aux-Noix the following day (September 7). Three of the wounded men in Mead’s company die during the night (Sergeant John Avery and Privates William McKee and Issac Morehouse), and Lieutenant Benjamin Mills of the 4th Connecticut is wounded by a British shell in the morning [4].

Notes:

1. I haven’t been able to divine the composition of Mott’s Artillery company from the sources I’ve read. A modern-day reenactor unit implies that Mott’s Artillery was made up of Captain Gershom Mott’s company of the 1st New York. However, the journal of Rudolphus Ritzema, which is where the term appears, seems to indicate that Mott’s company remained infantry. Perhaps then Mott’s Artillery consisted of Captain Edward Mott’s company of the 6th Connecticut, which was sent to Schuyler in June, 1775. Another possibility is that this was a unit of Connecticut volunteers commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Samuel Mott, who was chief engineer to Schuyler’s Army. In any event, these men were clearly drawn from the infantry, and Schuyler tried to get them additional pay as compensation for the hazardous duty they agreed to perform.

2. Some time ago, when I had read fewer sources, I imagined that this force might have had Abenaki serving with it. I now consider that possibility doubtful.

3. The term “Petite-Rivière-du-Nord” appears next to this stream on several maps from the mid-to-late 18th Century. However, the term does not appear in any of the journals or correspondence that I have read pertaining to operations against Fort Saint-Jean. The Americans, at least, seemed to have regarded it as just another muddy brook. The term also would prove to be of short endurance; since at least the 19th Century this stream has been known as Rivière Bernier.

4. How the Americans should have come under relatively accurate shell fire at both the upper and lower breastworks is an interesting question. The Americans were far from the fort’s walls and screened from view by intervening woods. A British journal notes in an entry for September 17 that Captain-Lieutenant Edward Williams of the Royal Artillery had some pieces of artillery “fixt so as to serve as a Mortar,” which I think means rigging a cannon barrel to fire shells at a mortar-like trajectory. The diary provides little information on such weapons. Perhaps the shells fired at the American breastworks on the 6th and 7th were fired from such guns.