Showing posts with label Francis Locke. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Francis Locke. Show all posts

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Concluding Thoughts on Ramsour’s Mill

Ramsour’s Mill was an important battle of the American Revolution, but how that battle was fought is not well understood. As I noted in the first post of this series, the case can be made that Ramsour’s Mill marked the turning point of the southern campaign of the American Revolution. However, none of the participants maintained journals (at least none are extant), and surviving correspondence from the time contains few mentions of the battle. Instead, the main sources of information are first and second-hand accounts written during the 19th Century. These accounts reflect a principally American view of the battle (i.e., Whig rather than Tory), and unfortunately, there is considerable disagreement among these accounts.

Here then are some tentative conclusions about the battle based on the sources available to me:

  • The battle was fought on June 20 or June 22, 1780, on a ridge east of what was then Ramsour’s Mill and north of today’s Lincolnton, North Carolina. June 20 is the date listed in every military history that I have read, but to the best of my knowledge, all ultimately rely on a single source: Joseph Graham. Prior to Graham’s influential account, some authors gave the date as June 22. The Loyalist Anthony Allaire met survivors of the battle on June 23 in Ninety-Six, South Carolina, which is more than 130 miles distant from the battlefield (using modern-day highways). Unfortunately, he did not state how these men got to Ninety-Six; if they walked than only the 20th is plausible.

  • The Tory defenders appears to have outnumbered the Whig attackers, but probably by a smaller number than is usually given. A typical military history of the battle claims that something like 400 Whigs attacked and defeated 1,300 Tories (1/4 of whom were unarmed). Once again, Graham is the main source for this information. However, there is reason to believe that Graham’s numbers were inflated. A key piece of evidence, I believe, is the dimensions of the ridge itself, which suggests a Tory force closer to 500 men than one that was close to 1,000 men.

  • Both Whigs and Tories fought bravely. A point made clear by Graham is that one side did not have a monopoly on heroics. The men who fought at Ramsour’s Mill had been raised in a similar environment, and indeed, in some cases were literally neighbors. The Whig victory cannot be convincingly attributed to one side being better shots or being made of sterner stuff than the other.

  • Three factors that may have contributed to the Whig victory were a) weather, b) arms and ammunition, and c) flank attacks.

  • Weather: A tradition concerning the battle of Ramsour's Mill is that the area was blanketed by fog at the time of the Whigs’ early-morning attack. (cf. battle summary by the Lincoln County Historical Association). This fog helped the Whigs to surprise the Tories and it screened from view their inferior numbers and their movements towards the Tory flanks.

  • Arms and Ammunition: In general, both Whig and Tory militia in North Carolina were lacking in arms and ammunition. Francis Locke’s attacking force seems to have been exceptional for being fairly well supplied in this regard. Indeed, some early accounts of the battle (specifically Gordon and Lee) claimed that Locke’s force was especially made up of those few troops that were well equipped for war. Following Graham’s account and Allaire’s journal, it seems that ¼ of the Tories fled at the beginning of the battle because they had no arms at all, and the rest retreated in large part because they had used up their limited supply of ammunition.

  • Flank Attacks: Graham vividly described how the Whigs surreptitiously gained first the right flank, then the left, of the Tory line. Neither movement was a part of some battle plan (indeed, it seems that Francis Locke did not have one). Instead, these movements were the result of individual captains acting on their own initiative. The flank attacks may have seemed especially threatening to the Tories in combination with the smoke and fog. The Tories' worsening ammunition situation may also have limited their ability to counter these attacks and help explain why the fighting on the Tory left flank devolved into hand-to-hand combat.

Whig vs. Tory at Ramsour's Mill.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Ramsour’s Mill: 19th Century Reminiscences and Lore

Joseph Graham’s description of the battle of Ramsour’s Mill is detailed and clear (cf. parts 1, 2, 3, 4), but that does not mean that it’s entirely correct. Graham’s sources were imperfect, and his memory was not infallible. Graham claimed that 8 or 10 veterans of the battle vouched for his description of the battle, but these were old men whose memories were likely clear chiefly for those things they individually saw and did, not the totality of the battle. Would they have known if there were errors in Graham’s account? Even if they suspected errors, would they have been confident enough in their recollection to contradict him?

For these reasons it’s worth considering other sources of information. Available sources on Ramsour's Mill include pension applications, an interview conducted with a participant of the battle, and local lore collected by historians.

Pension Applications:

I have relied on pension applications in making sense of other battles that I’ve written about to date, knowing full well that they were submitted long after the events of the Revolutionary War and that some are quite untrustworthy. Most of the transcribed applications that I’ve read concerning Ramsour’s Mill provide few details of the battle, but some are noteworthy. A sampling appears below.

The widow of John Dickey claimed that her husband, “served as Captain of a Company under Col Locke in the Battle of Ramsours Mill. That he courageously led on the attack in that battle. That when a retreat was ordered by the Commander in that battle the said Captain Dickey refused to quit his post bravely fighting Sword in hand until the line which was broken and driven back was restored and the Battle gained.” [See transcription by C. Leon Harris]. [hat tip to Burton for emailing me about Dickey's role in the battle].

John Hargrave claimed that “in June of the year '80 he again volunteered under one Capt. Thomas Hemphill & Col. Francis Lock, for the purpose of fighting the Tories who were very numerous. That having got together about 400 they heard that the Tories had taken Maj. (then) Edward Hampton & John Russell Lieut. & had condemned them to be hanged, but that they, having determined to rescue them, met the Tories 1400 or 1500 in number at a place called Ramsour's Mill & defeating them took all their baggage & made something like 100 of them prisoners as well as he recollects.” [See transcription by Will Graves].

Captain Samuel Otterson was with the troops under Brigadier-General Griffith Rutherford and Colonel Thomas Sumter that arrived after the battle ended. He recalled, “we marched toward the house of a celebrated Tory by the name of Ramsour for the purpose of defeating some Tories who had encamped at Ramsour's mill, but before we arrived, the Militia from Rowan, N. Carolina had defeated the Tories & we turned our horses into a large field of oats belonging to Ramsour & the oats were just ripening.” [see transcription by Will Graves].

Interview with Adam Reep:

Long after the battle, Adam Reep, a man who lived near the battlefield and claimed to have participated in the fighting, was interviewed by Wallace Reinhardt, the grandson of Christian Reinhardt, the man who owned the land on which the greater part of the fighting took place. Reep’s description of the battlefield and of the fighting was used to create an important map, that served as the basis for my miniature battlefield. (Reinhardt later published an account of the battle; this is not available online).

Reep’s account differed from Graham’s in important ways. Reep claimed that he met the Whig militia, led by Francis Locke, east of the battlefield, and that he provided them important intelligence about enemy strength, position, and intentions. Locke then asked Reep to guide his forces forward. Whereas Graham seemingly described all of Locke’s forces approaching along a single route, Reep claimed that there was a division of forces. Locke’s orders were that:

“Captain Falls will continue on this road, as it runs across the hill to the Mill, and move up to within three or four hundred yards of the enemy (who were on top of the hill), halt, and wait until the main body is near enough to commence the attack from the south side. Captain Dobson will march over towards the creek and into Green’s road (a road laid off by an English surveyor of that name) and will attack the enemy from that direction. Not a gun is to be fired until all are ready; the attack must be simultaneous.”

His map of the battlefield shows Captain Falls and the cavalry advancing down the Sherrill's Ford Road, and the main body, under Locke, swinging off to the southwest in order to gain the Tuckaseegee Ford Road.

According to Graham, Locke’s infantry formed a line opposite the Tories’ center, but the “Reep” map indicates that they instead formed a line opposite the Tories’ flank.

Graham's and Reep's Versions of the Opening Attack at Ramsour's Mill. Water courses are shown in blue, roads are brown, and the outline of a ridge is shown in grey. The Tory line is shown in red, the approach of the Whig horsemen is shown as a light blue arrow, and the approach of the Whig infantry is shown as a dark blue arrow. A = Ramsour's Mill on Clark's Creek, B = Green's Road, C = Tuckaseegee Ford Road, D = Sherrill's Ford Road.

There are, however, also similarities in the two accounts. In both cases, the Whigs initially drove the Tories up the hill, only to be driven back in turn. In both cases, the Whigs eventually gained the crest of the ridge and drove back the left flank of the Tory line. In both cases, the Tories were forced to flee across the bridge spanning Clark’s Creek.

Like Graham, Reep remembered especially vividly the nightmarish condition of the battlefield once the smoke cleared:

“The scene upon the battlefield was indescribable—dead men here and there, broken skulls, a few were seen with gun-locks sunk into their heads; disabled men moving about seeking help, men with shattered shoulders, broken arms and legs, while others were breathing their last breath. Shortly after the battle many women, children and old men came hunting for their loved ones.”

Local Lore:

A compendium of local lore about the battle was collected and published by E. G. Rockwell of Davidson College, in The Historical Magazine... (July, 1867, pages 24-27). Rockwell claimed that his account was “for the most part in the words of the different narrators, from whom the traditions have been taken down.”

There are some notable similarities between Rockwell's account and Graham's. In both cases, on the eve of battle, Francis Locke and his officers decided, after some debate, to attack the numerically superior force of Tories at Ramsour's Mill and sent word to Griffith Rutherford's nearby force of their intentions (see Ramsour's Mill: Joseph Graham's Timeline). For the most part, however, the accounts differ greatly.

According to Rockwell, Locke's infantry “divided into two equal bodies; the first was to advance and fire, then retreat, and form in the rear of the second, in the mean time to load as they retired; the second division was to advance and fire, retreat and in like manner, form in the rear, and load; thus to draw the enemy on, till Rutherford came up with the main body of the army.
This was the plan of attack, with the clear understanding that each was to watch the other’s motions, and act in concert. The arrangement being thus made and understood, the attack was made about sun-rise, while the Tories were engaged in preparing their breakfast; and so complete was the surprise that they found themselves falling by the balls of their enemies almost as soon as they discovered them.”

Graham also described the Whig infantry advancing in two successive lines, but he implied that the two lines had merely become separated during the chaotic opening attack.

Rockwell attributed the American victory in large part to the coordinated movements of these two lines, and to the heroic actions of a lone horseman:

“The first division, after firing, retreated, opening to the right and left from the centre, for the second to advance, fire, and retreat in the same way. The enemy, not withstanding their surprise, attempted to form a line; but a Whig of more courage than prudence, rode up, seized their colors and rode off with them unhurt amidst a shower of balls. Having now no rallying point, their consternation increased; and the quick succession of destructive fires, kept up by the assailants, rendered their confusion complete. The Whigs not only stood their ground, but advanced, after a few rounds, upon the enemy’s camp; and in a short time obtained a complete victory, taking possession of the camp before General Rutherford arrived with the main body of the army...”

By comparison, in Graham's account the American victory was due chiefly to the Whigs gaining the flanks of the Tory line. There is some recognition of this happening in Rockwell's account, but Graham's heroic Captain Hardin was replaced by one Captain Reed.

“Capt. Reed was ordered to take his men and flank the Tories: in doing so he had to cross a bottom and a branch, and pass through some underbrush. As he emerged in view of the enemy, a man rushed out towards him, and got behind a tree, watching an opportunity to shoot him. But being a good marksman Reed kept his eye on the tree, and seeing the shoulder of the Tory not entirely covered, he took a rifle from one of his men, and shot him through the part exposed. After the close of the battle he went among the wounded, and finding one shot through the shoulder, on inquiry as to the way he received his wound, he found him to be the man he had shot, and dressed the wound for him.”

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Joseph Graham Describes Ramsour’s Mill (2)

This is the first of several posts that describes, verbatim, Joseph Graham's account of the battle of Ramsour’s Mill. The account is illustrated with military miniatures and a miniature version of the battlefield. For background information on the battlefield, see Joseph Graham's description.

In brief, according to Graham, a large body of Loyalists (or "Tories") had organized at Ramsour's Mill and were attacked on the morning of June 20, 1780 by American (or "Whig") militia. The Americans were outnumbered, but they expected to take the Loyalists by surprise. Graham's account of the fighting (below), begins with the Americans advancing along the Tuckaseegee Ford Road towards the Loyalist pickets.

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

“The companies of Captains Falls, M’Dowell and Brandon being mounted, the other troops, under Colonel Locke, were arranged in the road two deep behind them; and without any other organization or orders they were marched to battle. When the horsemen came within sight of the picquet they plainly perceived that their approach had not been anticipated. The picquet fired and fled towards their camp. The horsemen pursued, and turning to the right out of the road they rode up within thirty steps of the line and fired at the Tories…”

The Whig horsemen Pursue the Picket Towards the Tory Encampment. The Tories are shown above in a line of battle for reasons of convenience; they were in fact ill prepared to receive an attack.

“…, who, being in confusion, had not completely formed their line; but seeing only a few men assailing them, they quickly recovered from their panic and poured in a destructive fire which obliged the horsemen to retreat.”

The Whig Horsemen Are Repulsed.

“They retreated in disorder, passing through the infantry who were advancing; several of the infantry joined them and never came into action. At a convenient distance the greater part of the horsemen rallied, and returning to the fight exerted themselves with spirit during its continuance. The infantry hurried to keep near the horsemen in their pursuit of the picquet, and their movements being very irregular, their files were open six or eight steps, and when the front approached the Tories the rear was an hundred and sixty yards back. The Tories, seeing the effect of their fire, came down the hill a little distance and were in fair view. The infantry of the Whigs kept the road to the point between the glade and the corner of the fence opposite the centre of the Tories. Here the action was renewed.”

“The Action Was Renewed.” The Tories, coming down the hill, encounter the front rank of the Whig infantry. The rear rank is approaching at lower right.

“The front fired several times before the rear came up. The Tories being on their left, they deployed to the right in front of the glade, and came into action without order or system. In some places they were crowded together in each other's way; in other places there were none. As the rear came up they occupied those places, and the line gradually extending, the action became general and obstinate on both sides.”

The Whig infantry Advance Along the Edge of the Glade.

“The Action Became General and Obstinate”

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Ramsour's Mill: Joseph Graham's Timeline

Joseph Graham described for historians not only the battle of Ramsour’s Mill itself, but also the sequence of events that led up to it. A summary of those events appears below.
  • May 12, 1780: The American army in the southern theater surrenders to British forces at Charleston, South Carolina.
  • May 29: British Lieutenant-Colonel Banastre Tarleton destroys a force of Virginia troops at Waxhaws, South Carolina, the last force of American regulars in South Carolina.
  • June 7: British Lieutenant-Colonel John Moore of the Royal North Carolina Regiment returns home to Tryon County, North Carolina. “[H]e arrived at his father's... wearing a sword and an old tattered suit of regimentals.” He encourages local Loyalists by bringing news of the capture of Charleston and the advance of British troops into the South Carolina backcountry.
  • June 8: Brigadier-General Griffith Rutherford, of the North Carolina militia, hears that Lieutenant-Colonel Francis Rawdon is leading a column of British troops towards the North Carolina border.
  • June 10: Rutherford’s militia assemble at Reese’s plantation, 18 miles northeast of Charlotte, North Carolina. Rutherford intends to defend the Charlotte area against Rawdon’s advance.
  • June 10: Tryon County Loyalists meet with John Moore at Indian Creek. Moore tells them that the British intend to invade North Carolina in the early fall. In the meantime “they, with all other royal subjects, should hold themselves in readiness [for the British invasion], and in the meantime get in their harvest; that before the getting in of the harvest it would be difficult to procure provisions for the British army, and that as soon as the country could furnish subsistence to the army it would advance into North Carolina and give support to the Royalists.”
  • June 10: Moore learns that Major Joseph McDowell, an American (Whig) militia commander, is 8 miles away and searching for Loyalist leaders. McDowell has only 20 men with him, and Moore decides to attack.
  • June 11: McDowell’s band leaves the area and Moore’s Loyalists cannot overtake them. Moore temporarily sends his men home with the understanding that they will soon reconvene at Ramsour’s Mill in Tryon County.
  • June 12: Griffith Rutherford hears that Francis Rawdon is moving away from the North Carolina border. Rutherford orders his own troops to advance to Mallard’s Creek, 10 miles nearer the border.
  • June 13: 200 Loyalists assemble at Ramsour’s Mill.
  • June 14: Hundreds of additional Loyalists assemble at Ramsour’s Mill. Major Nicolas Welsh of the Royal North Carolina Regiment brings news of the victory at Waxhaws. “He wore a rich suit of regimentals, and exhibited a considerable number of guineas by which he sought to allure some, whilst he endeavored to intimidate others by an account of the success of the British army in all the operations of the South, and the total inability of the Whigs to make further opposition. His conduct had the desired effect, and much more confidence was placed in him than in Colonel Moore.”
  • June 14: Griffith Rutherford creates two elite detachments from the 650 or so militiamen at his disposal. He has 65 men equipped as dragoons and placed under the command of Major William Davie. He also has 100 men designated “light infantry” and placed under the command of Colonel William Davidson.
  • June 14: Rutherford learns that Loyalists are organizing in Tryon County, 40 miles to the northwest. He orders Francis Locke of Rowan County, Major Davie Wilson of Mecklenburg County, and other officers, to raise as many men as they can to counter this threat.
  • June 15: Rutherford advances two miles to the south of Charlotte: closer yet to the border with South Carolina.
  • June 17: Rutherford learns that Francis Rawdon's column has retired to Camden, South Carolina. It is now clear to Rutherford that the British will not soon invade his state. At the same time Rutherford learns that the Tryon County Loyalists are at Ramsour’s Mill.
  • June 18: Rutherford marches his men to Tuckaseegee Ford on the Catawba River, which is only 12 miles from Ramsour’s Mill. He requests Francis Locke to bring his forces to Tuckaseegee Ford.
  • June 18: Davie Wilson, with 65 men, crosses Tool’s Ford and joins Joseph McDowell, who has 25 men. At McEwen’s Ford they are joined by Captain Gilbraith Falls with 40 men. The combined force marches up the east side of Mountain Creek.
  • June 19: It rains in the morning. Rutherford’s men discharge their guns, which alarms the neighborhood. When some of the local men turn out to investigate, they join Rutherford’s command. Rutherford’s command spends the night in a camp 16 miles from Ramsour’s Mill.
  • June 19: Wilson, McDowell, and Falls join forces with Francis Locke. Their combined force has approximately 400 men. Locke and his fellow officers are at Mountain Creek, 16 miles from Ramsour’s Mill. They do not receive Rutherford’s request to move to Tuckaseegee Ford. They decide that it is safer for the men’s families to remain in the area than it is to join Rutherford (who they believe is still near Charlotte). They also reason that it is safer to attack the Loyalists than it is to remain in one place. Although the Loyalists are more numerous, they are not expecting an attack. Locke (the senior officer) sends a messenger to Rutherford relaying this decision. His men make a night march in order to surprise the Loyalists early the next morning.
  • June 19/June 20: Locke and his fellow officers are on the road to Ramsour's Mill. During a halt, “the officers convened to determine on the plan of attack. It was agreed that the companies commanded by Captains Falls, M’Dowell and Brandon should act on horseback and go in front. No other arrangements were made, and it was left to the officers to be governed by circumstances after they should reach the enemy. They resumed their march and arrived within a mile of the enemy's camp at daybreak.”
  • June 20: There are now perhaps as many as 1300 Loyalists at or near Ramsour’s Mill, but ¼ of these are without arms. Rutherford receives Locke’s message and marches his men to Ramsour’s Mill. Rutherford's command is miles from the battlefield at the time Locke's men make their attack.

Comment: Graham is not an infallible source, and some of the above-listed dates may be in error. For example, Graham claimed that the battle of Hill’s Ironworks took place on July 9, when there is clear evidence that the battle was on either June 17 or June 18.

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Ramsour’s Mill in Early Histories of the War

As described previously, the battle of Ramsour’s Mill was seldom mentioned in surviving correspondence from the summer of 1780. Nevertheless, the battle did not escape the notice of early chroniclers of the war.

Below is a selection of passages referring to the battle in some of the earliest works on the war. Common themes in these works is that a force of Loyalists organized in North Carolina in June, 1780, and that this force was soon attacked and dispersed by the Americans (Whigs). Few details about where or how the Loyalists were defeated were available to the authors of these accounts.

Charles Stedman. (1794). The History of the Origin, Progress, and Termination of the American War, Vol. 2.

Comments: Charles Stedman was a British officer who served in the southern theater (but not at Ramsour's Mill). In his account, the North Carolina Loyalists under John Moore rose up in anticipation of a British invasion of their colony. However, the "insurrection" was premature and Moore's force was dispersed by Griffith Rutherford.

“A correspondence had been kept up with the loyalists in North Carolina: And, as the expedition into that province was necessarily delayed, his lordship [Lieutenant-General Charles Cornwallis] sent emissaries amongst them to request the well affectect to attend to their harvest, collect provisions, and remain quiet till the king's troops were ready to enter the province, which would not be till the end of August, or beginning of September. But, unfortunately, this prudent and necessary admonition was not attended to. A number of loyalists in Tryon County having prematurely assembled in arms under a colonel More [Lieutenant-Colonel John Moore], towards the end of June, were quickly routed and dispersed by a provincial force under general Rutherford [i.e., Brigadier-General Griffith Rutherford]. This unsuccessful insurrection furnished a pretence for persecuting the loyalists in other parts of the province their gaols were filled with loyalists, and every day added a victim to their gibbets.”

William Gordon. (1801). The History of the Rise, Progress, and Establishment of the United States of America, Vol 3.

Comments: Reverend William Gordon of Roxbury, Massachusetts, was an avid chronicler of the war. His account provided additional detail as to how Moore's Loyalists were dispersed by the American Whigs. He noted that it was Francis Locke, not Griffith Rutherford, that commanded the American force that fought Moore, that Locke's men were greatly outnumbered, that a charge by a party of mounted Americans threw the Loyalists into confusion, and that the battle ended when the Loyalists fled during a temporary cease-fire.

“A large body of them [i.e., Loyalists] collected under the command of col. Moore, in North-Carolina, on the 22d of June. The greatest part had taken the oath of allegiance to that state, and many had done militia duty in the American service. Their premature insurrection... subjected them to an immediate dispersion. Gen. Rutherford instantly marched against these insurgents, but was so short of lead that he could arm only 300 men. Col. Lock [i.e., Colonel Francis Locke] advanced with this detachment twenty-five miles a-head to observe them, while the main body halted for a supply of ammunition. The colonel, though greatly inferior in force, was reduced to the necessity of attacking or being attacked. He chose the former; and capt. Falls [Captain Gilbraith Falls], with a party of horse, rushed into the middle of the royalists, and threw them into confusion. Twenty-two of the whig militia were killed or wounded; among the former were six of their officers, who were singled out by riflemen among the insurgents. The captain was one of the slain. Col. Moore proposed to col. Lock a cessation of all hostilities for an hour, which being agreed to, the former ran off with his whole party.”

David Ramsay (1811). The History of the American Revolution, Vol. 2.

Comments: David Ramsay was a South Carolina doctor turned delegate to the Continental Congress, and later, historian of the war. Ramsay was captured when the British took Charleston in May, 1780. He was imprisoned at the time of Ramsour's Mill.

“The precautions taken to prevent the rising of the royalists in North-Carolina, did not answer the end. Several of the inhabitants of Tryon county, under the direction of Col. Moore took up arms, and were in a few days defeated by the whig militia, commanded by Gen. Rutherford.”

Henry Lee. (1812). Memoirs of the War in the Southern Department of the United States.

Comments: Henry Lee fought in the southern theater of the war as a lieutenant-colonel commanding an American partisan corps. He and his corps arrived in the southern theater months after the battle of Ramsour's Mill. His account appears to have been based on that of William Gordon, described above. Lee, however, named the site of the battle (although it is misspelled).

“A large body of loyalists collected under colonel Moore at Armsaour's [sic] mill on the 22d of June; among whom were many who had not only taken the oath of allegiance to the state, but had served in arms against the British army. Rutherford lost no time in taking his measures to bring Moore to submission. But so destitute was he of ammunition that only three hundred men could be prepared for the field. This detachment was intrusted to colonel Locke, who was ordered to approach the enemy and watch his motions, while Rutherford continued to exert himself in procuring arms for the main body to follow under his own direction.

“Moore, finding an inferior force near to him, determined to attack it, in which decision he was gallantly anticipated by Locke, who, perceiving the enemy's purpose, and knowing the hazard of retreat, fell upon Moore in his camp. Captain Falls with the horse, led, and rushing suddenly, sword in hand, into the midst of the insurgents, threw them into confusion which advantage Locke pressed forward to improve, when he suspended the falling blow in consequence of colonel Moore proposing a truce for an hour with the view of amicable adjustment. During the negotiation, Moore and his associates dispersed, which appears to have been their sole object in proposing the suspension of hostilities.”