Showing posts with label Griffith Rutherford. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Griffith Rutherford. Show all posts

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.”

Friday, August 20, 2010

Joseph Graham Describes Ramsour’s Mill (4)

This is the final 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. For the earlier posts, click here, and here.

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

“The Tories finding the left of their position in possession of the Whigs and their centre being closely pressed, retreated down the ridge towards the mill exposed to the fire of the centre and of Captain Hardin's company behind the fence.

Retreat. Under pressure from in front and on both flanks, the Tory line collapses.

“The Whigs pursued until they got entire possession of the ridge, when they perceived to their astonishment that the Tories had collected in force on the other side of the creek beyond the mill. They expected the fight would be renewed, and attempted to form a line; but only eighty-six men could be paraded. Some were scattered during the action, others were attending to their wounded friends, and after repeated efforts not more than a hundred and ten could be collected.

Pursuit.

“In this perilous situation of things it was resolved that Major Wilson and Capt William Alexander, of Rowan, should hasten to General Rutherford and urge him to press forward to their assistance. Rutherford had marched early in the morning, and, at the distance of six or seven miles from Ramsour's, was met by Wilson and Alexander. Major Davie's cavalry was started at full gallop, and Colonel Davidson's infantry were ordered to hasten on with all possible speed [these units are briefly described in Joseph Graham's Timeline]. At the end of two miles they were met by others from the battle, who informed them that the Tories had retreated. The march was continued, and the troops arrived on the ground two hours after the battle had closed. The dead and most of the wounded were still lying where they fell.

...

“As there was no organization of either party, nor regular returns made after the action, the loss could not be ascertained with correctness. Fifty-six lay dead on the side of the ridge where the heat of the action prevailed; many lay scattered on the flanks and over the ridge towards the mill. It is believed that seventy were killed, and that the loss on each side was nearly equal. About an hundred men on each side were wounded, and fifty Tories were taken prisoners. The men had no uniform, and it could not be told to which party many of the dead belonged. Most of the Whigs wore a piece of white paper on their hats in front, and many of the men on each side being excellent riflemen, this paper was a mark at which the Tories often fired, and several of the Whigs were shot in the head. The trees behind which both Whigs and Tories occasionally took shelter were grazed by the balls; and one tree in particular, on the left of the Tories’ line, at the root of which two brothers lay dead, was grazed by three balls on one side and by two on the other.

“In this battle neighbors, near relations and personal friends fought each other; and as the smoke would from time to time blow off they could recognize each other. In the evening and on the next day the relations and friends of the dead and wounded came in, and a scene was witnessed truly afflicting to the feelings of humanity.”

Friday, August 6, 2010

Joseph Graham Describes Ramsour’s Mill (1)

Graham’s Description of the Battlefield

Joseph Graham began his account of the battle of Ramsour’s Mill by describing the disposition of the Loyalist militia (or “Tories”). He wrote:

“The Tories were encamped on a hill, three hundred yards east of Ramsour's Mill, and half a mile north of the present flourishing village of Lincolnton. The ridge stretches nearly to the east on the south side of the mill-pond and the road leading from the Tuckasege Ford by the mill, crosses the point of the ridge in a northwestern direction. The Tories occupied an excellent position on the summit of the ridge; their right on the road fronting to the south. The ridge has a very gentle slope, and was then interspersed with only a few trees, and the fire of the Tories had full rake in front for more than two hundred yards. The foot of the ridge was bounded by a glade, the side of which was covered with bushes. The road passed the western end of the glade at right angles, opposite the centre of the line, and on this road a fence extended from the glade to a point opposite the right of the line. The picket guard, twelve in number, were stationed on the road, two hundred and fifty yards south of the glade, and six hundred yards from the encampment.”

Terrain Features at Ramsour's Mill According to Joseph Graham (click to enlarge).

The miniature battlefield I created was based on the Reep/Reinhardt map, but Graham’s description mostly works with it, as shown above. Each of the terrain features mentioned by Graham are labeled, and there are, as he indicated, 300 scale-yards between the mill and the Tory line, 200 scale-yards of open space in front of the Tory Line, and 600 scale-yards between the Tories and their picket guard and 250 scale-yards between the southern end of the glade and the picket guard.

The Tory encampment is not shown in the image above (I imagine this would have included many brush huts, a number of wagons, and a few tents). Also, to facilitate view of the miniatures, I’ve included fewer trees and less undergrowth than historically would have been present.

There are two minor discrepancies between Graham’s description and the Reep/Reinhardt map. Graham mentioned a fence bordering on the right of the Tories; the Reep/Reinhardt map does not show this. The Reep/Reinhardt map shows a line of felled trees on the edge of the glade; Graham did not mention this. I included both the fence and the line of felled trees on the miniature battlefield.

Support From Others

Added evidence in favor of the above account can be found in the observations made by two of Graham’s contemporaries: Richard Winn and William Davie. Like Graham, these officers were with Griffith Rutherford’s force, which arrived after the fighting had ended (cf. Joseph Graham's timeline).

Winn commented that there were 1,000 Tories at the battle, that on the right of their position there was an open plantation with a high fence, that on the left there was a steep hill full of trees, and that in the rear there was a river and mills. Davie commented that there were 1,100 Tories, that there were formed on a high ridge with oaks, that on their right flank there was a fence, and that in their rear there was a mill pond.

How Many Loyalists?

Graham claimed that there were "nearly" 1,300 Loyalists at Ramsour’s Mill, but he did not claim that all of these men took place in the fighting. Graham indicated that ¼ of the Loyalists were without arms and that they fled to the mill before the battle was joined; he also indicated that some men with arms also did not fight, either because they also fled before the battle was joined, or because they were away from the Loyalist encampment at the beginning of the battle [see footnote]. These deductions leave the Loyalists with perhaps 950 men.

If one applies the deductions suggested by Graham's account to Davie’s total of 1,100 men, or Winn’s total of 1,000 men, then it’s possible to come up with an even smaller total. Alternatively, one might suspect that the Americans overstated enemy strength, as commonly occurred (by both sides) throughout the war, allowing one to reasonably propose an even smaller total.

In any event, a total considerably less than 1,000 seems warranted by the dimensions of the battlefield. The approximate location of each flank of the Loyalists' battle line is known from incidents described by Joseph Graham and others. Again, relying on a modern analysis of the Reep/Reinhardt map, it appears that the Loyalist line was around 800 feet in length (give or take a couple hundred feet). If the Loyalists were deployed in 2 ranks in close order, then only about 600 men could have fit in this space. If the Loyalists were deployed in 2 ranks in open order (as seems more likely), then fewer than 500 men could have fit in this space.

For the miniature representation of the battle, I ended up using a battle line consisting of 500 Loyalists (or more precisely, 25 figures using a 1:20 ratio). That total is shown below.

The "Tory" Battle Line at Ramsour's Mill (click to enlarge).

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

For Joseph Graham's account, see William A. Graham (1904). General Joseph Graham and His Papers on North Carolina Revolutionary History. Below are statements by Graham that shed light on the number of Loyalists that participated in the fighting.

"By the 20th nearly thirteen hundred men had assembled at Ramsour's, one-fourth of whom were without arms."

...

"As soon as the action began those of the Tories who had no arms and several who had, retreated across the creek.

"These were joined by others when they were first beaten back up the ridge, and by the two hundred that were well armed, who had arrived two days before from Lower Creek, in Burke County, under Captains Whitson and Murray. Colonel Moore and Major Welsh soon joined them, and those of the Tories who continued to fight to the last crossed the creek and joined them as soon as the Whigs got possession of the ridge."

...

"[Whig] Captain M'Kissick was wounded early in the action, being shot through the top of the shoulder; and finding himself disabled, went from the battleground about 80 poles to the west. About the the time the firing ceased he met ten of the Tories coming from a neighboring farm, where they had been until the sound of the firing started them."

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.”

Friday, July 2, 2010

Ramsour’s Mill: Initial Descriptions

Despite the fact that Ramsour's Mill appears to have been a crucial American victory – even a turning point, in the southern theater – the battle is little discussed in correspondence from that time.

Consider three letters written shortly after the battle: North Carolina governor Abner Nash to Virginia governor Thomas Jefferson on June 25, James Monroe to Thomas Jefferson on June 26, and Major-General Johann de Kalb to General George Washington on June 29.

Nash and Monroe referred to a brigade of North Carolina militia commanded by Brigadier-General Griffith Rutherford, but provided no hint that some of Rutherford’s men have won a victory at Ramsour’s Mill. In fact, their letters do not even suggest that there was significant Loyalist opposition in that part of the state. The letter by de Kalb is the only one of the three to refer to a Loyalist threat: he mentioned to Washington that a detachment of his men were in Guilford County helping the local militia defend themselves against their Loyalist counterparts. It’s unclear whether de Kalb was even aware of Rutherford’s force. Although he complained that “I am quite in the dark as to all eternal News from the South as well as from the East,” Rutherford’s force to the west was missing from a report he gave of American forces in the state.

Nash, Monroe, and de Kalb agreed on one thing: the main problem facing the Americans was a lack of provisions. Monroe noted that because of a lack of provisions, “…the Army under General de Kalb at Hillsboro, and that under General Caswell here [Cross Creek], are no longer able to hold those Stations and are in that dilemma, that they have only the alternative of advancing shortly on the Enemy or retiring to Virginia.” De Kalb complained that “We live from hand to mouth, and get very little, but what is collected by Detachments, and brought in with our Baggage Waggons [from] the Scatter’d few farms in this part…” As a consequence he was forced to put his men on reduced rations. [for a map of American dispositions, see here].

Perhaps the earliest written record of the battle of Ramsour’s Mill appears in the journal of Anthony Allaire, a lieutenant with the American Volunteers. On June 23 (i.e., 3 days afterwards), he wrote:

“Lay in the field at Ninety-Six [South Carolina]. Some friends came in, four were wounded. The militia had embodied at Tuckasegie [Tuckasegee], on the South Fork of Catawba river-were attacked by a party of Rebels, under command of Gen. [Griffith] Rutherford. The [Loyalist] militia were scant of ammunition, which obliged them to retreat. They were obliged to swim the river at a mill dam. The Rebels fired on them and killed thirty. Col. [Patrick] Ferguson, with forty American Volunteers, pushed with all speed in pursuit of the Rebels. It is seventy miles distance from Ninety-Six. The militia are flocking to him [i.e., Ferguson] from all parts of the country.”

It was not until July that American authorities referred to the victory in their correspondence. In a July 4 letter, South Carolina militia Colonel James Williams wrote that the Loyalists had 1,300 men at Ramsour’s Mill, that 35 were killed, and that 500 horses and all of their baggage had been taken. On July 23, North Carolina militia Major Thomas Blount claimed that the Loyalists had 70 men killed, 100 taken prisoners, and lost 300 horses and all of their baggage. Blount also claimed that the Americans lost a mere 7 killed and 19 wounded.

On the British side, Lieutenant-General Charles Cornwallis, did not refer to the battle in his correspondence with London until August 20, when he wrote:

“[O]ur Friends in Tryon County, North Carolina, in the latter end of June, who, having assembled without concert, plan, or proper leaders, were, two days, after, surprised and totally routed by the Son of Genl. Rutherford. Many of them fled into this Province, where their reports tended much to terrify our friends and encourage our enemies.”

Cornwallis perhaps chose to withhold this information until he could also report on positive developments. In this case, news of the defeat in North Carolina was accompanied by news of the British victories at Camden and Fishing Creek.

Note: Of course one's conclusions depend on the sources. In this case I searched the Colonial and State Records of North Carolina, the Thomas Jefferson papers, the George Washington papers, and the records of the Continental Congress. Additional mentions of the battle may have been found were I able to search newspaper articles from that time.

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

North Carolina: June, 1780

In June, 1780, the British completed their conquest of South Carolina and were making preparations for an eventual invasion of North Carolina. In anticipation of this invasion, large bands of Loyalist militia began to organize in North Carolina. For the moment, at least, North Carolina remained firmly in American control. Large bodies of North Carolina militia had been embodied, supported by a division of Continentals, a brigade of Virginia militia, and South Carolina refugees. The map shows the approximate distribution of these forces shortly before the battle of Ramsour's Mill (June 20). Please note that some small concentrations of troops have been omitted from this map.

British and American Forces in North Carolina in June, 1780 (click to enlarge). Red letters refer to British forces, blue letters to American forces. Placement of letters is approximate with respect to troop location.

Loyalist Militia:

A: A body of Loyalist militia at Ramsour's Mill, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel John Moore. This force was estimated to have 1,000 to 1,300 men.

B: A body of Loyalist militia at the forks of the Yadkin River, under the command of Colonel Samuel Bryan. This force was estimated to be as many as 800 men.

American Forces:

A: Continental forces at Hillsborough under the command of Major-General Johann de Kalb. This force included the Maryland division with 1,278 effectives, the 1st Continental artillery with 140 effectives, the Virginia state regiment of artillery with 175 effectives, 36 North Carolina Continentals, and 20 officers from South Carolina and Georgia.

B: American forces at Cross Creek under the command of Major-General Richard Caswell. This forced included approximately 1,500 North Carolina militia and the 200 infantry and cavalry of Armand's Legion.

C: North Carolina militia in the vicinity of Charlotte under the command of Brigadier-General Griffith Rutherford. Rutherford commanded approximately 1,100 men, including detachments sent to counter Moore. Nearby, South Carolina refugees were organizing under Thomas Sumter.

D: Virginia militia in Roanoke. This force included the vanguard of Brigadier-General Edward Stevens' approximately 2,500-man militia brigade.

E: American forces in Guilford County. This force included an unknown number of Guilford County militia, 80 Virginia State infantry under Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Porterfield, and 55 Virginia State cavalry under Major John Nelson.

F: American cavalry in Halifax. This force included the remnants of the 1st and 3rd Continental Light Dragoons, which had suffered serious losses during the Charleston campaign. According to one estimate, they now numbered about 200 men.

Note: The above is based on a variety of different sources, the most important of which is a letter from Johann de Kalb to George Washington dated June 29, 1780.

Saturday, September 5, 2009

Sumter's Brigade Forms

[Minor edits May 2, 2010]

As the British overran the South Carolina Backcountry in June, 1780, scattered bands of American militia coalesced just across the border in North Carolina. A number of militia commanders convened and elected one of their number, Thomas Sumter, as their "brigade" commander [see Note 1].

Sumter had been the colonel of the 6th South Carolina regiment, but he resigned his commission and returned to private life in 1778. The virtual elimination [see Note 2] of the commanders of the South Carolina Continental line at the siege of Charleston, elevated Sumter from has-been to one of the most important men in the state. Knowing that he was a wanted man, Sumter fled to North Carolina in May, 1780.

Sumter has attracted some rather remarkable character sketches.

Here is Henry Lee describing Sumter in his postwar history:

"He was not over scrupulous as a soldier in his use of means, and apt to make considerable allowances for a state of war. Believing it warranted by the necessity of the case, he did not occupy his mind with critical examinations oi' the equity of his measures, or of their bearings on individuals; but indiscriminately pressed forward to his end—the destruction of his enemy and liberation of his country. In his military character he resembled Ajax; relying more upon the fierceness of his courage than upon the results of unrelaxing vigilance and nicely adjusted combination. Determined to deserve success, he risked his own life and the lives of his associates without reserve. Enchanted with the splendor of victory, he would wade in torrents of blood to attain it. This general drew about him the hardy sons of the upper and middle grounds; brave and determined like himself, familiar with difficulty, and fearless of danger."

Here is John Buchanan in the modern history, The Road to Guilford Courthouse:

"Thomas Sumter (1734-1832) is not a sympathetic character. Wearing his ego on his shoulder, he had few peers as a prima donna and could spot a slight, intended or not, around a corner. He was careless with security and lives. His penchant for bloody and repeated frontal assaults was unnecessarily costly and finally led one officer to swear to Sumter's face and before others that never again would he serve under the Gamecock. But of all his partisan foes, Lord Cornwallis considered Sumter the most troublesome and obstinate. Thomas Sumter was a fighter who kept alive the flame of resistance and acted as a beacon for like-minded men at a time when others believed all was lost..."

Buchanan's claims that Sumter "was careless with security and lives," and that he had a "penchant for bloody and repeated frontal assaults" that were "unnecessarily costly," rest on events occurring during the battles of Rocky Mount, Hanging Rock, and Fishing Creek. To anticipate my coverage of these battles in the months ahead, my description will suggest that Sumter behaved imprudently on each of these occasions, but otherwise it will be much less critical [see Note 3].

The date of Sumter's election is usually given as June 15 (cf. Buchanan's history and Robert Bass' biography of Sumter). However, some of the participants in this event remembered the election being held on June 19, or the day before the battle of Ramsour's Mill. I haven't examined this discrepancy well enough to form an opinion on its cause. Several descriptions of the election are quoted below. Note that on June 20, Sumter's newly-organized brigade sought to join in the attack against Loyalist forces at Ramsour's Mill, but because of poor communication between the various American militia forces, they only arrived on the battlefield some hours after the fighting had ended.

Colonel Richard Winn [see Note 4] wrote after the war that: [T]he next day Arrive at Genl Rutherford's Camp near Charlotte in No. Carolina where I found 44 of the So. Carolinians in the Same Situation of myself[.] [W]e got together and held a Consultation, notwithstanding the Smallness of Our No. [I]t was unanimously Agreed on to oppose the British & Tories under Expectation when the panick [sic, panic] of the people was over many would Join us, [T]he next Question was who Should Command[.] Capt. R Winn was Chosen without a Desenting Voice, Capt. Winn obsd. that Colo Sumter was on the ground An Old Experienced Officer[.] [H]e shorely [sic, surely] was the most proper person to take the Command, for the memd [?] this was Objected too, however it was Agreed on that Colo Patton & Capt. Winn should without delay Consult the Colo on the Subject[.] [A]fter some Converstation and Explination Colo Sumter Accepted the nomination and the Next day Set Out with his party on Horse back and made a forced March to Reinforce Colo. Lock in Order to Attack a body of about 1000 Tories who had Collected at Ramsowers Mill in No. Carolina on the So. fork of Catawba under their leader Colo Moore, however Colo Sumter did not Arrive untill the Action was over..."

Captain Samuel Otterson recalled that "On the day after the election, 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."

Captain Joseph McJunkin [see Note 5] recalled that "...we unanimously chose Col. Thos. Sumter to be our leader or General, to lead us to face the Enemy, &... Sumter joined Rutherford that day, & [we]... could hardly be constrained from proceeding that evening to attack the above Tories; but Rutherford would not consent for him to start until next morning, him & men, all anxious to meet the Enemy, started by time, & posted on with all possible speed, but the distance being too great, our hero & his party did not get to the place of action until it was over.

It has been supposed, by some authors, that all of Sumter's regimental commanders were present at his election. Winn, however, claimed that there were only 44 men with Sumter at the time, exclusive of those in his own command. Sumter's brigade is known to have grown steadily after Ramsour's Mill until it numbered in the hundreds by late July. Perhaps some of the regiments that fought with Sumter in July and August attached themselves to his brigade after its initial formation. William Hill is one of the American commanders credited with helping to elect Sumter, but in my reading of his postwar memoir, quoted below, he and Andrew Neal retained an independent command at the time, and did not join Sumter's brigade until after Ramsour's Mill.

"About this time [i.e., shortly after the battle of Hill's Ironworks of June 17 or 18, 1780], I was informed that Col. Sumter was then in Salisbury with a few men waiting for a reinforcement — I then wrote to him, informing him of our situation & that there was a probability of our making a handsome stand — and that we were about to form a junction with Genl. Rutherfd. in N. Cara. that we were going to attack a large body of Tories that had collected at a place called Ramsour's Mill — But so it was that a detached party of about 300 horse from Genl Ruthd. attacked the Tory camp said to be upwards of a 1000 men, killed & dispersd. the whole — and then it was that Col. Sumter met with us from So. Ca. He then got authority from the civil & military authority of that State to impress or take waggons horses, provisions of all kinds, from the enemy that was in that action — & to give a receipt to that state for the same —"

The victory at Ramsour's Mill and the arrival in North Carolina of a large force of Maryland and Delaware Continentals commanded by Major-General Johann de Kalb gave the Americans the initiative.

Sumter's brigade would play a major role in the campaign that followe. In late June, Sumter moved his forces into the lands of the Catawba Nation, giving the Americans a toehold in South Carolina. The value of this position was more psychological than military. The Americans were badly lacking in provisions, arms, and ammunition. In early July, most of the brigade was temporarily disbanded. As the big American push into South Carolina would not occur before August, Sumter's men were given an opportunity to see to their farms and families and obtain supplies from home before the campaign began. Sumter himself returned to North Carolina in search of supplies.

Notes:

1. South Carolina Governor John Rutledge commissioned Sumter as brigadier general in October, 1780; because the election had no official standing, he is referred to in various sources as both a colonel and a general during the preceding summer.

2. A notable exception was Lieutenant-Colonel Francis Marion of the 2nd South Carolina regiment, who had been injured prior to the siege.

3. I'm also inclined to be less praiseworthy of Sumter. Buchanan implied that American resistance in the Backcountry somehow would have collapsed without Sumter. However, the accounts of Winn, Hill, and others make clear that a serious resistance to the British was organized in a number of places and before Sumter attained a prominent position. It seems likely that these various commands would have coalesced without Sumter -- just under a different leader. If participant accounts are to believed, there was no shortage of talented and determined officers in Sumter's brigade.

4. Richard Winn is credited as being colonel of the Fairfield militia regiment at this time (see J. D. Lewis' South Carolina military organization (or lack thereof): June 1, 1780, for a reconstruction). He calls himself captain in this account, but notes that "Capt. Winn begun to Rank as a Colonel" in early July.

5. Major Joseph McJunkin was frequently cited in my Cowpens project; McJunkin held the rank of captain during the summer of 1780.

Sources:

Robert Duncan Bass. (1961). Gamecock: The Life and Campaigns of General Thomas Sumter.

John Buchanan. (1997). The Road to Guilford Courthouse: The American Revolution in the Carolinas.

Will Graves. (2005). What Did Joseph McJunkin Really Saye? Southern Campaigns of the American Revolution, Volume 2, Issue 11.

Will Graves transcribed General Richard Winn's Notes -- 1780. (.pdf file).

Will Graves transcribed William Hill's memoir. (.pdf file).

Will Graves transcribed the pension application of Samuel Otterson. (.pdf file).

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