The American Invasion of the Niagara Peninsula – 1814
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 8-1979 The American Invasion of the Niagara Peninsula – 1814 Daniel K. R. Crosswell Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Crosswell, Daniel K. R., "The American Invasion of the Niagara Peninsula – 1814" (1979). Master's Theses. 1965. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/1965 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE AMERICAN INVASION OF THE NIAGARA PENINSULA - 1314 “by Daniel K. R. Crosswell A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1979 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A vote of thanks is extended to Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Grigoroff, Myroslaw Prystansky, and Karen Kaylor for their aid and support. The author is indebted to Mrs. Judith Massie for many long hours spent typing. Special thanks is offered to Professors Albert Castel and Sherwood Cordier whose guidance and assistance were invaluable and much appreciated. Daniel K. R. Crosswell Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)” . I f it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “ sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer o f a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. I f necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW. LONDON WC1R 4EJ. ENGLAND Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 131315% I CROSSUELL9 DANIEL KENNETH RICHA R& THE AMERICAN INVASION OF THE NIAGARA PENINSULA — 181%. WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY, M.A., 1979 Uruv JV__. .. International 300 n . zEEBRoao. a n n a r b o r , m i a s k * Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark . 1. Glossy photographs ^ 2. Colored illustrations _______ 3. Photographs with dark background _______ '4. Illustrations are poor copy_______ 5. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page________ 6. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages__________ throughout 7. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______ 8. Computer printout pages with indistinct print_______ 9. Page(s) lacking when material received, and not available from school or author _______ 10. Page{s) _______ seen to be missing in numbering only as text follows _______ 11. Poor carbon copy _______ 12. Not original copy, several pages with blurred type_ 13. Appendix pages are poor copy _______ 14. Original copy with light type _______ 15. Curling and wrinkled pages _______ 16. Other University M iaailm s International 300 N. ZEE3 RD.. ANN ARBOR. Ml <18106 <313) 761-4700 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I CANADA INVADED ...................... 1 II THE BATTLE OF CHIPPEWA.............. k Z III THE BATTLE OF LUNDY'S L A N E .......... 7 A IV THE SIEGE OF FORT E R I E ................ 137 V THE NIAGARA CAMPAIGN RECONSIDERED . 200 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PREFACE I initially embarked upon this paper for personal reasons. The matrilineal branch of my family being the Lundys, I sought to celebrate the role played by Catherine Lundy in the events of 181L. Family myth did not, unfor tunately, stand the acid test of scholarly research. Re luctantly, my ancestor's part in the drama has been, by necessity, relegated to the status of a footnote citation. Nevertheless, I continued my task and soon discovered that my efforts might have a utility far greater than ancestoral glorification. Once a contentious issue between American and Anglo- Canadian historians, the Battle of Lundy's Lane has sub sequently been reduced to near-oblivion. In the decades before the First World War, historians endeavored to illu strate the glory of their respective pasts. Anglophobia gave vent to highly colored and chauvinistic American accounts of the War of 1812. The Niagara Campaign of 181^, more than any other episode in the war save perhaps the Battle of New Orleans, won for American arms a measure of glory, conspicuously absent in the other campaigns. Based upon the highly questionable official reports of the senior American officers, American histories lack somewhat in substance. Although some excellent, but often super ficial, accounts of the battles along the Niagara have iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V emerged, in large part many histories retain their mis conceptions and errors. Even an historian as venerated as Henry Adams fell prey to his prejudices. At the same time, Canadians were eager to claim their place in the sun in conjunction with the glories of the 3ritish Empire. Many military histories appeared in the years before the First World War, the most thorough being Brigadier General Ernest Cruikshank' s series. These his tories were just as guilty of excessive nationalism cloud ing their account of these events as their American coun terparts . In my paper, I have attempted to reach a synthesis of these contradictory interpretations. I must confess my own nationalist predispositions yet I endeavored not to have them influenced my analytical dealing with the subject. Thanks to the archivists of the University of Toronto, I had access to several vital primary sources from which a clearer picture of events could be gleaned. I am equally indebted to the Buffalo Historical Society as well as the smaller, but no less helpful, societies in St. Catherines, Ontario, Niagara Falls, Ontario, and Niagara Falls, New York. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I. CANADA INVADED The United States embarked upon the War of 1812 to preserve the freedom of the seas against British depreda tions and impressment. The Orders in Council were viewed as the source of American commercial distress. Many of the ambitious young politicians, eager to exhibit American power, saw in British maritime actions a slap in the face. In a speech of December 31. 1811, Representative Henry Clay of Kentucky stated: "What are we not to lose by peace? - commerce, character, a nation’s best treasure, honor!”' Thus, the fundamental cause of the War of 1812 was the British maritime policies which hampered American commerce and injured national pride. Why was American military strategy aimed toward Canada’s conquest? Firstly, there was no doubt in Ameri can minds that British agents provoked Indian frontier depredations. Secondly, and more importantly, an invasion of Canada was the only means available to carry the war to the British. The British, victors at Trafalgar, could not be seriously threatened upon the seas by an American fleet which had only a handful of frigates. The conquest of Canada was the obvious, indeed, the only method of injur- 1 Irving Brant, James Madison, Commander-in-Chief (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1961), p. 17. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 ing Great Britain. It was thought that little more was required than a mere declaration of war followed by a friendly occupation 1 of Canada.- Canadians, -Americans believed, would welcome the lifting of the yoke of British tyranny and monarchism. A three-pronged invasion was launched by the Americans in the summer and autumn of 1812: Brigadier-General William Hull advanced from Detroit with his army of 2,500; Major General Stephen Van Rensselaer of the New York Militia, commanding 3,170 men (900 regulars), invaded the Niagara frontier; and Major General Henry Dearborn moved against 2 Montreal with 5>000 men in the main American effort.