A Journal of a Young Man of Massachusetts Part 16

It appears to us, after an attentive examination of this report, that the commissioners meant to justify Shortland in commencing his murderous attack upon the prisoners, and to condemn the soldiers for continuing it. Singular as this idea appears, it is no less strange to us, how it can be possible they could reconcile it to their feelings to make up a report containing such a direct contradiction to reason; for surely if Shortland could be justified in using coercive measures in the first instance, the military certainly should be acquitted for the subsequent ma.s.sacre, as the whole was conducted under his immediate command;--and if he had A RIGHT to kill one, on the same ground he might have extended it to a thousand. And, on the other hand, if any part of the transaction is to be condemned, Shortland should answer for the whole; for what necessity could there be made to attempt identifying any of the soldiers? Surely the commissioners could not think of bringing them to punishment, as they acted by the direct orders of Shortland and his officers!--and if any one could or ought to be made to answer for the outrage, it should be Shortland.

In addition to the contradictions contained in the commissioners'

joint report, Mr. King, in his letter to his excellency J. Q.

Adams, almost denies the ground on which they have, in part, founded Shortland's justification, when he says (alluding to have heard several Americans _swear, positively_, that Shortland did give the order to fire, and an officer of the guard _thinking_ that he did not, as he should have heard him) "perhaps the bias of my mind was, that Shortland did give that order; and wishing the report to go forth under our joint signatures, I forbore to press some of the points so far as otherwise I MIGHT have done."

If, then, any part has been neglected, or pa.s.sed over for accommodation, or any other purpose (and one there certainly has, in not paying the same attention to the American as was done to the English evidence) it is to be regretted that Mr. King should so far forget the sacred duties attached to the appointment of a commissioner to enquire into the murder of his countrymen, as to pa.s.s over any points which might have brought to light the means of punishment for the murder, or obtained in some measure an indemnity for the surviving unhappy sufferers.

Will not the shades of the departed victims haunt him in his midnight slumbers, and, pointing to their lacerated bodies, say, these still remain unavenged? Will not the unhappy survivors show the stumps of their amputated limbs, and say, these wounds fester, and still remain unatoned? Will not the widow and the helpless orphan raise their innocent hands to heaven, and cry, why was justice denied us? Why was the heart so callous to our sufferings?

And why was the bosom shut to sympathy? Let Mr. King point out some means to appease these bitter complaints, and we shall be satisfied.

We shall now close these unpleasant remarks, by noticing another unaccountable error in Mr. King's letter to Mr. Adams, where he mentions, speaking of Shortland, "and his general conduct, previous to this occurrence, as far as I could with propriety enter into such details, appears to have been characterized with great fairness, and even kindness, in the relation in which he stood towards the prisoners."--We shall not pretend to ask Mr.

King where he obtained the evidence on which he grounds this a.s.sertion; we are sure it was not from the prisoners, who ought to have been the best judges of that circ.u.mstance; but, instead of all that, all the Americans who were permitted to express an opinion on that subject, at the examination, declared, without reserve, as would all the prisoners in the depot, had they been asked the question, that Shortland's conduct, from the commencement of his appointment to that station, had been cruel, oppressive, and overbearing; and, instead of taking measures to alleviate the distresses of the wretched objects under him, as a feeling man would have done, he seemed to take a pleasure in harra.s.sing them whenever he could find the slightest pretext for so doing.

_W. Colton_, _Joseph Swain_, _Arch'd Taylor_, _David Ingalls_, _Reuben Sherman_, _Arch'd I. Mackay_, _Philip Black_, _Homer Hall_, _James B. Mansfield_, _Abr'm M'Intire_, _Wm. Cochran_, _Henry Dolliver_, _John Jones_, _B. Weeks_, _Wm. Demerell_, _Thomas Ward_, _William K. White_.

REMARKS.

In presenting to the world the record of a transaction, probably the most barbarous which the history of modern warfare can furnish, we cannot refrain from remarks.--Whatever our feelings may be, upon a subject so amply calculated to excite the indignation and abhorrence of every friend to humanity, and every one who has respect for the laws of civilized and mitigated warfare, we will, nevertheless, refrain, so far as the circ.u.mstances of outraged humanity will permit, from the violence of invective, and wholly from unwarranted crimination. Those, into whose hands these doc.u.ments may fall, will, however, preserve them as a monument erected to the memory of their slaughtered countrymen, and a memento of the unfeeling cruelty of our late enemy.

Though we are far from believing that there are not persons of n.o.ble and humane minds in the English nation, yet, a uniformity of conduct, on the part of the Government and its agents, has taught us to believe that they, at least, are blood thirsty and cruel.

The incarceration of Americans in the Jersey Prison Ship at New-York, and Mill Prison, in England, in the Revolutionary war, raised in the minds of the sainted heroes of those times, the most exalted feelings of indignation and abhorrence. The history of those prisoners, where hundreds were compelled to wear out an existence, rendered miserable by the cruelty of an enemy, professing a reverence for the sublime principles of Christianity, is already familiarized to the minds of the American people. If the feelings of Americans were then indignant, what should they be, on beholding those cruelties renewed with more than ten fold severity? The conduct of Thomas George Shortland, the agent at Dartmoor Prison, is such as should "d.a.m.n him to everlasting fame."

Upon what principles the conduct of this man, precedent to the ever memorable 6th of April, 1815, can be justified, we cannot determine. The indiscriminate confinement of both officers and men in the same prisons, and those the most unfit, decayed, and loathsome of any which the Government could furnish, was an infraction of the established laws of civilized nations for the treatment of prisoners of war. It was equally abhorrent to the principles of humanity, and only sanctioned by British governmental agents, and those petty Nations of Savages, whose known usages of warfare have hitherto kept them beyond the pale of national law. The history of modern European wars can furnish no parallel to this part of the history of Dartmoor. But when we arrive at the slaughter of prisoners on the 6th of April, the climax of barbarity is complete, and the mind is sated with the contemplation of principles as shocking to humanity as the consequences are degrading to the character of the English nation.

An eminent writer upon national law, has formerly extolled the "English and French for their treatment given to prisoners of war," and at the same time mentions the case of Charles I. King of Naples, who, having defeated and taken prisoner Conrade, his compet.i.tor, caused him, together with his fellow-prisoner, Frederick of Austria, to be beheaded at Naples. Upon this case our author has the following pertinent remarks:--"This barbarity raised an universal horror, and Peter the third, King of Arragon, reproached Charles with it, as a detestable crime, till then unheard of among Christian princes. However, the case was of a dangerous rival contending with him for the throne. But, supposing the claims of his rival were unjust, Charles might have kept him in prison until he had renounced them, and given security for his future behavior." If this act of Charles raised an "universal horror," what should be the excitement produced by the cold blooded ma.s.sacre of a number of unarmed and unoffending prisoners of war in confinement? Humanity shudders at the thought, and language furnishes no appropriate epithet with which to brand the infamous perpetrator of so foul, so hitherto unheard of a crime.

Did that writer now live, he would no longer extol the humanity of the English nation, but in common with the friends of humanity, he would join in the "universal horror" which British cruelty has excited.

The complexion of this transaction is rendered still more dark and barbarous, and its criminality most shockingly enhanced, by the circ.u.mstances under which many of those unfortunate men became prisoners, and finally were offered up as victims to gratify the cruel and insatiate feeling of the British agent. They were American Citizens, who had been impressed into the service and bondage of Great Britain, in time of peace. They had served that government from a necessity, arising from the a.s.sumed principle of a right to search neutral vessels for British seamen, and the practice of taking Americans and compelling them to service. We cannot, however, too much applaud the magnanimity of those men, in refusing to fight against and slaughter their countrymen; nor can we too much detest the conduct of Great Britain, in confining them as prisoners of war.

This practice a.s.sumed as a right in the first moments of our existence as an independent and commercial nation, has "grown with our growth," and the evil thereof has increased in proportion as our commercial rivalship has become more alarming to the pride and injustice of Great Britain. It is a practice which cannot be traced to any principle of justification; and yet we have seen the legislators of Ma.s.sachusetts, clothed with a garb of official sanct.i.ty, send to the world a report, amounting almost to a denial, that such a practice was in existence! We pretend not to judge of their motives: but we remark, how soon they are confounded by the report of Shortland and Magrath. By that instrument it appears, that of thirty-eight who were killed or wounded, twelve were of the number of Impressed Americans, who had given themselves up as prisoners of war, upon the commencement of hostilities. If this be the correct proportion of their prisoners, who have been impressed from American vessels, and as it is an official doc.u.ment of British authority, we cannot believe the ratio to be less, we see the advocates of British magnanimity confounded and put to shame, by the testimony of those same British agents, whose justification they have so eagerly, though unsuccessfully attempted. It might, indeed, have been supposed, that after having so frequently been treated with the same contempt, they might have learned sufficient caution, at least, to stay their measures until the pleasure of their transatlantic friends should be known. But their overweening anxiety has only tended to plunge them in deeper embarra.s.sments, and should teach them, that more prudence and less zeal in the cause of a national enemy, might secure them a safer retreat in the moments when those whose friendship they had so anxiously sought, had deserted, and condemned them.

By the report of the Legislature of Ma.s.sachusetts upon the subject of impressments, it would appear that no more than sixteen had been impressed from this Commonwealth. What must be our conclusion upon a comparison of this report, with that of Messrs. Shortland and Magrath? It is irresistable, either that the former did not report the full number of impressments, or that the latter have aggravated their guilt and condemnation, by swelling the number to a degree beyond what the facts would justify, from some cause, unknown to their American advocates, and in favor of the facts and principles, for which the American government have uniformly contended. A few of those a.s.sumed as facts, by the present dominant party in New-England, may aid us in this enquiry, and perhaps conduct us to a correct conclusion. They have repeatedly told us, that New-England, and more particularly Ma.s.sachusetts, has ever been the nursery of our seamen. That this section had furnished more than the whole remaining part of the United States.

Admitting the correctness of the report of Shortland and Magrath, we are wholly unable to reconcile the report of our Legislature with those which they a.s.sume as facts, and upon which the principles of their report were, in part, predicated. It exhibits to our view a disposition to fritter away the enormities of the British Government, and a determination to justify them in every act of barbarity, however unjustifiable in its circ.u.mstances, or however shocking in its operation.

The report of Messrs. King and Larpent may here claim a portion of our attention. Unpleasant as the task may be, to reflect, even indirectly upon the conduct of one of our countrymen, acting in the high and solemn capacity to which Mr. King was called, we cannot, however, without doing violence to our own feelings, and criminating numbers of our countrymen, perhaps equally ent.i.tled to credibility with Mr. King himself, afford our credence to his singular report; especially when we see it contradicted unconditionally, by the unfortunate witnesses of the unhappy and barbarous transaction.

Even Mr. King himself, in his letter to Mr. Adams, furnishes a tardy acknowledgment, that he had not completed the duties to which he had been called. "Considering it of much importance (he says) that the report, whatever it might be, should go forth under our joint signatures, I have forborne to press some of the points which it involves as far as otherwise I might have done." And why did Mr. King forbear to press every point involved in the report?

Was it from a disposition to perform his whole duty to his country; or, rather, from a too common admiration of British principles and British characters.

The numerous affidavits accompanying the report made by the committee of the prisoners, together with the reply to the report of Messrs. King and Larpent, afford the most positive testimony in contradiction to many of its prominent features. We can form no other opinion respecting this report, than either that Mr. King was overreached by his colleague, or that he was pre-determined to fritter down the abuses which the British Government and its agents had lavished upon their American prisoners. Why either Messrs. King or Larpent should decline the examination of all the witnesses offered by the prisoners, is wholly inexplicable, unless we attribute to them a mutual and fixed determination to justify the conduct of Shortland and his accomplices, at the expense of criminating hundreds of Americans, who were no less ent.i.tled to credibility than either of themselves. Hereafter "let no such men be trusted."

The treatment of the prisoners appears to have proceeded from the same principles of inhumanity, which have given rise to the hostile operations of the British Commanders upon our maritime and inland frontiers, during the continuance of the late contest. Such principles belong only to Savages or their allies. The outrages at the river Raisin, Hampton, Havre de Grace, Washington, and those attempted at New-Orleans, it was thought, might have filled the measure of British barbarities. But to the prisons of Dartmoor was transferred the scene of its completion. Americans, armed in defence of their soil, their Const.i.tution, and natural rights, were too invincible to the "veteran" conquerors of the East.

Prisoners of war in confinement, and without arms, were selected as the objects upon which they might glut their malice.

We have heard much from a certain cla.s.s of our politicians of the burning of Newark and St. David's; but little have they said of the destruction of Buffalo, of Washington City, or the ma.s.sacre of our unfortunate countrymen at Dartmoor; and that little has been directed to the justification of the perpetrators. The conflagration of our Capitol, with the appendages of art and taste, and even the slaughter of our countrymen, could not excite in those minds one feeling of indignation; whilst the unauthorized destruction of a few houses, within the territorial limits of our enemy, not only excited their warmest sympathies for the enemy, but their foulest denunciations of our own Government.

We might here attempt a comparison of the treatment of each Government to their prisoners. But the contrast is so evident, that we shall commit it to our readers without remark.

Where is the American, whose feelings do not become indignant, after a full and dispa.s.sionate view of all the circ.u.mstances connected with this savage transaction. Though we may again be told, that Great Britain is the 'Bulwark of our Religion;' yet it may be hoped, that few, indeed, will be found to worship in a temple stained with the blood of their countrymen, or consign their consciences to the keeping of the upholders of the temple of Juggernaut, or the restorers of Papal power.

Though our policy as an Independent Republic is pacific, yet should our rights again be a.s.sailed, and future wars ensue, WE WILL REMEMBER DARTMOOR!

We here subjoin a letter from the Right Honorable Lord Castlereagh to our Commissioners at Ghent, with their answer, together with the reply of our Secretary of State to the British charge des affairs at Washington:

_Lord Castlereagh to Messrs. Clay and Gallatin._

Foreign Office, May 22, 1815.

GENTLEMEN--I lost no time in laying before the Prince Regent the report made by Mr. Larpent and Mr. King, respectfully appointed on the part of his majesty's government, and that of the United States of America, to enquire into the circ.u.mstances of the late unfortunate occurrence at Dartmoor Prison.

His Royal Highness has commanded me to express, through you, to the government of America, how deeply he laments the consequences of this unhappy affair.

If any thing can tend to relieve the distress which his Royal Highness feels on this occasion, it is the consideration, that the conduct of the soldiers was not actuated from any spirit of animosity towards the prisoners, and that the inactivity of the officers may be attributed rather to the inexperience of militia forces, than to any want of zeal or inclination to afford that liberal protection which is ever due to prisoners of war.

But as his Royal Highness has observed, at the same time, with sincere regret, that although the firing of the troops upon the prisoners may have been justified at its commencement, by the turbulent conduct of the latter, yet that the extent of the calamity must be ascribed to a want of steadiness in the troops, and of exertion in the officers, calling for the most severe animadversion. His Royal Highness has been pleased to direct the commander in chief to address to the commanding officer of the Somerset militia, his disapprobation of the conduct of the troops, which it is trusted will make a due impression on the minds of the officers and men who were engaged in this unfortunate transaction.

As an additional proof of the sentiments which animate the Prince Regent on this occasion, I am further commanded to express his Royal Highness' desire to make a compensation to the widows and families of the sufferers; and I have to request that you, gentlemen, would make this known to your government, inviting them, at the same time, to co-operate with his majesty's charge d'affairs in the United States, in investigating the respective claims, for the purpose of fulfilling his Royal Highness'

benevolent intentions upon this painful occasion.

I request that you will accept the a.s.surance of the distinguished consideration with which I have the honor to be, &c.

(Signed)

CASTLEREAGH.

To Henry Clay, Esq. and Albert Gallatin, Esq.

_Copy of a letter from Messrs. Clay and Gallatin, to Lord Castlereagh._

Hanover Street, Hanover Square, March 24, 1815.

MY LORD--We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your lordship's official note of the 22d inst.

Having, as we have already informed your lordship, no powers on the subject to which it refers, we will lose no time in transmitting it to our government.--We will also place in the possession of the American minister, near his Britannic majesty's government, whose arrival here we daily expect, a copy of your lordship's note, together with a statement of what had previously pa.s.sed respecting the unfortunate event at Dartmoor.

We embrace the opportunity of tendering, &c.

(Signed)

H. CLAY, ALBERT GALLATIN.

The Right Honorable Viscount Castlereagh, Secretary of State for the Foreign Department, &c. &c.