The Battle of New Orleans Part 1

The Battle of New Orleans.

by Zachary F. Smith.

PREFACE

In the preparation of the following account of the "Battle of New Orleans," I have availed myself of all accessible authorities, and have been placed under obligations to Colonel R.T. Durrett, of Louisville, Kentucky. I have had free access to his library, which is the largest private collection in this country, and embraces works upon almost every subject. Besides general histories of the United States and of the individual States, and periodicals, newspapers, and ma.n.u.scripts, which contain valuable information on the battle of New Orleans, his library contains numerous works more specifically devoted to this subject. Among these, to which I have had access, may be mentioned Notices of the War of 1812, by John M. Armstrong, two volumes, New York, 1840; The Naval History of Great Britain from 1783 to 1830, by Edward P. Brenton, two volumes, London, 1834; History of the Late War, by H.M. Brackenridge, Philadelphia, 1839; An Authentic History of the Second War for Independence, by Samuel R. Brown, two volumes, Auburn, 1815; History of the Late War by an American (Joseph Cushing), Baltimore, 1816; Correspondence between General Jackson and General Adair as to the Kentuckians charged by Jackson with inglorious flight, New Orleans, 1815; An Authentic History of the Late War, by Paris M. Davis, New York, 1836; A Narrative of the Campaigns of the British Army by an Officer (George R. Gleig), Philadelphia, 1821; History of Louisiana, American Dominion, by Charles Gayarre, New York, 1866; The Second War with England, ill.u.s.trated, by J.T. Headley, two volumes, New York, 1853; History of the War of 1812 between the United States and Great Britain, by Rossiter Johnson, New York, 1882; The Pictorial Field-book of the War of 1812, by Benjamin J. Lossing, New York, 1868; The War of 1812 in the Western Country, by Robert B. McAfee, Lexington, Kentucky, 1816; Historical Memoirs of the War of 1814-1815, by Major A. Lacarriere Latour, Philadelphia, 1816; Messages of James Madison, President of the United States, parts one and two, Albany, 1814; The Military Heroes of the War of 1812, by Charles J. Peterson, Philadelphia, 1858; The Naval War of 1812, by Theodore Roosevelt, New York, 1889; The History of the War of 1812-15, by J. Russell, junior, Hartford, 1815; The Glory of America, etc., by R. Thomas, New York, 1834; Historic Sketches of the Late War, by John L. Thomson, Philadelphia, 1816; The Life of Andrew Jackson, by Alexander Walker, Philadelphia, 1867; A Full and a Correct Account of the Military Occurrences of the Late War between Great Britain and the United States, by James Williams, two volumes, London, 1818.

I have also been placed under obligations to Mr. William Beer, librarian of the Howard Library of New Orleans, which has become a depository of rare works touching the history of the South Mississippi Valley, and especially relating to the War of 1812 and the battle of New Orleans. A list of all the works in this library which Mr. Beer placed at my disposal would be too long for insertion here, but the following may be mentioned: Claiborne's Notes on the War in the South, Goodwin's Biography of Andrew Jackson, Reid and Easten's Life of General Jackson, Nolte's Fifty Years in Both Hemispheres, Report of Committee on Jackson's Warrant for Closing the Halls of the Legislature of Louisiana, The Madison Papers, Ingersoll's Historic Sketch of the Second War between Great Britain and the United States, Cooke's Seven Campaigns in the Peninsula, Hill's Recollections of an Artillery Officer, c.o.ke's History of the Rifle Brigade, Diary of Private Timewell, and Cooke's Narrative of Events. No one would do justice to himself or his subject if he should write a history of the battle of New Orleans without availing himself of the treasures of the Howard Library.

Z.F. SMITH.

INTRODUCTION

England was apparently more liberal than Spain or France when, in the treaty of 1783, she agreed to the Mississippi River as the western boundary of the United States. Spain was for limiting the territory of the new republic on the west to the crest of the Alleghany Mountains, so as to secure to her the opportunity of conquering from England the territory between the mountains and the Great River. Strangely enough and inconsistently enough, France supported Spain in this outrageous effort to curtail the territory of the new republic after she had helped the United States to conquer it from England, or rather after General Clark had wrested it from England for the colony of Virginia, and while Virginia was still in possession of it. The seeming liberality of England, however, may not have been more disinterested than the scheming of Spain and France in this affair. England did not believe that the United States could exist as a permanent government, but that the confederated States would disintegrate and return to her as colonies.

The King of England said as much when the treaty was made. If, then, the States were to return to England as colonies, the more territory they might bring with them the better, and hence a large grant was acknowledged in the treaty of peace. The acts of England toward the United States after acknowledging their independence indicate that the fixing of the western boundary on the Mississippi had as much selfishness as liberality, if indeed it was not entirely selfish.

The ink was scarcely dry upon the parchment which bore evidence of the ratified treaty of 1783 when the mother country began acts of hostility and meanness against her children who had separated from her and begun a political life for themselves. When the English ships of war, which had blockaded New York for seven long years, sailed out of the harbor and took their course toward the British Isles, instead of hauling down their colors from the flagstaff of Fort George, they left them flying over the fortification, and tried to prevent them from being removed by chopping down all the cleats for ascent, and greasing the pole so that no one could climb to the top and pull down the British flag or replace it by the colors of the United States. An agile sailor boy, named Van Arsdale, who had probably ascended many trees in search of bird's nests, and clambered up the masts of ships until he had become an expert climber, nailed new cleats to the flagstaff and climbed to its summit, bearing with him the flag of the new republic. When he reached the top he cut down the British flag and suspended that of the United States.

This greasy trick may have been the act of some wag of the retiring fleet, and might have been taken for a joke had it not been followed by hostile acts which indicated that this was the initial step in a long course of hostility and meanness.

But it was soon followed by the retention of the lake forts which fell into British hands during the Revolutionary War, and which, by the terms of the treaty, were to be surrendered. Instead of surrendering them according to the stipulations of the treaty, they held them, and not only occupied them for thirteen years, but used them as storehouses and magazines from which the Indians were fed and clothed and armed and encouraged to tomahawk and scalp Americans without regard to age or s.e.x.

And then followed a series of orders in council, by which the commerce of the United States was almost swept from the seas, and their sailors forcibly taken from American ships to serve on British. These orders in council were so frequent that it seemed as if the French on one side of the British Channel and the English on the other were hurling decrees and orders at one another for their own amus.e.m.e.nt while inflicting dire injuries on other nations, and especially the Americans.

Had it not been for these hostile acts of the British there would have been no War of 1812. Had they continued to treat the young republic with the justice and liberality to which they agreed in fixing its western boundary in the treaty of 1783, no matter what their motive may have been, there would have been no cause for war between the two countries.

The Americans had hardly recovered from the wounds inflicted in the Revolutionary War. They were too few and too weak and too poor to go to war with such a power as England, and moreover wanted a continuance of the peace by which they were adding to the population and wealth of their country. What they had acquired in the quarter of a century since the end of the Revolutionary War was but little in comparison with the acc.u.mulations of England during long centuries, and they were not anxious to risk their all in a conflict with such a power; but young and weak and few as they were, they belonged to that order of human beings who hold their rights and their honor in such high regard that they can not continuously be insulted and injured without retaliation. The time came when they resolved to bear the burdens of war rather than submit to unjustice and dishonor.

In the French and Indian war which preceded the Revolution there was fighting for some time before a formal declaration of war. The English drove the French traders from the Ohio Valley, and the French forced out the English while the two nations were at peace. The French cha.s.sed from one of their forts to another with fiddles instead of drums, and the English with fowling-pieces instead of muskets rambled over the forest, but they sometimes met and introduced each other to acts of war while a state of hostility was acknowledged by neither. Something like a similar state of things preceded the War of 1812. Tec.u.mseh was at work trying to unite all the tribes of Indians in one grand confederacy, ostensibly to prevent them from selling their lands to the Americans, but possibly for the purpose of war. While he was at this work his brother, the Prophet, had convinced the Indians that he had induced the Great Spirit to make them bullet-proof, and the English so encouraged them with food and clothing and arms that they believed they were able to conquer the Americans, and began to carry on hostilities against them without any formal declaration of war by either party. The battle of Tippecanoe, which came of this superst.i.tion among the Indians and this encouragement from England, may be considered the first clash of arms in the War of 1812. The English took no open or active part in this battle, but their arms and ammunition and rations were in it, and after it was lost the Indians went to the English and became their open allies when the War of 1812 really began. Whether the English were allies of the Indians or the Indians allies of the English, they fought and bled and died and were conquered together after the initial conflict at Tippecanoe, in 1811, to the final battle at New Orleans in 1815, which crowned the American arms with a glory never to fade.

The Filson Club, whose broad field of work in history, literature, science, and art is hardly indicated by the name of the first historian of Kentucky, which it bears, has deemed three of the battles which were fought during the War of 1812 as the most important of the many that were waged. These three were, first, the battle of Tippecanoe, regarded as the opening scene of the b.l.o.o.d.y drama; second, the battle of the Thames, by which the power of the British was crushed in the west and northwest, and third, the battle of New Orleans, which ended the war in a glorious victory for the Americans. The Club determined to have the history of these three battles written and filed among its archives, and to have the matter published for the benefit of the public. Hence, the task was undertaken by three different members of the Club.

The first of these, "The Battle of Tippecanoe," was prepared for the Club by Captain Alfred Pirtle, and published in 1900 as Filson Club Publication Number 15. It is an ill.u.s.trated quarto of one hundred and sixty-seven pages, which gives a detailed account of the battle of Tippecanoe and the acts of the Indians and British which led to it and the important consequences which followed. The names of the officers and soldiers, and especially those of Kentucky who were engaged in it, are given so far as could be ascertained, and the book is a historic record of this battle, full enough and faithful enough to furnish the reader with all of the important facts.

The second, "The Battle of the Thames," the 5th of October, 1813, was undertaken by Colonel Bennett H. Young, and appeared in 1903 as the eighteenth publication of the Filson Club. It is an elaborately ill.u.s.trated quarto of two hundred and eighty-six pages, and presents a detailed account of the acts which led up to the main battle and the engagements by land and water which preceded it. It contains a list of all the Kentuckians who as officers and privates were in the battle. The reader who seeks information about this battle need look no further than its pages.

The third and last of these important battles occurred at New Orleans the 8th of January, 1815. Its history was prepared for the Club by Mr.

Z.F. Smith, and now appears as Filson Club Publication Number Nineteen, for the year 1904. It is an ill.u.s.trated quarto in the adopted style of the Club, which has been so much admired for its antique paper and beautiful typography. It sets forth with fullness and detail the hostilities which preceded and led to the main battle, and gives such a clear description of the final conflict by the a.s.sistance of charts as to enable the reader to understand the maneuvers of both sides and to virtually see the battle as it progressed from the beginning to the end.

This battle ended the War of 1812, and when the odds against the Americans are considered, it must be p.r.o.nounced one of the greatest victories ever won upon the battlefield. The author, Mr. Z.F. Smith, was an old-line Whig, and was taught to hate Jackson as Henry Clay, the leader of the Whigs, hated him, but he has done the old hero full justice in this narrative, and has a.s.signed him full honors of one of the greatest victories ever won. Although his sympathies were with General Adair, a brother Kentuckian, he takes up the quarrel between him and General Jackson and does Jackson full and impartial justice. If Jackson had been as unprejudiced against Adair as the author against Jackson, there would have been nothing like a stain left upon the escutcheon of the Kentuckians who abandoned the fight on the west bank of the Mississippi because it was their duty to get out of it rather than be slaughtered like dumb brutes who neither see impending danger nor reason about the mistakes of superiors and the consequences. He who reads the account of the battle of New Orleans which follows this introduction will know more about that battle than he knew before, or could have learned from any other source in so small a compa.s.s.

R.T. DURRETT,

_President of The Filson Club_.

THE BATTLE OF NEW ORLEANS

GULF COAST CAMPAIGN, PRECEDING THE FINAL STRUGGLE.

On the 26th of November, 1814, a fleet of sixty great ships weighed anchor, unfurled their sails, and put to sea, as the smoke lifted and floated away from a signal gun aboard the Tonnant, the flagship of Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane, from Negril Bay, on the coast of Jamaica. Nearly one half of these vessels were formidable warships, the best of the English navy, well divided between line-of-battle ships of sixty-four, seventy-four, and eighty guns, frigates of forty to fifty guns, and sloops and brigs of twenty to thirty guns each. In all, one thousand pieces of artillery mounted upon the decks of these frowned grimly through as many port-holes, bidding defiance to the navies of the world and safely convoying over thirty transports and provisioning ships, bearing every equipment for siege or battle by sea and for a formidable invasion of an enemy's country by land. Admiral Cochrane, in chief command, and Admiral Malcombe, second in command, were veteran officers whose services and fame are a part of English history.

On board of this fleet was an army and its retinue, computed by good authorities to number fourteen thousand men, made up mainly of the veteran troops of the British military forces recently operating in Spain and France, trained in the campaigns and battles against Napoleon through years of war, and victors in the end in these contests. Major Latour, Chief Engineer of General Jackson's army, in his "Memoirs of the War in Florida and Louisiana in 1814-15," has carefully compiled from British official sources a detailed statement of the regiments, corps, and companies which const.i.tuted the army of invasion under Pakenham, at New Orleans, as follows:

Fourth Regiment-- King's Own, Lieutenant-colonel Brooks 750

Seventh Regiment-- Royal Fusileers, Lieutenant-colonel Blakency 850

Fourteenth Regiment-- d.u.c.h.ess of York's Own, Lieutenant-colonel Baker 350

Twenty-first Regiment-- Royal Fusileers, Lieutenant-colonel Patterson 900

Fortieth Regiment-- Somersetshire, Lieutenant-colonel H. Thornton 1,000

Forty-third Regiment-- Monmouth Light Infantry, Lieutenant-colonel Patrickson 850

Forty-fourth Regiment-- East Ess.e.x, Lieutenant-colonel Mullen 750

Eighty-fifth Regiment-- Buck Volunteers, Lieutenant-colonel Wm. Thornton 650

Ninety-third Regiment-- Highlanders, Lieutenant-colonel Dale 1,100

Ninety-fifth Regiment-- Rifle Corps, Major Mitch.e.l.l 500

First Regiment-- West India (colored), Lieutenant-colonel Whitby 700

Fifth Regiment-- West India (colored), Lieutenant-colonel Hamilton 700

A detachment from the Sixty-second Regiment 350

Rocket Brigade, Artillery, Engineers, Sappers and Miners 1,500

Royal Marines and sailors from the fleet 3,500 ------ Total 14,450

Including artillerists, marines, and others, seamen of the ships' crews afloat, there were not fewer than eighteen thousand men, veterans in the service of their country in the lines of their respective callings, to complete the equipment of this powerful armada.

At the head of this formidable army of invasion were Lord Edward Pakenham, commander-in-chief; Major-general Samuel Gibbs, commanding the first, Major-general John Lambert, the second, and Major-general John Keene, the third divisions, supported by subordinate officers, than whom none living were braver or more skilled in the science and practice of war. Nearly all had learned their lessons under the great Wellington, the conqueror of Napoleon. Since 1588, when the combined naval and military forces of England were summoned to repel the attempted invasion and conquest of that country by the Spanish Armada, the British Government had not often fitted out and sent against an enemy a combined armament so powerful and so costly as that which rendezvoused in the tropical waters of Negril Bay in the latter autumn days of 1814. Even the fleet of Nelson at the Battle of the Nile, sixteen years before, where he won victory and immortal honors by the destruction of the formidable French fleet, was far inferior in number of vessels, in ordnance, and in men to that of Admiral Cochrane on this expedition. The combined equipment cost England forty millions of dollars.

In October and November of this year, the marshaling of belligerent forces by sea and land from the sh.o.r.es of Europe and America, with orders to rendezvous at a favorable maneuvering point in the West Indies, caused much conjecture as to the object in view. That the War Department of the English Government meditated a winter campaign somewhere upon the southern coasts of the United States was a common belief; that an invasion of Louisiana and the capture and occupation of New Orleans was meant, many surmised. For reasons of State policy, the object of the expedition in view was held a secret until the day of setting sail. Now it was disclosed by those in command that New Orleans was the objective point, and officers and men were animated with the hope that, in a few weeks more, they would be quartered for the winter in the subjugated capital of Louisiana, with a dream that the coveted territory might be occupied and permanently held as a possession of the British Empire.

The Government at Washington was advised that, during the summer and early autumn months of 1814, our implacable enemy was engaged in preparations for a renewal of hostilities on a scale of magnitude and activity beyond anything attempted since the war began; but it seemed not fully to interpret the designs and plans of the British leaders.

Especially unfortunate, and finally disastrous to the American arms, was the inaptness and inertness of the Secretary of War, General Armstrong, in failing to adopt, promptly and adequately, measures to meet the emergency. For almost a year after the destruction of the English fleet on Lake Erie by Commodore Perry, and of the English army at the battle of the Thames by General Harrison, a period of comparative repose ensued between the belligerents. The British Government was too much absorbed in delivering the _coup-de-main_ to the great Napoleon to give attention to America. But her opportunity came. The allied powers defeated and decimated the armies of the French Emperor, and forced him to capitulate in his own capital. On the 3d of March, 1814, they entered Paris. On the eleventh of May Napoleon abdicated, and was sent an exile to Elba.