Troublous Times in Canada Part 24

2nd Charge.-With having at Fort Erie on the afternoon of the 2nd June last, after he had received information that a large and overwhelming force of the enemy was within a very short distance from his command, and that his command was in danger of being destroyed or captured, and after having himself seen that force approaching, recklessly and uselessly landed 5 officers and 68 men of the Welland Ca.n.a.l Field Battery and Dunnville Naval Brigade from the steamer "Robb," marched them along an exposed road, and posted them in a most dangerous position, where they were exposed to a front and flanking fire from the enemy, which course on his part resulted in disaster to his command, the serious wounding and maiming (some of them for life) of an officer and five men, and the capture by the enemy of four officers and thirty-two men of that command.

3rd Charge.-With having at Fort Erie on the afternoon of the 2nd June last, after having placed his command in the dangerous position described in Charge No. 2, and when a force of the enemy greatly superior in numbers to his command was within a very short distance from and advancing upon his left flank, and another force of the enemy far stronger than the one first herein mentioned was within a very short distance of and advancing against his front and preparing to flank his right, the whole force of the enemy being overwhelming and numbering 500 or 600 men, while his command only numbered 5 officers and 68 men, neither ordering a retreat to the steamer "Robb," which there was ample time to effect, and whereby his whole command might have been saved, nor allowing a fire to be opened on the enemy, but on the contrary, neglecting to give orders for a retreat, and directing that no order to fire should be given.

4th Charge.-With having, at Fort Erie, on the afternoon of the 2nd June last, after he had placed his command in the dangerous and exposed position described in the preceding charges, and given the order not to fire as therein mentioned, disgracefully, in the face of the enemy, and in order to secure his personal safety, deserted his command and left it without orders of any kind.

5th Charge.-With having, on or about the 4th June last, in a certain report of his proceedings addressed to Colonel Lowry, commanding the Niagara frontier, untruly, and knowing it to be untrue, stated that, having advanced to meet the enemy at Fort Erie on the 2nd June last, he did, in order to save the prisoners then on board the tug "Robb" and prevent the enemy from obtaining possession of that vessel, order the Captain of that vessel to cast off and get into the stream, and ordered his (Colonel Dennis') men (meaning his command, landed as aforesaid) to retreat and do the best they could to get away, each man for himself, when in reality he did not give such orders, and had at the time of which he alleges he gave them, deserted his command.

6th Charge.-That he was guilty of misconduct at Fort Erie on the afternoon of the 2nd June last, in this, that having received information that an overwhelming body of the enemy was then within a very short distance of and advancing against Fort Erie, and in fact seen that body himself, he should and might, instead of placing his command then at Fort Erie in the dangerous position described in Charge No. 2, have embarked it in the steamer "Robb," so protected that vessel with materials at hand that she would have been proof against the fire and weapons of the enemy, and dropping into the stream, held the enemy in check without any casualty to his command, and prevented them from escaping to the United States before the arrival of a force sufficiently strong to capture them.

The Court having proceeded to the examination of the evidence brought forward against the accused, as well as what he has offered in exculpation, and having duly considered the same, are of-

OPINION.

As to the 1st Charge.-That the allegation that Lieut.-Colonel Dennis, after having received information of the near approach of an overwhelming force, made arrangements for billetting his men at Fort Erie, thereby raising the inference that in so acting he evinced disregard for the lives of the officers and men of the party under his command, is not sustained. And that of the part of this charge attributing to Lieut.-Colonel Dennis an expressed intention (with or without such information as he is alleged to have had) of leaving a part of his command at Fort Erie and taking the steamer and remainder of the force to Port Colborne, there is not any evidence whatever in support.

As to 2nd Charge.-That this charge, based on the a.s.sertion not only that the accused officer was in possession of certain information, but had actual personal knowledge of the approach of a large and overwhelming force of the enemy, is not sustained by the evidence before the Court. On the contrary, with reference to the alleged knowledge of that fact, the Court is of opinion that the rumors which immediately before his party was disembarked to repel any attack on the village of Fort Erie, were, in so far as regarded the strength of the enemy's force, so much at variance with previously received information of a definite nature, as to be disbelieved not only by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis, but to some extent by the officers who have preferred the charges against him. And it appears to the Court that it was only after he had got his men into position, and after they had come into actual contact with the enemy, that the great superiority in numbers of the attacking force became a matter of certainty.

As to the 3rd Charge.-That this charge, being also grounded upon certain knowledge alleged to have been in the possession of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis at a particular time with respect to the great superiority of the enemy's force, and that whilst possessing that knowledge, and there being time to avail himself of the line of retreat alleged to have been open to him, he neglected to do so, is not sustained by the evidence before the Court. And with reference to the remainder of this charge as to the aforesaid officer not allowing a fire to lie opened upon the enemy, but on the contrary directing that no order to fire should be given, the Court are further of opinion that this part of the charge is not only not sustained, but is refuted by the evidence offered on behalf of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis.

As to the 4th Charge.-That with reference to the grave accusations contained in this charge, the Court are of opinion that throughout the whole of the affair, and up to the moment when he ascertained from personal observation that the enemy was on the point of cutting off his command by an overwhelming force, the dispositions of his party and the orders given by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis were carried out and given in a perfectly collected and regular manner, and that on the retreat of his force his position was not such as to warrant the use of the language in which this charge has been framed, nor did Lieut.-Colonel Dennis, as alleged, leave his force without orders, and that therefore not only is this charge not sustained, but this Court are further of opinion that the imputation contained herein against Lieut.-Colonel Dennis is by no means supported by the evidence.

As to the 5th Charge.-That as to this charge nothing which has transpired in the evidence offered before this Court having varied the report made by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis to Colonel Lowry, the officer commanding on the Niagara frontier, as published in the Gazette of the 23rd of June last, and finding that the statements therein contained are fully supported by evidence before the Court, this Court are further of opinion that this charge is not sustained.

As to the 6th Charge.-That with reference to the allegation of misconduct on the part of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis contained in this charge, the officers preferring it, having based that a.s.sertion on an opinion which they appear to have formed as to the course which ought to have been, but was not adopted by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis with the force at his disposal, the Court are of opinion that although subsequent events and results may have properly led to the conclusion that such a course might have resulted in the manner alleged in the charge, no charge of misconduct in not adopting such a course is sustained, first, because it does not appear from the evidence that at the time when it is alleged that this course might have been successfully adopted, the officer in command had foreseen occasion for it. And also because it is by no means clear to the Court that there was time after he became aware of the vicinity of the enemy to have taken the steps suggested in this charge.

(Signed) GEO. T. DENISON, Colonel, President.

J. SHANLY, Lieut.-Colonel.

S. B. FAIRBANKS, Lieut.-Colonel.

Fort Erie. 8th November, 1866.

Colonel Denison, the President, having been overruled by the majority of the Court, has signed the proceedings as its President, and now desires to express his dissent from the finding of the majority for the following reasons:-

Second Charge.-That as to the first allegation, "that he had received information that a large and overwhelming force of the enemy was within a very short distance from his command, and that his command was in danger of being captured," it appears to be proved by the evidence that this fact is established. The evidence of Drill Instructor McCracken, Lieutenant McDonald, Henry Cole, Thomas Carlisle, Lieutenant Nimmo, and of Lewis Palmer, show clearly that messenger after messenger arrived with this information, that most of the officers and men were aware of it, and that the remonstrances of Capt King and Capt. McCallum show not only their appreciation of the danger, but also afford the strongest presumption that Lieut.-Colonel Dennis must have been aware of it before he marched his command off the dock. This is also further established by the admission of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis in his "Statement of Facts" submitted to the Court, that he himself, after hearing the report, saw at least one hundred and fifty of the enemy before landing his men, and his further statement of his having sent word to the "Robb" to secure the boat and prisoners in case he was overpowered, and his having withdrawn his men from Ramsford's Corner to a position near the "Robb," all prove the evidence of doubts in his mind as to whether he had sufficient strength in his command to successfully resist the force which he was informed was about to attack him. And as to the remainder of the second charge the evidence proves it conclusively.

Third Charge.-Colonel Denison also dissents from the finding of the Court upon the third charge, as he is of opinion that the third charge is proved, with the exception that the allegation that Lieut.-Colonel Dennis did not allow a fire to be opened on the enemy. On this point there is a certain amount of reb.u.t.ting evidence, although the weight of evidence seems to support the charge.

(Signed) GEO. T. DENISON. Colonel. President.

Fort Erie, 8th November, 1866.

With respect to the foregoing charges and opinion, and to the evidence generally taken by the Court of Inquiry, His Excellency directs the publication of the following remarks:

1. Although the order for the a.s.sembly of the Court was general in its terms, the special memorandum of instructions furnished for the guidance of the President and members, stated that the Court was a.s.sembled to give Lieut.-Col. Dennis an opportunity of refuting charges which had been "made against his personal conduct on the 2nd June, at Fort Erie," and directed the reception of any evidence which might tend to elucidate the truth.

2. The only one of the above six charges which, strictly speaking, the Court was required to consider, was the 4th, which imputed disgraceful and cowardly conduct to the accused officer.

3. His Excellency approves of the opinion of the Court with respect to the 1st. 3rd. 4th. 5th and 6th charges.

4. With respect to the second charge. His Excellency is of opinion that Lieut.-Col. Dennis committed an error in judgment in removing the small force under his command, from the means of secure retreat afforded by the steamer, before he had ascertained with some degree of certainty the probable force of the enemy, of whose near approach he was informed; but if the accusation made against Lieut.-Col. Dennis in this charge be correct, that he did so remove his force from the shelter of the steamer for the purpose of attacking an enemy, whose numbers he knew to be overwhelming-the proceeding savours rather of rashness than of timidity. Had Lieut.-Col. Dennis been the coward which his accusers would have the public believe, he would in such a case have eagerly availed himself of the remonstrances which it is stated were made to him, to return with the men under his command to the deck of the steamer.

5. The first charge being one of imputed intention only, the fulfilment of which it was not attempted to establish, was not a proper charge for investigation by any Court.

6. The sixth charge is also an improper charge to have preferred or investigated. No Commanding Officer would be safe if his subordinates could be allowed to frame a charge of misconduct against him for not having adopted a particular course, which, judging deliberately after the event, his accusers might think to have been advisable. There is no pretence that the course which Lieut.-Col. Dennis is accused of misconduct for not adopting, was suggested to him and rejected.

END