Canadian
Research
Alberta
British
Columbia
Manitoba
New Brunswick
Newfoundland
Northern
Territories
Nova Scotia
Nunavut
Ontario
Prince Edward
Island
Quebec
Saskatchewan
Yukon
Canadian Indian
Tribes
Chronicles of
Canada
Free Genealogy Forms
Family Tree
Chart
Research
Calendar
Research Extract
Free Census
Forms
Correspondence Record
Family Group Chart
Source
Summary New Genealogy Data
Family Tree Search
Biographies
Genealogy Books For Sale
Indian Mythology
US Genealogy
Other Websites
British Isles Genealogy
Australian Genealogy
FREE Web Site Hosting at
Canadian Genealogy
|
The Loyalists under Arms
It has been charged against the Loyalists, and the
charge cannot be denied, that at the beginning of the Revolution
they lacked initiative, and were slow to organize and defend
themselves. It was not, in fact, until 1776 that Loyalist regiments
began to be formed on an extensive scale. There were several reasons
why this was so. In the first place a great many of the Loyalists,
as has been pointed out, were not at the outset in complete sympathy
with the policy of the British government; and those who might have
been willing to take up arms were very early disarmed and
intimidated by the energy of the revolutionary authorities. In the
second place that very conservatism which made the Loyalists draw
back from revolution hindered them from taking arms until the king
gave them commissions and provided facilities for military
organization. And there is no fact better attested in the history of
the Revolution than the failure of the British authorities to
understand until it was too late the great advantages to be derived
from the employment of Loyalist levies. The truth is that the
British officers did not think much more highly of the Loyalists
than they did of the rebels. For both they had the Briton's contempt
for the colonial, and the professional soldier's contempt for the
armed civilian.
Had more use been made of the Tories, the military history of the
Revolution might have been very different. They understood the
conditions of warfare in the New World much better than the British
regulars or the German mercenaries. Had the advice of prominent
Loyalists been accepted by the British commander at the battle of
Bunker's Hill, it is highly probable that there would have been none
of that carnage in the British ranks which made of the victory a
virtual defeat. It was said that Burgoyne's early successes were
largely due to the skill with which he used his Loyalist
auxiliaries. And in the latter part of the war, it must be confessed
that the successes of the Loyalist troops far outshone those of the
British regulars. In the Carolinas Tarleton's Loyal Cavalry swept
everything before them, until their defeat at the Cowpens by Daniel
Morgan. In southern New York Governor Tryon's levies carried fire
and sword up the Hudson, into 'Indigo Connecticut,' and over into
New Jersey. Along the northern frontier, the Loyalist forces
commanded by Sir John Johnson and Colonel Butler made repeated
incursions into the Mohawk, Schoharie, and Wyoming valleys and, in
each case, after leaving a trail of desolation behind them, they
withdrew to the Canadian border in good order. The trouble was that,
owing to the stupidity and incapacity of Lord George Germain, the
British minister who was more than any other man responsible for the
misconduct of the American War, these expeditions were not made part
of a properly concerted plan; and so they sank into the category of
isolated raids.
From the point of view of Canadian history, the most interesting of
these expeditions were those conducted by Sir John Johnson and
Colonel Butler. They were carried on with the Canadian border as
their base-line. It was by the men who were engaged in them that
Upper Canada was at first largely settled; and for a century and a
quarter there have been leveled against these men by American and
even by English writers charges of barbarism and inhumanity about
which Canadians in particular are interested to know the truth.
Most of Johnson's and Butler's men came from central or northern New
York. To explain how this came about it is necessary to make an
excursion into previous history. In 1738 there had come out to
America a young Irishman of good family named William Johnson. The
famous naval hero, Sir Peter Warren, who was an uncle of Johnson,
had large tracts of land in the Mohawk valley, in northern New York.
These estates he employed his nephew in administering; and, when he
died, he bequeathed them to him. In the meantime William Johnson had
begun to improve his opportunities. He had built up a prosperous
trade with the Indians; he had learned their language and studied
their ways; and he had gained such an ascendancy over them that he
came to be known as 'the Indian-tamer,' and was appointed the
British superintendent-general for Indian Affairs. In the Seven
Years' War he served with great distinction against the French. He
defeated Baron Dieskau at Lake George in 1755, and he captured
Niagara in 1759; for the first of these services he was created a
baronet, and received a pension of 5,000 pounds a year. During his
later years he lived at his house, Johnson Hall, on the Mohawk
river; and he died in 1774, on the eve of the American Revolution,
leaving his title and his vast estates to his only son, Sir John.
Just before his death Sir William Johnson had interested himself in
schemes for the colonization of his lands. In these he was
remarkably successful. He secured in the main two classes of
immigrants, Germans and Scottish Highlanders. Of the Highlanders he
must have induced more than one thousand to emigrate from Scotland,
some of them as late as 1773. Many of them had been Jacobites; some
of them had seen service at Culloden Moor; and one of them,
Alexander Macdonell, whose son subsequently sat in the first
legislature of Upper Canada, had been on Bonnie Prince Charlie's
personal staff. These men had no love for the Hanoverians; but their
loyalty to their new chieftain, and their lack of sympathy with
American ideals, kept them at the time of the Revolution true almost
without exception to the British cause. King George had no more
faithful allies in the New World than these rebels of the '45.
They were the first of the Loyalists to arm and organize themselves.
In the summer of 1775 Colonel Allan Maclean, a Scottish officer in
the English army, aided by Colonel Guy Johnson, a brother-in-law of
Sir John Johnson, raised a regiment in the Mohawk valley known as
the Royal Highland Emigrants, which he took to Canada, and which did
good service against the American invaders under Montgomery in the
autumn of the same year. In the spring of 1776 Sir John Johnson
received word that the revolutionary authorities had determined on
his arrest, and he was compelled to flee from Johnson Hall to
Canada. With him he took three hundred of his Scottish dependants;
and he was followed by the Mohawk Indians under their famous chief,
Joseph Brant. In Canada Johnson received a colonel's commission to
raise two Loyalist battalions of five hundred men each, to be known
as the King's Royal Regiment of New York. The full complement was
soon made up from the numbers of Loyalists who flocked across the
border from other counties of northern New York; and Sir John
Johnson's 'Royal Greens,' as they were commonly called, were in the
thick of nearly every border foray from that time until the end of
the war. It was by these men that the north shore of the St Lawrence
river, between Montreal and Kingston, was mainly settled. As the
tide of refugees swelled, other regiments were formed. Colonel John
Butler, one of Sir John Johnson's right-hand men, organized his
Loyal Rangers, a body of irregular troops who adopted, with
modifications, the Indian method of warfare. It was against this
corps that some of the most serious charges of brutality and
bloodthirstiness were made by American historians; and it was by
this corps that the Niagara district of Upper Canada was settled
after the war.
It is not possible here to give more than a brief sketch of the
operations of these troops. In 1777 they formed an important part of
the forces with which General Burgoyne, by way of Lake Champlain,
and Colonel St Leger, by way of Oswego, attempted, unsuccessfully,
to reach Albany. An offshoot of the first battalion of the 'Royal
Greens,' known as Jessup's Corps, was with Burgoyne at Saratoga; and
the rest of the regiment was with St Leger, under the command of Sir
John Johnson himself. The ambuscade of Oriskany, where Sir John
Johnson's men first met their Whig neighbors and relatives, who were
defending Fort Stanwix, was one of the bloodiest battles of the war.
Its 'fratricidal butchery' denuded the Mohawk valley of most of its
male population; and it was said that if Tryon county 'smiled again
during the war, it smiled through tears.' The battle was
inconclusive, so bitterly was it contested; but it was successful in
stemming the advance of St Leger's forces.
The next year (1778) there was an outbreak of sporadic raiding all
along the border. Alexander Macdonell, the former aide-de-camp of
Bonnie Prince Charlie, fell with three hundred Loyalists on the
Dutch settlements of the Schoharie valley and laid them waste.
Macdonell's ideas of border warfare were derived from his Highland
ancestors; and, as he expected no quarter, he gave none. Colonel
Butler, with his Rangers and a party of Indians, descended into the
valley of Wyoming, which was a sort of debatable ground between
Connecticut and Pennsylvania, and carried fire and sword through the
settlements there. This raid was commemorated by Thomas Campbell in
a most unhistorical poem entitled Gertrude of Wyoming:
On Susquehana's side, fair Wyoming! Although the wild-flower on thy
ruined wall And roofless homes a sad remembrance bring Of what thy
gentle people did befall.
Later in the year Walter Butler, the son of Colonel John Butler, and
Joseph Brant, with a party of Loyalists and Mohawks, made a similar
inroad on Cherry Valley, south of Springfield in the state of New
York. On this occasion Brant's Indians got beyond control, and more
than fifty defenseless old men, women, and children were slaughtered
in cold blood.
The Americans took their revenge the following year. A large force
under General Sullivan invaded the settlements of the Six Nations
Indians in the Chemung and Genesee valleys, and exacted an eye for
an eye and a tooth for a tooth. They burned the villages, destroyed
the crops, and turned the helpless women and children out to face
the coming winter. Most of the Indians during the winter of 1779-80
were dependent on the mercy of the British commissaries.
This kind of warfare tends to perpetuate itself indefinitely. In
1780 the Loyalists and Indians returned to the attack. In May Sir
John Johnson with his 'Royal Greens' made a descent into the Mohawk
valley, fell upon his 'rebellious birthplace,' and carried off rich
booty and many prisoners. In the early autumn, with a force composed
of his own regiment, two hundred of Butler's Rangers, and some
regulars and Indians, he crossed over to the Schoharie valley,
devastated it, and then returned to the Mohawk valley, where he
completed the work of the previous spring. All attempts to crush him
failed. At the battle of Fox's Mills he escaped defeat or capture by
the American forces under General Van Rensselaer largely on account
of the dense smoke with which the air was filled from the burning of
barns and villages.
How far the Loyalists under Johnson and Butler were open to the
charges of inhumanity and barbarism so often leveled against them,
is difficult to determine. The charges are based almost wholly on
unsubstantial tradition. The greater part of the excesses complained
of, it is safe to say, were perpetrated by the Indians; and Sir John
Johnson and Colonel Butler can no more be blamed for the excesses of
the Indians at Cherry Valley than Montcalm can be blamed for their
excesses at Fort William Henry. It was unfortunate that the military
opinion of that day regarded the use of savages as necessary, and no
one deplored this use more than men like Haldimand and Carleton; but
Washington and the Continental Congress were as ready to receive the
aid of the Indians as were the British. The difficulty of the
Americans was that most of the Indians were on the other side.
That there were, however, atrocities committed by the Loyalists
cannot be doubted. Sir John Johnson himself told the revolutionists
that 'their Tory neighbors, and not himself, were blamable for those
acts.' There are well-authenticated cases of atrocities committed by
Alexander Macdonell: in 1781 he ordered his men to shoot down a
prisoner taken near Johnstown, and when the men bungled their task,
Macdonell cut the prisoner down with his broadsword. When Colonel
Butler returned from Cherry Valley, Sir Frederick Haldimand refused
to see him, and wrote to him that 'such indiscriminate vengeance
taken even upon the treacherous and cruel enemy they are engaged
against is useless and disreputable to themselves, as it is contrary
to the disposition and maxims of their King whose cause they are
fighting.'
But rumor exaggerated whatever atrocities there were. For many years
the Americans believed that the Tories had lifted scalps like the
Indians; and later, when the Americans captured York in 1813, they
found what they regarded as a signal proof of this barbarous
practice among the Loyalists, in the speaker's wig, which was
hanging beside the chair in the legislative chamber! There may have
been members of Butler's Rangers who borrowed from the Indians this
hideous custom, just as there were American frontiersmen who were
guilty of it; but it must not be imagined that it was a common
practice on either side. Except at Cherry Valley, there is no proof
that any violence was done by the Loyalists to women and children.
On his return from Wyoming, Colonel Butler reported: 'I can with
truth inform you that in the destruction of this settlement not a
single person has been hurt of the inhabitants, but such as were
armed; to those indeed the Indians gave no quarter.'
In defense of the Loyalists, two considerations may be urged. In the
first place, it must be remembered that they were men who had been
evicted from their homes, and whose property had been confiscated.
They had been placed under the ban of the law: the payment of their
debts had been denied them; and they had been forbidden to return to
their native land under penalty of death without benefit of clergy.
They had been imprisoned, fined, subjected to special taxation;
their families had been maltreated, and were in many cases still in
the hands of their enemies. They would have been hardly human had
they waged a mimic warfare. In the second place, their depredations
were of great value from a military point of view. Not only did they
prevent thousands of militiamen from joining the Continental army,
but they seriously threatened the sources of Washington's food
supply. The valleys which they ravaged were the granary of the
revolutionary forces. In 1780 Sir John Johnson destroyed in the
Schoharie valley alone no less than eighty thousand bushels of
grain; and this loss, as Washington wrote to the president of
Congress, 'threatened alarming consequences.' That this work of
destruction was agreeable to the Loyalists cannot be doubted; but
this fact does not diminish its value as a military measure.
This site includes some historical materials that
may imply negative stereotypes reflecting the culture or language of
a particular period or place. These items are presented as part of
the historical record and should not be interpreted to mean that the
WebMasters in any way endorse the stereotypes implied.
Chronicles of Canada, The
United Empire Loyalists, A Chronicle of the Great Migration, 1915
Chronicles of Canada |