The Trial of Edward Braddock part 3

The Charges Defended, by James Stuart and Chief Shingas

 

(To follow this story’s progression, read parts 1 and 2 first.  Part 1 can be read at: http://www.defendingthelegacy.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-trial-of-edward-braddock-part-1.html

Part 2 can be read at: http://www.defendingthelegacy.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-trial-of-edward-braddock-part-2.html)

 

The prosecuting attorney had listened to the testimony of the two witnesses much like a card player who holds the ace of trumps in his hand, or a chess player preparing to checkmate his opponent with the next move.  When Mrs. George Anne Bellamy stepped down from the witness box, the prosecutor arose.

 



“The witnesses for the defendant have given their evidence, and perhaps they are correct that Braddock treated fellow Europeans less brutally,” the prosecutor said smoothly.  “But what of his treatment of the Native Americans who were his allies?  I have evidence to confirm my original assertion that Braddock despised these masters of frontier warfare, leading to his defeat and death at the battle of the Monongahela.  Mr. James Stuart, will you take the witness box?”

 

A man in the dress of a frontier settler came to the witness stand and began.

 

“This testimony comes from Chief Shingas who met with General Braddock.  ‘That he with 5 other Chiefs of the Delaware Shawnee & Mingo Nations (Being 2 from Each Nation) had applied to General Braddock and Enquired what he intended to do with the Land [the Ohio Country] if he Could drive the French and their Indians away To which Braddock replied that the English Shou’d Inhabit & Inherit the Land, on which Shingas asked General Braddock whether the Indians that were Friends to the English might not be Permitted to Live and Trade Among the English and have Hunting Ground sufficient to Support themselves and Familys as they had no where to Flee Too But into the Hands of the French and their Indians who were their Enemies (that is Shingas' Enemies). On which General Braddock said that No Savage Should Inherit the Land. On receiving which answer Shingas and the other Chiefs went that night to their own People-To whom they Communicated General Braddock's Answer And the Next Morning Returned to General Braddock again in hopes he might have Changed his Sentiments and then repeated their Former Questions to General Braddock again and General Braddock made the same reply as Formerly, On which Shingas and the other Chiefs answered That if they might not have Liberty To Live on the Land they would not Fight for it To which General Braddock answered that he did not need their Help and had No doubt of driveing the French and their Indians away.’” (1)

 

Will the defendants have any answer to this eyewitness testimony against Braddock?  Stay tuned for part 4 of the Trial of Edward Braddock!

1. http://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-1D
    

Fontenoy Gallery by Jacques Onfray de Breville

Today is the anniversary of the 1745 Battle of Fontenoy, fought between the French Army and the Pragmatic Allies (comprising Great Britain, the Netherlands, Hanover, and the Holy Roman Empire).  At the battle of Fontenoy, Marshal Saxe directed the French army to victory.

 In the picture at left, Marshal Saxe rides in his wicker chariot because he was too ill to ride a horse.  The man at right is an uhlan of the Volontaires de Saxe.
 




Saxe's plan called for redoubts to strengthen the French position against the Allied attacks.  It also incorporated the elite Arquebusiers de Grassin to patrol the woods and harass the enemy columns as they attacked Saxe's redoubts.  They are doing this in the picture, warily looking out for trouble.  They performed their job admirably, delaying the advance of a column of British infantry.

But the Allies had penetrated Saxe's lines in a massive column that refused to be broken.  Saxe ordered the reserve Irish Brigade (made up of Irish exiles in French service) and Louis XV's bodyguard, known as the Maison du Roi, to give one final attack.  These elite troops hit the Allied column and gained the victory for France.  The Maison du Roi is charging in this picture.  Fontenoy is also remarkable because Louis XV and his son the Dauphin were encamped there during the battle.

All these pictures were created by the French artist Comte Jacques Onfray de Breville.  He signed his work with his initials "JOB."

Review of Through The Fray by G. A. Henty

Through the Fray

By G. A. Henty

Originally published 1886

 

The Victorian novelist G. A. Henty wrote a multitude of excellent books during his career.  But many of his stories are “Henty-esque”, that is, they tend to have very similar plotlines.  Not so Through the Fray.  Its main conflict is internal, its main hero (Ned Sankey) is a mill-owner, and its main heroine  (Mary "Polly" Powlett) does not marry the mill-owner.

 

Through the Fray follows the adventures and misadventures of Edward “Ned” Sankey, a son of a retired officer.  This story is set in the years 1811-12.  It opens with Ned in the school of a brutal tyrant Mr. Hathorn.  As a result of his unjust punishments, Ned leads a rebellion against him, which ends in a courtroom trial and the loss of Mr. Hathorn’s job.  While good came out of Ned’s revolt, and the school is now under the kindly Mr. Porson, Ned’s father warns him about the dangers of his quick temper.  “Beware of your temper, Ned, for unless you overcome it, be assured that sooner or later it may lead to terrible consequences.” (pg. 79)

 

The school is now run by Mr. Porson, a good-natured schoolmaster with a fondness for cricket.  The boys all love him—well, almost all.  James Mathers believes Mr. Porson’s kindness to be all “gammon”, but the rest of the boys disagree.  However, the school is thrown into an uproar when their teacher’s classical dictionary turns up missing.  It is located in a second-hand bookshop with an ill reputation, but how did it get there?  Did one of the students steal it?  Another theft follows, this time of a gold pencil-case.  Ned and his chum Ripon trace it to Mathers, who is caught.   “He was tempted, you see, and none of us can tell what we may do when temptation comes, unless we have God’s help to enable us to withstand it and to do what is right,” observes their teacher.  (pg. 113)

Now Ned passes through a very difficult time in his life: the death of his father in an accident.  As the oldest child in the family, much responsibility devolves on him, especially since his mother does not like to be troubled.  Ned’s life is made even more difficult when his mother remarries a mill-owner named Mr. Mulready.  Mr. Mulready and Ned dislike each other.  After sparring and arguments for months, their antagonism finally breaks out into a fight.  The next morning Mr. Mulready is found dead.

 

Most people believe that Ned killed his stepfather in a fit of passion.  Ned denies it, but the circumstantial evidence is against him.  Ned is put on trial and found “Not Guilty” but his mother is certain of his guilt.  Will proof ever appear that Ned Sankey is innocent?

 

The characters in this book are some of the most vibrant that Mr. Henty has written.  There are three villains of very different stripes, from two-faced Mr. Mulready to thieving James Mathers.  But the heroes of the book are also very well-defined.  Longsuffering Captain Sankey, kindly Mary Powlett, and loyal Bill Marner are some who touch Ned’s life in different ways.

 

Highly recommended.

This book can be read for free at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/8732/8732-h/8732-h.htm

 

I’ll leave the last word with Mr. Henty: “In this story I have left the historical battlefields, across so many of which I have taken you, and have endeavored to show that there are peaceful battles to be fought and victories to be won every jot as arduous and as difficult as those contested under arms. … In the present tale my hero's enemy was within, and although his victory was at last achieved the victor was well nigh worsted in the fray. We have all such battles to fight, dear lads; may we all come unscathed and victorious through the fray! “

Flag of the British Legion

 



Tarleton's portrait.  I am grateful to have
it in such high resolution to be able to
see Reynolds' details.



 

Banastre Tarleton’s British Legion  is one of the most famous units in the American Revolution.  In this portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds, Tarleton wears the uniform of the British Legion.  Two cannons and three flags (one buff and two red) appear in the portrait.  Most likely they are trophies won in war.

 

But in the upper left hand corner of the portrait is another flag.  Rather than being draped on the ground this one is flourished triumphantly by a trooper of the British Legion.  Is it the flag of the Legion?  We don’t know; however it has several distinctly British elements.

 

The upper left canton is white with a greenish-gray bird.  Is it a swan? (1)  Lighting appears to be shooting from the bird into two corners of the canton.  The flag’s ground is dark red or brown.  In the lower left canton (below the white canton) are two artillery pieces.  In the center is a dark circular laurel wreath enclosing a red “L” written in cursive script.  Above the “L” appears to be a crown.

 

Clicking on this picture will enlarge it
so that you can see what the text
is describing.

I have numbered the elements of the flag on the detail of Reynolds’ portrait and use the same numbers here.  This allows a comparison of my text with the painting.

1. The bird appears to be a swan.  Firstly, the bird’s neck is bent downward, like swans in heraldry.  It is certainly not an eagle or hawk, as neither of them have such a long neck. Secondly, a distinct representation of swan (with a golden crown around its neck and a golden chain attached to it) is a symbol of British royalty.  Most intriguingly, the bird appears to wear a golden chain.
2. The artillery pieces are quite unusual on a British flag.  It is possible, however, that they represent enemy cannons captured by the Legion.  This could be a forerunner of the later system of “battle honors”, where a regiment would be granted the right to put the name of a battle it fought in on its flag.  Battle honors were officially introduced in the regular British army in 1784. (2)  However, it is quite possible that units were embellishing their flags with honors and trophies before 1784.  And since Tarleton’s legion was not a regular unit (until 1781[3]), it would be more likely to have unofficial elements on its flags.
3. The crown is of the British type known as the Crown of Saint Edward.
4. The laurel wreath is very common on American Revolution-era British flags.  It usually enclosed the regimental number or badge.  There is an “L” within the wreath, possibly standing for “Legion”?
   Is this the flag of the British Legion?  More research is needed, but it certainly has enough British elements to rule out the possibility that it is a captured French or American flag.
    
   

   

   My reconstruction of the Legion's flag

   
   The last picture shows my reconstruction of this flag.  I owe credit to many Wikimedia contributors for creating some of the elements used in the flag.  Specifically, the swan and Crown of Saint Edward were created by Wikimedia User: Sodacan and licensed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.  The cannon was created by Wikimedia User: Heralder and licensed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.
    

1. pg. 237, A History of the Uniforms of the British Army volume 3 by C. C. P. Lawson
2. pg. 128, A History of the Uniforms of the British Army volume 3 by C. C. P. Lawson
3. On March 7, 1781, the British Legion was put on the American Establishment with 5 other Loyalist regiments.  This meant that they were regular (professional) soldiers and their officers would receive half-pay when they retired or the regiment was disbanded. Royal Provincial Website. http://www.royalprovincial.com/military/rhist/britlegn/blmem3.htm

The Trial of Edward Braddock part 2

Part Second: Braddock's Character Defended, by Captain Robert Orme and George Anne Bellamy

An outcry broke in the court as the prosecutor finished.  Some applauded him, while others voiced their opposition.  A man in a red coat and blue cuffs leapt from his seat before being admonished to sit down.  “Every one’s evidence in turn, sir,” said the bailiff.

“Having heard the charge from the prosecution, we will now hear the evidence of the defendant’s character.  Captain Robert Orme, will you present your evidence?” asked the judge.



A portrait of Captain Robert Orme

“Certainly, my lords,” said the gentleman who had risen before.  Eagerly, he took the witness stand and, waiting for perfect silence and attention, began.

“My name is Robert Orme, and I am a lieutenant in the Coldstream Guards. (1)  I was an aide-de-camp to General Braddock, and served him during his appointment as Major-General.  I was with him from England to his untimely demise in battle against the perfidious French.”

“You were in close contact with the General then and can give us an estimation of his character?”

“Yes, my lords.  ‘I judge it a Duty to vindicate the Memory of a Man whom I greatly and deservedly esteemed…it is very hard [that] the bluntness and openness of a Man’s Temper should be called Brutality and that he who would hear Opinions more freely than any man should be accused of Obstinacy and Peremptoriness.’” (2)

Captain Orme sat down and the judge called on the next witness.

 

“The next witness is George Anne Bellamy, the famous actress.  Mistress Bellamy, will you present your evidence?”

“I was known to the general from my infancy.  (3) He became as a second father to me and before he departed to take command in the colonies, he left his will and silver plate with me.  ‘This great man having been often reproached with brutality, I am induced to recite the following little accident, which evidently shews the contrary.

"As we were walking in the Park one day, we heard a poor fellow was to be chastised; when I requested the General to beg off the offender.  Upon his application to the general officer, whose name was Drury, he asked Braddock, ‘How long since he had divested himself of brutality, and of the insolence of his manners?’  To which the other replied, ‘You never knew me insolent to my inferiors.  It is only to such rude men as yourself, that I behave with the spirit which I think they deserve.’" (4)

 

1. The Foot Guards ranks were one higher than in the regular army; thus a lieutenant of the Guards would rank as a captain in the rest of the Army.  This was common practice among European household troops and explains why Orme is sometimes referred to as Lieutenant (his Guards rank), and sometimes as Captain (his effective rank on Braddock’s expedition).
2. Letter of Captain Robert Orme, found on page xx. Braddock’s Defeat, edited by Charles Hamilton.
3. pg. 177, An Apology for the Life of George Anne Bellamy.  Read it at: https://archive.org/stream/apologyforlifeof12bell#page/176/mode/2up
4. pg. 29, An Apology for the Life of George Anne Bellamy.  Read it at: http://archive.org/stream/apologyforlifeof35bell#page/n39/mode/2up/search/braddock

The Trial of Edward Braddock part 1

Part First: The Charges Brought, by the movie Alone Yet Not Alone

 

It came to pass one day that I read a book telling the story of the French and Indian War.  As I read, I contemplated the characters who acted in it: George Washington, Sieur de Jumonville, the Half-King, and General Edward Braddock.  Braddock especially intrigued me.  Here was a man courageous in battle yet defeated and killed by Native American Indians and French Canadians.  Did Braddock’s defeat stem from the fact that he had no Indians on his side?  Was Braddock merely unfortunate, or did he deliberately drive his natives away, atoning for his mistake with his death?

 

I heard a slight noise as a gentleman in a red coat with gold lace sat down near me.  Looking up, I realized that I was in a courtroom, which was rapidly filling up.  Oddly enough, I sat in a chair in the middle of the court while benches in the two halves of the court contained the rest of the crowd.  On one side I noticed an Indian chieftain seated next to a pioneer settler; on the other, a female actress and a soldier in a red coat.  It was clear that every one was deeply interested in the case.  The audience was, probably wisely, separated into pro and con, defendants and prosecutors.

 

“Oyez!  Oyez!  Oyez!” shouted the bailiff.  “This honorable court will now come to order to consider the case of Edward Braddock.  In brief, the charges are as follows: Edward Braddock, major-general in the British Army under George II, conducted himself in the 13 colonies with arrogance, and treated with reckless contempt his Indian allies.  This neglect and dereliction of duty caused his defeat and death at the Battle of the Monongahela on July 9, 1755.  The prosecutor will now present his evidence.”

 

Edward Braddock, from the movie Alone Yet Not Alone

The prosecutor stepped forward and began to read as follows:

 

Colonel George Washington: “The chiefs of all six tribes request an audience with Your Excellency.”

General Edward Braddock: “Colonel Washington, can’t you see I have no time for savages?”

Washington: “Sir, the chiefs bring with them over 400 warriors.  They will prove invaluable as we near Fort Duquense.”

Braddock: “Invaluable?  Are you suggesting His Majesty’s finest regiments require the assistance of untrained, illiterate savages to win in this battle?”

Washington: “They are masters of stealth and ambush.  We can employ them to protect our flanks.  Your troops cannot shoot an enemy they cannot see.”

Braddock: “Washington, you weary me.  Very well.  Give me a moment and then show them in.”

Washington: “General Braddock, may I present the great Delaware chief, Shingas.

Chief Shingas of the Delaware: “General, my people have lived, hunted on these lands from the beginning of time.  Now we willingly share these lands with the English.  We join you in driving French from these lands.  We ask only once the French are gone, that you grant us lands for hunting to feed our children.”

Braddock: “Never!  Only the British shall inherit this land.”

Shingas: “General, we willingly take up the tomahawk against the French.  We defend your cause with our lives.”

Braddock: “His Majesty’s troops do not need you to win this battle.  No savage shall ever inherit this land.  Is that clear?  Now, begone.” (1)

 

1. This transcript is from the movie Alone Yet Not Alone.  For more about this movie, see www.aloneyetnotalone.com

Review of Drummer Boy for Montcalm by Wilma Pritchard Hays

Drummer Boy for Montcalm

By Wilma Pritchard Hays, illustrated by Alan Moyler

Published 1959 by The Viking Press

187 pages, hardcover with dust jacket

 

“Word had come to France that England was preparing to besiege Quebec that summer of 1759, and both sides knew it was to be a fight to the finish.  Now as Peter Demo stood on the deck of the French ship bringing recruits, the twelve-year-old stowaway was bursting with excitement over his first view of the walled city built on a sheer cliff two hundred feet above the St. Lawrence.” (description from inside dust jacket)

 

The Story

The book opens with a short prologue: “England and France in the New World,” which tells the story of the English and French settlements in North America up to 1759. 

The story begins with the arrival of Peter Demo at Quebec.  Peter, an orphan, joins a ship of recruits sailing to reinforce General Montcalm’s army in Quebec.  There he befriends a courier du bois named Philippe d’Argons.  Peter wants to be a courier du bois himself, but first he needs money to get started.  He is accepted as a worker for the Grand Company of Associates, which he quickly discovers is a corrupt monopoly.   Peter and Philippe work to return stolen furs to the Indians and Peter has to leave his job with the Grand Company.  He then becomes a drummer boy with Montcalm’s forces, follows the French army during the siege of Quebec, and makes friends with an Indian named Bomazeen.  When Quebec finally surrenders, Peter and Bomazeen become fur traders in the region of Lake Champlain.  An epilogue details what happened to Peter Demo (who was a real person) and the Grand Company of Associates.

 

The History

On the dust jacket, Mrs. Hays states that she “followed closely the true incidents of battle, the details of weather and its effects upon the siege.”  This is a true statement, for her story is impressively researched.  This is no generic fiction that is randomly set in an era; rather this book is steeped in 1759 Quebec.  Commanders’ names and personalities are here.  Songs of the era are sung by the soldiers.  Even the thievery of the pompously named Grand Company of Associates is chronicled.

 

Interestingly, Mrs. Hays uses actual quotes for historic figures whenever possible.  The speech of the Ottawa chief is chronicled by Captain Bougainville in his journal (1).  Nearly all of General Montcalm’s lines are recorded in history.  In addition to its research, this book also has a chronology for the siege of Quebec in the back of the book.

  

Lastly

This book is a labor of love, and a charming look at the 1759 siege of Quebec. 

Highly recommended. 5/5 stars. 

The book’s best quote comes from the Abbe.  When talking to Peter, he says: “Le bon Dieu (the good Lord) did not promise always to do what we ask.  He promised always to be with us—whether it rains or shines.”

 

1. pg. 145, Adventure in the Wilderness: the American Journals of Louis-Antoine de Bougainville (University of Oklahoma: 1990)