A journal, of a young man of Massachusetts, late a surgeon on board an American privateer, who was captured at sea by the British in May, eighteen hundred and thirteen and was confined first, at Melville Island, Halifax, then at Chatham, in England, and last at Dartmoor prison : $b Interspersed with observations, anecdotes and remarks, tending to illustrate the moral and political characters of three nations. To which is added, a correct engraving of Dartmoor prison, representing the massacre ofWaterhouse, Benjamin
History
A journal, of a young man of Massachusetts, late a surgeon on board an American privateer, who was captured at sea by the British in May, eighteen hundred and thirteen and was confined first, at Melville Island, Halifax, then at Chatham, in England, and last at Dartmoor prison : $b Interspersed with observations, anecdotes and remarks, tending to illustrate the moral and political characters of three nations. To which is added, a correct engraving of Dartmoor prison, representing the massacre of
Waterhouse, Benjamin
Dartmoor Prison; United States -- History -- War of 1812 -- Prisoners and prisons
The report goes on to state, "the cross fire, which was kept up
from several of the platforms on the walls round the prison, and
directed against straggling parties of prisoners, running about
the yard, endeavoring to enter the prison by the door which the
turnkey left open, according to their usual practice, _does seem_
to have been without object or excuse, and to have been a wanton
attack upon the lives of defenceless, and, at the same time,
unoffending individuals." In answer to this paragraph, we shall
only reply, that had the commissioners examined ALL the American
evidence, and attached the same credit to it, which it appears
they have done to ALL the English evidence, similar expressions
would have been made use of against Shortland's conduct throughout
the whole of their report.
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
massacre, 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."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account