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 numerous affidavits accompanying the report made by the
committee of the prisoners, together with the reply to the report
of Messrs. King and Larpent, afford the most positive testimony in
contradiction to many of its prominent features. We can form no
other opinion respecting this report, than either that Mr. King
was overreached by his colleague, or that he was pre-determined to
fritter down the abuses which the British Government and its
agents had lavished upon their American prisoners. Why either
Messrs. King or Larpent should decline the examination of all the
witnesses offered by the prisoners, is wholly inexplicable, unless
we attribute to them a mutual and fixed determination to justify
the conduct of Shortland and his accomplices, at the expense of
criminating hundreds of Americans, who were no less entitled to
credibility than either of themselves. Hereafter "let no such men
be trusted."
The treatment of the prisoners appears to have proceeded from the
same principles of inhumanity, which have given rise to the
hostile operations of the British Commanders upon our maritime and
inland frontiers, during the continuance of the late contest. Such
principles belong only to Savages or their allies. The outrages at
the river Raisin, Hampton, Havre de Grace, Washington, and those
attempted at New-Orleans, it was thought, might have filled the
measure of British barbarities. But to the prisons of Dartmoor was
transferred the scene of its completion. Americans, armed in
defence of their soil, their Constitution, and natural rights,
were too invincible to the "veteran" conquerors of the East.
Prisoners of war in confinement, and without arms, were selected
as the objects upon which they might glut their malice.
We have heard much from a certain class of our politicians of the
burning of Newark and St. David's; but little have they said of
the destruction of Buffalo, of Washington City, or the massacre of
our unfortunate countrymen at Dartmoor; and that little has been
directed to the justification of the perpetrators. The
conflagration of our Capitol, with the appendages of art and
taste, and even the slaughter of our countrymen, could not excite
in those minds one feeling of indignation; whilst the unauthorized
destruction of a few houses, within the territorial limits of our
enemy, not only excited their warmest sympathies for the enemy,
but their foulest denunciations of our own Government.
We might here attempt a comparison of the treatment of each
Government to their prisoners. But the contrast is so evident,
that we shall commit it to our readers without remark.
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