Howe, William Howe, Viscount, 1729-1814; White Plains, Battle of, White Plains, N.Y., 1776
E-text prepared by Colin Bell, Joseph Cooper, Graeme Mackreth, and the
Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(http://www.pgdp.net)
Note: This e-book was prepared from a Reprint Edition, 1971,
by Arno Press Inc.
LC# 71-140874
ISBN 0-405-01219-5
Eyewitness Accounts of the American Revolution, Series III
ISBN for complete set: 0-405-01187-3
Manufactured in the United States of America
CONDUCT OF SIR WILLIAM HOWE
OBSERVATIONS
UPON THE
CONDUCT
OF
S-r W-----M H--E
AT THE
WHITE PLAINS;
AS RELATED IN THE GAZETTE
OF DECEMBER 30, 1776.
(By Israel Mauduit)
London:
Printed for J. Bew, Pater-Noster Row.
M,DCC,LXXIX.
Tarrytown, N.Y.
Reprinted
William Abbatt
1927
EDITOR'S PREFACE
Of the four British commanders here during the Revolution, Howe was
certainly the chief, so far as dullness amounting to apathy and slowness
almost equal to immobility, went. His first experience of American
determination was at Bunker's Hill; and he ever afterwards showed a
wholesome respect for his opponents. On the particular event we are
considering, his expedition northward from New York to White Plains in
1776, his ineptitude was so conspicuous that Israel Mauduit wrote this
stinging pamphlet (now very rare) about it, in which Howe's various
forms of inefficiency are so tersely and forcibly shown up. It was
indeed fortunate for the patriots that a really active, energetic
officer was not in command; for such a one as Simcoe or Maitland would
have easily defeated them. Howe afterwards explained to Parliament his
reasons for not following up his advantage at White Plains, by saying
his inaction was "due to political reasons, which he could not then
disclose." The fact, as it afterwards came out, was that he had
received--and accepted--the treasonable offers of William Demont, the
first American traitor, regarding the post of Fort Washington. By a--for
him--rapid return to New York, he was thus enabled to capture Fort
Washington and two thousand men. His statements as to his losses at
Pell's Point are clearly untrue, as shown by the detailed accounts given
in my "Battle of Pell's Point." Mauduit was probably unaware of the
facts, or he would not have failed to include them in his pamphlet.
Sir W-----m H--e having called for papers for the satisfaction of the
public, and thereby invited us to read and attend to them, I have been
accidentally led to the perusal of one of them, and here offer what has
occurred upon the occasion.
The observations are confined solely to the General's and Admiral's own
account. And, that the reader's mind may not be prejudiced, he is
desired first to peruse the letters themselves; with Faden's and many
other larger maps of New York and Long Island. The latter part of the
letters, upon the taking Fort Washington, is omitted as having no
relation to that subject.
THE LONDON GAZETTE
Published by Authority
EXTRAORDINARY:
_Monday, December 30, 1776_
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account