History of the settlement of Upper Canada (Ontario,): with special reference to the Bay QuintéCanniff, William
History
History of the settlement of Upper Canada (Ontario,): with special reference to the Bay Quinté
Canniff, William
Ontario -- History; Quinte, Bay of (Ont.)
As Burgoyne at his inglorious surrender at Saratoga, thought not of the
innocent inhabitants of the Mohawk and Hudson, who had identified
themselves with the loyal cause, and supplied his troops with
provisions, and left them to the merciless “Sons of Liberty,” to be
despoiled of their all, and exposed to fearful cruelty, so at the last,
when the British Government relinquished the attempt to subdue
rebellion, the American Loyalists were of remote consideration. We can
gather now but the outlines of this great wrong done unto noble men. The
particulars are buried in the wreck of fortune, and of happiness,
respecting all worldly matters. The after life of the loyalists was of
too earnest a nature to allow time to place on record the sufferings,
and the wanderings of the disinherited. The lost cause did not stimulate
men to draw upon imagination, such as may be found in gaudy-hued
descriptions of American revolutionary heroes, male and female. But
there is sufficient of facts recorded, and engraven by the iron pen of
extreme anguish upon hearts, that were of flesh, to stamp the
persecutors with infamy, and mark the refugees, that clustered around
the border forts, and found homes at Sorel, Lachine, and Montreal, with
the highest attributes of patriotism and love of country.
The conduct of the ministry, and the commissioners at Paris is open to
the severest censure. They left the claims of the loyalists to be
decided by the American Congress. We may allow them the credit of having
held the belief, that this body would be actuated by a feeling of
justice and right, but the error was a grave one, the wrong grievous and
hard to be endured. In pursuing this course, the British ministry did
not escape condemnation by members of Parliament, and a feeling of
sympathy was evoked that led to a tardy dispensing of justice. Lord
North said “that never were the honor, the principles, the policy of a
nation, so grossly abused as in the desertion of those men, who are now
exposed to every punishment that desertion and poverty can inflict,
because they were not rebels.” Mr. Sheridan “execrated the treatment of
those unfortunate men, who, without the least notice taken of their
civil and religious rights, were handed over as subjects to a power that
would not fail to take vengeance on them for their zeal and attachment
to the religion and government of the mother country,” “and he called it
a crime to deliver them over to confiscation, tyranny, resentment and
oppression.” Lord Loughborough said that “in ancient nor modern history
had there been so shameful a desertion of men who had sacrificed all to
their duty and to their reliance upon British faith.” Others, in terms
of equal severity, denounced the ministry in Parliament for their
neglect. The ministry admitted it all, but excused themselves by the
plea that “a part must be wounded, that the whole of the empire may not
perish”—that they “had but the alternative, either to accept the terms
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