Mahan on naval warfare : $b Selections from the writing of Rear Admiral Alfred T. MahanMahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
History
Mahan on naval warfare : $b Selections from the writing of Rear Admiral Alfred T. Mahan
Mahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
Naval art and science; Naval strategy; Sea-power
against Montreal, for, if successful, a much larger region would be
isolated and reduced. Montreal gone, Kingston could receive no help from
without; and, even if capable of temporary resistance, its surrender
would be but a question of time. Coincidently with this military
advance, naval development for the control of the lakes should have
proceeded, as a discreet precaution; although, after the fall of
Kingston and Montreal, there could have been little use of an inland
navy, for the British local resources would then have been inadequate to
maintain an opposing force.
_Results of the Northern Campaign_
[While control was more vital and the forces stronger on Lake Ontario
than on either Erie or Champlain, no naval action of consequence
occurred there in 1813 or in fact throughout the war. Yeo, the British
commander, was enjoined by Admiralty orders to take no risks; and the
American Commodore Chauncey, with no such justification, adopted a
similar policy. Hence the important fleet actions of the war were in
other waters—Perry’s victory of September 10, 1813, on Lake Erie, and
Macdonough’s victory on Lake Champlain a year later. The first sentence
in the paragraph following refers to a raid on Buffalo, December 30,
1813.—EDITOR.]
With this may be said to have terminated the northern campaign of 1813.
The British had regained full control of the Niagara peninsula, and they
continued to hold Fort Niagara, in the State of New York, till peace was
concluded. The only substantial gain on the whole frontier, from the
extreme east to the extreme west, was the destruction of the British
fleet on Lake Erie, and the consequent transfer of power in the west to
the United States. This was the left flank of the American position. Had
the same result been accomplished on the right flank,—as it might have
been,—at Montreal, or even at Kingston, the center and left must have
fallen also. For the misdirection of effort to Niagara, the local
commanders, Dearborn and Chauncey, are primarily responsible; for
Armstrong[95] yielded his own correct perceptions to the representations
of the first as to the enemy’s force, supported by the arguments of the
naval officer favoring the diversion of effort from Kingston to Toronto.
Whether Chauncey ever formally admitted to himself this fundamental
mistake, which wrecked the summer’s work upon Lake Ontario, does not
appear; but that he had learned from experience is shown by a letter to
the Secretary of the Navy,[96] when the squadrons had been laid up. In
this he recognized the uselessness of the heavy sailing schooners when
once a cruising force of ships for war had been created, thereby
condemning much of his individual management of the campaign; and he
added: “If it is determined to prosecute the war offensively, and secure
our conquests in Upper Canada, Kingston ought unquestionably to be the
first object of attack, and that so early in the spring as to prevent
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