By this surrender the Americans lost in prisoners two thousand six hundred and thirty-seven enlisted men and two hundred and twenty-one officers,[220] the greater part from Pennsylvania, and nearly half of them well-drilled troops. These were the men, with those taken on Long Island and at Kip's Bay, for whose accommodation the Presbyterian and Reformed churches in New York were turned into prisons, and who were to perish by hundreds by slow starvation and loathsome disease, which brutal keepers took little trouble to alleviate. The loss of the enemy in killed and wounded was something over four hundred and fifty, about two thirds of which fell upon the Hessians. The American casualties were four officers and fifty privates killed, and not over one hundred wounded. [Footnote 220: Henshaw's copy of return of prisoners.--_Document No._ 59.] * * * * * Upon whom the responsibility for the loss of this post should rest is a question on which divided opinions have been expressed.[221] Greene had urged the retention of the fort as necessary, both to command the passage of the river, and because it would be a threatening obstacle to the enemy's future operations. For them to advance into the country with such a fortification in their rear would be a hazardous move. These reasons were sound, and, as already stated, when the main army evacuated Harlem Heights, Washington's council voted to retain Fort Washington. But on the 7th of November, some British men-of-war again passed the obstructions without difficulty, and Washington wrote to Greene on the 8th from White Plains as follows: "SIR: The late passage of the three vessels up the North River (which we have just received advice of) is so plain a proof of the inefficacy of all the obstructions we have thrown into it, that I cannot but think it will fully justify a change in the disposition which has been made. If we cannot prevent vessels passing up, and the enemy are possessed of the surrounding country, what valuable purpose can it answer to attempt to hold a post from which the expected benefit cannot be had? I am therefore inclined to think it will not be prudent to hazard the men and stores at Mount Washington; but as you are on the spot, leave it to you to give such orders as to evacuating Mount Washington as you judge best, and so far revoking the order given to Col. Magaw to defend it to the last." [Footnote 221: Two weeks before the attack on the fort, Magaw's adjutant, William Demont, deserted to the enemy. This fact has lately been established by the recovery, by Mr. Edward F. de Lancey, of the New York Historical Society, of Demont's own letter confessing the desertion. It is dated London, January 16th, 1792, and is in part as follows: