The Defence of Stonington (Connecticut) Against a British Squadron, August 9th to 12th, 1814 — John Shaqi
The Defence of Stonington (Connecticut) Against a British Squadron, August 9th to 12th, 1814Trumbull, J. Hammond (James Hammond)
History
The Defence of Stonington (Connecticut) Against a British Squadron, August 9th to 12th, 1814
Trumbull, J. Hammond (James Hammond)
Stonington (Conn.) -- History -- Bombardment, 1814
About 8 o'clock in the morning of Wednesday, the Brig [_Dispatch_]
hauled within half a mile of our breast-work, and opened a well directed
and animated fire. Our few guns being now well manned by citizens and
volunteers, from Stonington, New London, Mistick and Groton, they were
ready to receive her. Her fire was returned with a spirit and courage
rarely to be equalled,--and of those gallant souls who stood this
conflict, we can only say, they gloriously did their duty. Heroes having
so nobly acted, with ours, will receive the plaudit of their country.
What effect such bravery had on the enemy, will appear from the fact,
that the brig was compelled to cut her cable and retire out of reach of
our shot. Her anchor has since been taken up, with a number of fathoms
of cable. No attack was afterwards made by the brig. This contest with
the brig (called the _Dispatch_), continued on our part from the
breast-work until the ammunition was expended. To this circumstance,
unfortunately for the village and mortifying to those so gallantly
engaged in the defence, may be attributed the principal injury sustained
by the buildings. For two hours or more, she kept up a constant fire
without having it in our power to return a shot: during which time, we
are confident, had there been a supply of ammunition, she would have
been taught the use and meaning of her name.
The further particulars which transpired on Wednesday and Thursday,
having been noticed by you, in the publication above referred to, very
correctly, the public must be satisfied without any comments from us. In
the publication of the transactions of Friday, we have discovered one
error. Amidst the combined fire of the Ramilies, frigate and bomb-ship,
Lieut. Lathrop and volunteers from the Norwich Artillery, in fact did
proceed, to undertake in assisting to get off the cannon from the
breast-work, but they met other brave lads who had accomplished this
hazardous duty. The praise therefore of this performance, however they
may have distinguished themselves in other duties, is not correctly
bestowed.
In passing the proceedings of Thursday and Friday, we would not overlook
the singular communication received from Commodore Hardy, which preceded
the fire on Thursday. Two subjects esteemed very important by Sir Thomas
seem connected, Torpedoes and Mrs. Stewart,--a lady we presume worthy of
the notice even of Commodore Hardy. But a demand made on those with
whom, it was well known, no power existed to comply, is not a little
extraordinary: besides, this communication is totally different from and
unconnected with the one it was sent as an answer to. It would appear
from reading the documents, that assurances were given that no torpedoes
ever did, or ever should, go from this place. This was not the fact; no
promises or confessions of any kind were ever made. To this singular
letter no general reply was given; that part, only, [was] noticed,
relative to Mrs. Stewart.
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