Letter from Mr. Beasly, agent for American prisoners of war at London, to the Committee of American prisoners of war in Dartmoor prison.Agency for American prisoners of war,London, April 12, 1815.Gentlemen—It having been stated in some of the newspapers published here, that the American government intended to send some ships of war bound to the Mediterranean, to this country, for the purpose of completing their crews from among the prisoners; and having been informed that this idea has got among the prisoners, it becomes my duty to request, that you will inform them that the fact is not so.I have already informed you of the measures which had been taken to provide conveyances for the prisoners. You will let them know, that eight large transports have been engaged, some of which must be now at Plymouth; others will follow, until the whole of the prisoners are sent off.It is much to be lamented, that at a moment when every exertion was making to restore them to their country,they should have fallen into an excess which has proved fatal to some. And I am at a loss to conceive how they could, under such circumstances, pretend to say, that the cause of this unfortunate but shameful conduct, was the neglect of their government or its agent. This, I am informed, they have stated to the officers who were sent to examine into the affair. I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,R. G. BEASLY.The Committee of the American prisoners, Dartmoor.
Letter from Mr. Beasly, agent for American prisoners of war at London, to the Committee of American prisoners of war in Dartmoor prison.
Gentlemen—It having been stated in some of the newspapers published here, that the American government intended to send some ships of war bound to the Mediterranean, to this country, for the purpose of completing their crews from among the prisoners; and having been informed that this idea has got among the prisoners, it becomes my duty to request, that you will inform them that the fact is not so.
I have already informed you of the measures which had been taken to provide conveyances for the prisoners. You will let them know, that eight large transports have been engaged, some of which must be now at Plymouth; others will follow, until the whole of the prisoners are sent off.
It is much to be lamented, that at a moment when every exertion was making to restore them to their country,they should have fallen into an excess which has proved fatal to some. And I am at a loss to conceive how they could, under such circumstances, pretend to say, that the cause of this unfortunate but shameful conduct, was the neglect of their government or its agent. This, I am informed, they have stated to the officers who were sent to examine into the affair. I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,
R. G. BEASLY.
The Committee of the American prisoners, Dartmoor.
Dartmoor, April 14, 1815.Sir—Yours, of the 12th inst. came to hand this morning. It is with astonishment we note its contents, that the officers who came to inquire into the circumstances of the late unfortunate affair, should have informed you, that the prisoners stated to them the cause of that event was that their government or its agent had neglected them. This is a most deliberate falsehood, let your authors be who they may. We deny not that the anxiety of the prisoners to get released from here, has been great; they have even censured you as being dilatory in your preparations for that purpose—but their government they have never implicated—and you may rest assured, that they have too much of the genuine spirit of Americans, to apply to the officer of a foreign government for relief, or to make them a party in any dispute with the government or its agents.We solemnly assure you, that whatever anxiety among the prisoners, or want of confidence in your exertions, as above stated, may have existed among them, that it can in no way be construed to have any collusion or connection with the late event, and was expressly so stated to the admiral, who came here from Plymouth.We, on the contrary, in the name of the five thousand prisoners confined here, accuse Shortland of a deliberate, pre-determined act of atrocious murder—we have sufficient evidence in our possession to prove it to the world, and we call on you (there being at present no accredited minister, or charge des affairs at the court of London) to make strict inquiries into the circumstances of the case, and procure all the evidence necessary for a proper investigation into the same; for well do we feel assured, that our government will not thus suffer its citizens to be sacrificed, for the gratification of national prejudice, malice or revenge, of the petty officers of a foreign state.We are at no loss to impute the misrepresentation of the British officers to their proper motives. They artfully wish to excite in your breast a spirit of enmity and resentment against the prisoners, that you might use less perseverance, or feel yourself less interested in making the proper inquiries into the late affair.With much respect, we remain, Sir, your most obedient and humble servants,WILLIAM HOBART,WALTER COLTON,HENRY ALLEN.R. G. Beasly, Esq. Agent for Prisoners, London.
Dartmoor, April 14, 1815.
Sir—Yours, of the 12th inst. came to hand this morning. It is with astonishment we note its contents, that the officers who came to inquire into the circumstances of the late unfortunate affair, should have informed you, that the prisoners stated to them the cause of that event was that their government or its agent had neglected them. This is a most deliberate falsehood, let your authors be who they may. We deny not that the anxiety of the prisoners to get released from here, has been great; they have even censured you as being dilatory in your preparations for that purpose—but their government they have never implicated—and you may rest assured, that they have too much of the genuine spirit of Americans, to apply to the officer of a foreign government for relief, or to make them a party in any dispute with the government or its agents.
We solemnly assure you, that whatever anxiety among the prisoners, or want of confidence in your exertions, as above stated, may have existed among them, that it can in no way be construed to have any collusion or connection with the late event, and was expressly so stated to the admiral, who came here from Plymouth.
We, on the contrary, in the name of the five thousand prisoners confined here, accuse Shortland of a deliberate, pre-determined act of atrocious murder—we have sufficient evidence in our possession to prove it to the world, and we call on you (there being at present no accredited minister, or charge des affairs at the court of London) to make strict inquiries into the circumstances of the case, and procure all the evidence necessary for a proper investigation into the same; for well do we feel assured, that our government will not thus suffer its citizens to be sacrificed, for the gratification of national prejudice, malice or revenge, of the petty officers of a foreign state.
We are at no loss to impute the misrepresentation of the British officers to their proper motives. They artfully wish to excite in your breast a spirit of enmity and resentment against the prisoners, that you might use less perseverance, or feel yourself less interested in making the proper inquiries into the late affair.
With much respect, we remain, Sir, your most obedient and humble servants,
WILLIAM HOBART,WALTER COLTON,HENRY ALLEN.
R. G. Beasly, Esq. Agent for Prisoners, London.
Second Letter from Mr. Beasly to the American Committee.Agency for American Prisoners of War,London, April 14, 1815.Gentlemen—My letter to you of the 12th inst. on the subject of the melancholy event, was written under an impression which I received from a report of it, transmitted to me by this government: I have since received your report of the circumstances. Had I been in possession of the information therein contained, the letter would have been differently expressed. I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,R. G. BEASLY.Committee of American Prisoners, Dartmoor.P. S. I subjoin an extract of the report alluded to from the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty:"The rioters, it appears, endeavored toOVERPOWERthe guard, to force the prison, and had actually seized the arms of some of the soldiers, and made a breach in the walls of the depot, when the guard found itself obliged to have recourse to their fire arms, and five of the rioters were killed, and thirty-four wounded, after which the tumult subsided, and the depot was placed in a state of tranquillity and security."Admiral Sir J. T. Duckworth, Commander in Chief at Plymouth, having received information of this unfortunate event, lost no time in directing Rear Admiral Sir Josias Rowley, Baronet, K. C. B.and Schornberg, the two senior officers at that port, to proceed to Dartmoor, and to inquire into the circumstances. Those officers accordingly repaired to the depot, where they found, on examination of the officers of the depot, andall the American prisoners who were called before them, that the circumstances of the riot were as before stated; but that no excuse could be assigned for the conduct of the prisoners, but their impatience to be released; and the Americans unanimously declared, that their complaint of delay was not against the British government, but against their own, which ought to have sent means for their early conveyance home, and in replies to distinct questions to that effect they declared they had no ground of complaint whatsoever."
Second Letter from Mr. Beasly to the American Committee.
Gentlemen—My letter to you of the 12th inst. on the subject of the melancholy event, was written under an impression which I received from a report of it, transmitted to me by this government: I have since received your report of the circumstances. Had I been in possession of the information therein contained, the letter would have been differently expressed. I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,
R. G. BEASLY.
Committee of American Prisoners, Dartmoor.
P. S. I subjoin an extract of the report alluded to from the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty:
"The rioters, it appears, endeavored toOVERPOWERthe guard, to force the prison, and had actually seized the arms of some of the soldiers, and made a breach in the walls of the depot, when the guard found itself obliged to have recourse to their fire arms, and five of the rioters were killed, and thirty-four wounded, after which the tumult subsided, and the depot was placed in a state of tranquillity and security.
"Admiral Sir J. T. Duckworth, Commander in Chief at Plymouth, having received information of this unfortunate event, lost no time in directing Rear Admiral Sir Josias Rowley, Baronet, K. C. B.and Schornberg, the two senior officers at that port, to proceed to Dartmoor, and to inquire into the circumstances. Those officers accordingly repaired to the depot, where they found, on examination of the officers of the depot, andall the American prisoners who were called before them, that the circumstances of the riot were as before stated; but that no excuse could be assigned for the conduct of the prisoners, but their impatience to be released; and the Americans unanimously declared, that their complaint of delay was not against the British government, but against their own, which ought to have sent means for their early conveyance home, and in replies to distinct questions to that effect they declared they had no ground of complaint whatsoever."
No. XXI.Dartmoor, April 17, 1815.To Rear Admiral Sir J. T. Duckworth.Sir—The officers whom you sent to this place to inquire into the circumstance of the unfortunate occurrence of the 6th inst. whatever right they had to represent the conduct of Captain Shortland in the most favorable manner, we conceive it an act of gross injustice that they should have given to you such a false and scandalous representation of what they were told by the prisoners.In the report from the admiralty board to Mr. Beasly, (a copy of which he has transmitted to us) it is stated that the prisoners, when called upon to give an account of the circumstances of the 6th, exonerated Captain Shortland and the English government from any blame respecting the same, and accused their own government and its agent of being the cause.We, on the contrary, solemnly declare, that it was expressly stated to Admiral Rowley, that whatever anxiety might have existed among the prisoners for a speedy release, could, in no way whatever, be construed to have had any collusion or connection with that event.—That the prisoners, so far from having any idea of attempting to break out, if the gates had been opened, and every one suffered to go who might wish to do so, not one in a hundred would have left the prison, having no means of subsistence in a foreign country, and being likewise liable toIMPRESSMENT, when by staying a few days longer, they would, probably, be embarked for their native country.They, on the contrary, accused Captain Shortland of being the sole mover and principal perpetrator of the unprovoked and horrid butchery.Conceiving, from your well known character in the British navy for integrity and candor, that you would not wish to have your name the medium of imposing such a gross misrepresentation and such direct falsehoods on the admiralty board and the British public, we have taken the liberty of thus addressing you, and have the honor to subscribe ourselves, your most obedient and very humble servants,Wm. Hobart,Walter Colton,Henry Allen,Thomas B. Mott,Wm. B. Orne,Committee of American Prisoners, Dartmoor.[In addition to the documents furnished by the committee of the Dartmoor prisoners, we lay the following affidavit of Archibald Taylor before the public. Will people doubt this evidence also? Is it likely that common soldiers, hired assassins, would make use of similar expressions from their own impulses? or is it not much more conformable to common sense to believe that this was the language held by their officers, and that they echoed it.]City of New York, ss.Archibald Taylor, late commander of the Paul Jones, private armed vessel of war, being duly sworn, doth depose and say—That he was a prisoner in Dartmoor prison at the time of the late massacre of Americans; that after the affair of the 6th of April, and on the night of the same day, he was in the prison No. 3, assisting Thomas Smith, late his boatswain, who was shot through his leg by the soldiers in the yard, when an order was received to have all the wounded removed from the prisons to the hospital; and while this deponent was carrying the said Thomas Smith to the door of the prison, to deliver him to the guards selected to receive him, some of the soldiers observed to this deponent, "this is in turn for the affair at New Orleans, where you killed our men, and now we have our revenge"—and further this deponent saith not.ARCHIBALD TAYLOR.Sworn before me, this 28th June, 1815.AARON H. PALMER,Notary Public.
Dartmoor, April 17, 1815.To Rear Admiral Sir J. T. Duckworth.Sir—The officers whom you sent to this place to inquire into the circumstance of the unfortunate occurrence of the 6th inst. whatever right they had to represent the conduct of Captain Shortland in the most favorable manner, we conceive it an act of gross injustice that they should have given to you such a false and scandalous representation of what they were told by the prisoners.In the report from the admiralty board to Mr. Beasly, (a copy of which he has transmitted to us) it is stated that the prisoners, when called upon to give an account of the circumstances of the 6th, exonerated Captain Shortland and the English government from any blame respecting the same, and accused their own government and its agent of being the cause.We, on the contrary, solemnly declare, that it was expressly stated to Admiral Rowley, that whatever anxiety might have existed among the prisoners for a speedy release, could, in no way whatever, be construed to have had any collusion or connection with that event.—That the prisoners, so far from having any idea of attempting to break out, if the gates had been opened, and every one suffered to go who might wish to do so, not one in a hundred would have left the prison, having no means of subsistence in a foreign country, and being likewise liable toIMPRESSMENT, when by staying a few days longer, they would, probably, be embarked for their native country.They, on the contrary, accused Captain Shortland of being the sole mover and principal perpetrator of the unprovoked and horrid butchery.Conceiving, from your well known character in the British navy for integrity and candor, that you would not wish to have your name the medium of imposing such a gross misrepresentation and such direct falsehoods on the admiralty board and the British public, we have taken the liberty of thus addressing you, and have the honor to subscribe ourselves, your most obedient and very humble servants,Wm. Hobart,Walter Colton,Henry Allen,Thomas B. Mott,Wm. B. Orne,Committee of American Prisoners, Dartmoor.[In addition to the documents furnished by the committee of the Dartmoor prisoners, we lay the following affidavit of Archibald Taylor before the public. Will people doubt this evidence also? Is it likely that common soldiers, hired assassins, would make use of similar expressions from their own impulses? or is it not much more conformable to common sense to believe that this was the language held by their officers, and that they echoed it.]City of New York, ss.Archibald Taylor, late commander of the Paul Jones, private armed vessel of war, being duly sworn, doth depose and say—That he was a prisoner in Dartmoor prison at the time of the late massacre of Americans; that after the affair of the 6th of April, and on the night of the same day, he was in the prison No. 3, assisting Thomas Smith, late his boatswain, who was shot through his leg by the soldiers in the yard, when an order was received to have all the wounded removed from the prisons to the hospital; and while this deponent was carrying the said Thomas Smith to the door of the prison, to deliver him to the guards selected to receive him, some of the soldiers observed to this deponent, "this is in turn for the affair at New Orleans, where you killed our men, and now we have our revenge"—and further this deponent saith not.ARCHIBALD TAYLOR.Sworn before me, this 28th June, 1815.AARON H. PALMER,Notary Public.
Dartmoor, April 17, 1815.
To Rear Admiral Sir J. T. Duckworth.
Sir—The officers whom you sent to this place to inquire into the circumstance of the unfortunate occurrence of the 6th inst. whatever right they had to represent the conduct of Captain Shortland in the most favorable manner, we conceive it an act of gross injustice that they should have given to you such a false and scandalous representation of what they were told by the prisoners.
In the report from the admiralty board to Mr. Beasly, (a copy of which he has transmitted to us) it is stated that the prisoners, when called upon to give an account of the circumstances of the 6th, exonerated Captain Shortland and the English government from any blame respecting the same, and accused their own government and its agent of being the cause.
We, on the contrary, solemnly declare, that it was expressly stated to Admiral Rowley, that whatever anxiety might have existed among the prisoners for a speedy release, could, in no way whatever, be construed to have had any collusion or connection with that event.—That the prisoners, so far from having any idea of attempting to break out, if the gates had been opened, and every one suffered to go who might wish to do so, not one in a hundred would have left the prison, having no means of subsistence in a foreign country, and being likewise liable toIMPRESSMENT, when by staying a few days longer, they would, probably, be embarked for their native country.
They, on the contrary, accused Captain Shortland of being the sole mover and principal perpetrator of the unprovoked and horrid butchery.
Conceiving, from your well known character in the British navy for integrity and candor, that you would not wish to have your name the medium of imposing such a gross misrepresentation and such direct falsehoods on the admiralty board and the British public, we have taken the liberty of thus addressing you, and have the honor to subscribe ourselves, your most obedient and very humble servants,
Wm. Hobart,Walter Colton,Henry Allen,Thomas B. Mott,Wm. B. Orne,Committee of American Prisoners, Dartmoor.
[In addition to the documents furnished by the committee of the Dartmoor prisoners, we lay the following affidavit of Archibald Taylor before the public. Will people doubt this evidence also? Is it likely that common soldiers, hired assassins, would make use of similar expressions from their own impulses? or is it not much more conformable to common sense to believe that this was the language held by their officers, and that they echoed it.]
City of New York, ss.
Archibald Taylor, late commander of the Paul Jones, private armed vessel of war, being duly sworn, doth depose and say—
That he was a prisoner in Dartmoor prison at the time of the late massacre of Americans; that after the affair of the 6th of April, and on the night of the same day, he was in the prison No. 3, assisting Thomas Smith, late his boatswain, who was shot through his leg by the soldiers in the yard, when an order was received to have all the wounded removed from the prisons to the hospital; and while this deponent was carrying the said Thomas Smith to the door of the prison, to deliver him to the guards selected to receive him, some of the soldiers observed to this deponent, "this is in turn for the affair at New Orleans, where you killed our men, and now we have our revenge"—and further this deponent saith not.
ARCHIBALD TAYLOR.
Sworn before me, this 28th June, 1815.
AARON H. PALMER,Notary Public.
Plymouth, 18th April, 1815.We the undersigned commissioners, appointed on behalf of our respective governments, to inquire into and report upon, the unfortunate occurrence of the 6th April inst. at Dartmoor Prison; having carefully perused the proceedings of the several courts of inquiry, instituted immediately after that event, by the orders of Admiral Sir John T. Duckworth and Major-General Brown, respectively, as well as the depositions taken at the coroner's inquest upon the bodies of the prisoners, who lost their lives upon that melancholy occasion; upon which inquest the jury found a verdict of justifiable homicide; proceeded immediately to the examination upon oath in the presence of one or more of the magistrates of the vicinity, of all the witnesses, both American and English, who offered themselves for that purpose; or who could be discovered as likely to afford any material information on the subject, as well as those who had been previously examined before the coroner, as otherwise, to the number in the whole of about eighty. We further proceeded to a minute examination of the prisons, for the purpose of clearing up some points which, upon the evidence alone, were scarcely intelligible; obtaining from the prisoners, and from the officers of the depot, all the necessary assistance and explanation; and premising, that we have been from necessity compelled to draw many of our conclusions from statements and evidence highly contradictory, we do now make upon the whole proceedings the following report:—During the period which has elapsed since the arrival in this country of the account of the ratification of the treaty of Ghent, an increased degree of restlessness and impatience of confinement appears to have prevailed amongst the American prisoners at Dartmoor, which, though not exhibited in the shape of any violent excesses, has been principally indicated by threats of breaking out if not soon released.On the 4th of this month in particular, only two days previous to the events which are the subject of this inquiry, a large body of the prisoners rushed into the market-square, from whence, by the regulations of the prison they are excluded, demanded bread instead of biscuit, which had on that day been issued by the officers of the depot;their demands having been then almost immediately complied with, they returned to their own yards, and the employment of force on that occasion became unnecessary.On the evening of the 6th, about 6 o'clock, it was clearly proved to us, that a breach or hole had been made in one of the prison walls, sufficient for a full sized man to pass, and that others had been commenced in the course of the day near the same spot, though never completed.That a number of the prisoners were over the railing erected to prevent them from communicating with the sentinels on the walls, which was of course forbidden by the regulations of the prison, and that in the space between the railing and those walls they were tearing up pieces of turf, and wantonly pelting each other in a noisy and disorderly manner.That a much more considerable number of the prisoners was collected together at that time in one of their yards near the place where the breach was effected, and that although such collection of prisoners was not unusual at other times (the Gambling Tables being commonly kept in that part of the yard) yet, when connected with the circumstances of the breach, and the time of the day, which was after the hour the signal for the prisoners to retire to their respective prisons had ceased to sound, it became a natural and just ground of alarm to those who had charge of the depot.It was also in evidence that in the building formerly the petty officers' prison, but now the guard barrack, which stands in the yard to which the hole in the wall would serve as a communication, a part of the arms of the guard who were off duty, were usually kept in the racks, and though there was no evidence that this was, in any respect, the motive which induced the prisoners to make the opening in the wall, or even that they were ever acquainted with the fact, it naturally became at least a further cause of suspicion and alarm, and an additional reason for precaution.Upon these grounds captain Shortland appears to us to have been justified in giving the order, which about this time he seems to have given, to sound the alarm bell, the usual signal for collecting the officers of the depot and putting the military on the alert.However reasonable and justifiable this was as a measure of precaution, the effects produced thereby in the prisons, but which could not have been intended, were most unfortunate, and deeply to be regretted. A considerable number of the prisoners in the yards where no disturbance existed before, and who were either already within their respective prisons, or quietly retiring as usual towards them, immediately upon the sound of the bell rushed back from curiosity (as it appears) towards the gates, where, by that time, the crowd had assembled, and many who were at the time absent from their yards, were also from the plan of the prison, compelled, in order to reach their own homes, to pass the same spot, and thus that which was merely a measure of precaution, in its operation increased the evil it was intended to prevent. Almost at the same instant that the alarm bell rung, (but whether before or subsequent is upon the evidence doubtful, though captain Shortland states it positively as one of his further reasons for causing it to ring) some one or more of the prisoners broke the iron chain, which was the only fastening of No. 1 gate, leading into market square by means of an iron bar; and a very considerable number of the prisoners immediately rushed towards that gate; and many of them began to press forwards as fast as the opening would permit into the square.There was no direct proof before us of previous concert or preparation on the part of the prisoners, and no evidence of their intention or disposition to effect their escape on this occasion, excepting that which arose by inference from the whole of the above detailed circumstances connected together.The natural and almost irresistible inference to be drawn, however, from the conduct of the prisoners by captain Shortland and the military was, that an intention on the part of the prisoners to escape was on the point of being carried into execution, and it was at least certain that they were by force passing beyond the limits prescribed to them at a time when they ought to have been quietly going in for the night. It was also in evidence that the outer gates of the market square were usually opened about this time to let the bread waggons pass and repass to the store, although at the period in question they were in fact closed.Under these circumstances, and with these impressions necessarily operating upon his mind, and a knowledge that if the prisoners once penetrated through the square, the power of escape was almost to a certainty afforded to them, if they should be so disposed; captain Shortland in the first instance proceeded down the square towards the prisoners, having ordered a part of the different guards, to the number of about fifty only at first, (though they were increased afterwards) to follow him. For some time both he and Dr. Magrath endeavored by quiet means and persuasion, to induce the prisoners to return to their own yards, explaining to them the fatal consequences which must ensue if they refused, as the military would in that case be necessarily compelled to employ force. The guard was by this time formed in the rear of captain Shortland, about two thirds of the way down the square—the latter is about one hundred feet broad, and the guard extended nearly all across. Captain Shortland, finding that persuasion was all in vain, and that although some were induced by it tomake an effort to retire, others pressed on in considerable numbers, at last ordered about 15 file of the guard, nearly in front of the gate which had been forced, to charge the prisoners back to their own yards.The prisoners were in some places so near the military, that one of the soldiers states that he could not come fairly down to the charge; and the military were unwilling to set against an enemy. Some struggling ensued between the parties, arising partly from intention, but mainly from the pressure of those behind preventing those in front from getting back. After some little time, however, this charge appears to have been so far effective, and that with little or no injury to the prisoners, as to have driven them for the most part quite down out of the square, with the exception of a small number who continued their resistance about No. 1 gate.A great crowd still remained collected after this in the passage between the square and the prisoners' yards, and in the part of those yards in the vicinity of the gates.—This assemblage still refused to withdraw, and according to most of the English witnesses and some of the American, was making a noise, hallowing, insulting and provoking, and daring the military to fire, and according to the testimony of several of the soldiers, and some others, were pelting the military with large stones, by which some of them were actually struck. This circumstance is, however, denied by many of the American witnesses; and some of the English, upon having the question put to them, stated that they saw no stones thrown previously to the firing, although their situation at the time was such as to enable them to see most of the proceedings in the square.Under these circumstances the firing commenced.—With regard to any order having been given to fire the evidence is very contradictory. Several of the Americans swear positively, that captain Shortland gave that order; but the manner in which from the confusion of the moment, they described this part of the transaction, is so different in its details that it is very difficult to reconcile their testimony. Many of the soldiers and other English witnesses, heard the word given by some one, but no one of them can swear it was by captain Shortland, or by any one in particular, and some, amongst whom is the officer commanding the guard, think, if captain Shortland had given such an order that they must have heard it, which they did not. In addition to this captain Shortland denies the fact; and from the situation which he appears to have been placed at the time, even according to the American witnesses, in front of the soldiers, it may appear somewhat improbable that he should then have given such an order.But, however, it may remain a matter of doubt whether the firing first began in the square by order, or was a spontaneous act of the soldiers themselves, it seemed clear that it was continued and renewed both there and elsewhere without orders; and that on the platforms, and in several places about the prison, it was certainly commenced without any authority.The fact of an order having been given at first, provided the firing was under the existing circumstances justifiable, does not appear very material in any other point of view, than as shewing a want of self possession and discipline in the troops if they should have fired without order.With regard to the above most important consideration, of whether the firing was justifiable or not, we are of opinion, under all the circumstances of the case, from the apprehension which the soldiers might fairly entertain, owing to the numbers and conduct of the prisoners, that this firing to a certain extent was justifiable in a military point of view, in order to intimidate the prisoners, and compel them thereby to desist from all acts of violence, and to retire as they were ordered, from a situation in which the responsibility of the agents, and the military, could not permit them with safety to remain.From the fact of the crowd being so close and the firing at first being attended with very little injury, it appears probable that a large proportion of the muskets were, as stated by one or two of the witnesses, levelled over the heads of the prisoners; a circumstance in some respects to be lamented, as it induced them to cry out "blank cartridges," and merely irritated and encouraged them to renew their insults to the soldiery, which produced a repetition of the firing in a manner much more destructive.The firing in the square having continued for some time, by which several of the prisoners sustained injuries, the greater part of them appear to have been running back with the utmost precipitation and confusion to their respective prisons, and the cause for further firing seems at this period to have ceased. It appears, accordingly, that captain Shortland was in the market square exerting himself and giving orders to that effect, and that lieutenant Fortye had succeeded in stopping the fire of his part of the guard.Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to find any justification for the further continuance and renewal of the firing, which certainly took place both in the prison yards and elsewhere; though we have some evidence of subsequent provocation given to the military, and resistance to the turnkeys in shutting the prisons, and of stones being thrown out from within the prison doors.The subsequent firing rather appears to have arisen from the state of individual irritation and exasperation on the part of the soldiers, who followed the prisoners into their yards, and from the absence of nearly all of the officers who might have restrained it as well as from the great difficulty of putting an end to a firing when once commenced under such circumstances. Captain Shortland was from this time busily occupied with the turnkeys in the square, receiving and taking care of the wounded. Ensign White remained with his guard at the breach, and lieutenants Ayelyne and Fortye, the only other subalterns known to have been present, continued with the main bodies of their respective guards.The time of the day, which was the officers' dinner hour, will in some measure explain this, as it caused the absence of every officer from the prison whose presence was not indispensable there. And this circumstance which has been urged as an argument to prove the intention of the prisoners to take this opportunity to escape, tended to increase the confusion, and to prevent those great exertions being made which might perhaps have obviated a portion at least of the mischief which ensued.At the same time that the firing was going on in the square, a cross fire was also kept up from several of the platforms on the walls round the prisoners where the sentries stand, by straggling parties of soldiers who ran up there for that purpose. As far as this fire was directed to disperse the men assembled round the breach, for which purpose it was most effectual, it seems to stand upon the same ground as that in the first instance in the square.—That part which it is positively sworn was directed against straggling parties of prisoners running about the yards and endeavoring to enter in the few doors which the turnkeys, according to their usual practice, had left open, does seem, as stated, to have been wholly without object or excuse, and to have been a wanton attack upon the lives of defenceless, and at that time, unoffending individuals.In the same, or even more severe terms, we must remark upon what was proved as to the firing in the door-ways of the prisons, more particularly into that of No. 3 prison, at a time when the men were in crowds at the entrance. From the position of the prison and the door, and from the marks of the balls which were pointed out to us, as well as from the evidence, it was clear this firing must have proceeded from soldiers a very few feet from the door way; and although it was certainly sworn that the prisoners were at the time of part of the firing at least, continuing to insult and occasionally to throw stones at the soldiers, and that they were standing in the way of, and impeding the turnkey, who was there for the purpose of closing the door, yet still there was nothing stated which could, in our view, at all justify such excessively harsh and severe treatment of helpless and unarmed prisoners, when all idea of escape was at an end.Under these impressions, we used every endeavor to ascertain if there was the least prospect of identifying any of the soldiers who had been guilty of the particular outrages here alluded to, or of tracing any particular death, at that time to the firing of any particular individual, but without success; and all hopes of bringing the offenders to punishment would seem to be at an end.In conclusion, we, the undersigned, have only to add, that whilst we lament, as we do most deeply, the unfortunate transaction which has been the subject of this inquiry, we find ourselves unable to suggest any steps to be taken as to those parts of it which seem to call for redress and punishment.(Signed)CHARLES KING,FRANCIS SEYMOUR LARPENT.
Plymouth, 18th April, 1815.
We the undersigned commissioners, appointed on behalf of our respective governments, to inquire into and report upon, the unfortunate occurrence of the 6th April inst. at Dartmoor Prison; having carefully perused the proceedings of the several courts of inquiry, instituted immediately after that event, by the orders of Admiral Sir John T. Duckworth and Major-General Brown, respectively, as well as the depositions taken at the coroner's inquest upon the bodies of the prisoners, who lost their lives upon that melancholy occasion; upon which inquest the jury found a verdict of justifiable homicide; proceeded immediately to the examination upon oath in the presence of one or more of the magistrates of the vicinity, of all the witnesses, both American and English, who offered themselves for that purpose; or who could be discovered as likely to afford any material information on the subject, as well as those who had been previously examined before the coroner, as otherwise, to the number in the whole of about eighty. We further proceeded to a minute examination of the prisons, for the purpose of clearing up some points which, upon the evidence alone, were scarcely intelligible; obtaining from the prisoners, and from the officers of the depot, all the necessary assistance and explanation; and premising, that we have been from necessity compelled to draw many of our conclusions from statements and evidence highly contradictory, we do now make upon the whole proceedings the following report:—
During the period which has elapsed since the arrival in this country of the account of the ratification of the treaty of Ghent, an increased degree of restlessness and impatience of confinement appears to have prevailed amongst the American prisoners at Dartmoor, which, though not exhibited in the shape of any violent excesses, has been principally indicated by threats of breaking out if not soon released.
On the 4th of this month in particular, only two days previous to the events which are the subject of this inquiry, a large body of the prisoners rushed into the market-square, from whence, by the regulations of the prison they are excluded, demanded bread instead of biscuit, which had on that day been issued by the officers of the depot;their demands having been then almost immediately complied with, they returned to their own yards, and the employment of force on that occasion became unnecessary.
On the evening of the 6th, about 6 o'clock, it was clearly proved to us, that a breach or hole had been made in one of the prison walls, sufficient for a full sized man to pass, and that others had been commenced in the course of the day near the same spot, though never completed.
That a number of the prisoners were over the railing erected to prevent them from communicating with the sentinels on the walls, which was of course forbidden by the regulations of the prison, and that in the space between the railing and those walls they were tearing up pieces of turf, and wantonly pelting each other in a noisy and disorderly manner.
That a much more considerable number of the prisoners was collected together at that time in one of their yards near the place where the breach was effected, and that although such collection of prisoners was not unusual at other times (the Gambling Tables being commonly kept in that part of the yard) yet, when connected with the circumstances of the breach, and the time of the day, which was after the hour the signal for the prisoners to retire to their respective prisons had ceased to sound, it became a natural and just ground of alarm to those who had charge of the depot.
It was also in evidence that in the building formerly the petty officers' prison, but now the guard barrack, which stands in the yard to which the hole in the wall would serve as a communication, a part of the arms of the guard who were off duty, were usually kept in the racks, and though there was no evidence that this was, in any respect, the motive which induced the prisoners to make the opening in the wall, or even that they were ever acquainted with the fact, it naturally became at least a further cause of suspicion and alarm, and an additional reason for precaution.
Upon these grounds captain Shortland appears to us to have been justified in giving the order, which about this time he seems to have given, to sound the alarm bell, the usual signal for collecting the officers of the depot and putting the military on the alert.
However reasonable and justifiable this was as a measure of precaution, the effects produced thereby in the prisons, but which could not have been intended, were most unfortunate, and deeply to be regretted. A considerable number of the prisoners in the yards where no disturbance existed before, and who were either already within their respective prisons, or quietly retiring as usual towards them, immediately upon the sound of the bell rushed back from curiosity (as it appears) towards the gates, where, by that time, the crowd had assembled, and many who were at the time absent from their yards, were also from the plan of the prison, compelled, in order to reach their own homes, to pass the same spot, and thus that which was merely a measure of precaution, in its operation increased the evil it was intended to prevent. Almost at the same instant that the alarm bell rung, (but whether before or subsequent is upon the evidence doubtful, though captain Shortland states it positively as one of his further reasons for causing it to ring) some one or more of the prisoners broke the iron chain, which was the only fastening of No. 1 gate, leading into market square by means of an iron bar; and a very considerable number of the prisoners immediately rushed towards that gate; and many of them began to press forwards as fast as the opening would permit into the square.
There was no direct proof before us of previous concert or preparation on the part of the prisoners, and no evidence of their intention or disposition to effect their escape on this occasion, excepting that which arose by inference from the whole of the above detailed circumstances connected together.
The natural and almost irresistible inference to be drawn, however, from the conduct of the prisoners by captain Shortland and the military was, that an intention on the part of the prisoners to escape was on the point of being carried into execution, and it was at least certain that they were by force passing beyond the limits prescribed to them at a time when they ought to have been quietly going in for the night. It was also in evidence that the outer gates of the market square were usually opened about this time to let the bread waggons pass and repass to the store, although at the period in question they were in fact closed.
Under these circumstances, and with these impressions necessarily operating upon his mind, and a knowledge that if the prisoners once penetrated through the square, the power of escape was almost to a certainty afforded to them, if they should be so disposed; captain Shortland in the first instance proceeded down the square towards the prisoners, having ordered a part of the different guards, to the number of about fifty only at first, (though they were increased afterwards) to follow him. For some time both he and Dr. Magrath endeavored by quiet means and persuasion, to induce the prisoners to return to their own yards, explaining to them the fatal consequences which must ensue if they refused, as the military would in that case be necessarily compelled to employ force. The guard was by this time formed in the rear of captain Shortland, about two thirds of the way down the square—the latter is about one hundred feet broad, and the guard extended nearly all across. Captain Shortland, finding that persuasion was all in vain, and that although some were induced by it tomake an effort to retire, others pressed on in considerable numbers, at last ordered about 15 file of the guard, nearly in front of the gate which had been forced, to charge the prisoners back to their own yards.
The prisoners were in some places so near the military, that one of the soldiers states that he could not come fairly down to the charge; and the military were unwilling to set against an enemy. Some struggling ensued between the parties, arising partly from intention, but mainly from the pressure of those behind preventing those in front from getting back. After some little time, however, this charge appears to have been so far effective, and that with little or no injury to the prisoners, as to have driven them for the most part quite down out of the square, with the exception of a small number who continued their resistance about No. 1 gate.
A great crowd still remained collected after this in the passage between the square and the prisoners' yards, and in the part of those yards in the vicinity of the gates.—This assemblage still refused to withdraw, and according to most of the English witnesses and some of the American, was making a noise, hallowing, insulting and provoking, and daring the military to fire, and according to the testimony of several of the soldiers, and some others, were pelting the military with large stones, by which some of them were actually struck. This circumstance is, however, denied by many of the American witnesses; and some of the English, upon having the question put to them, stated that they saw no stones thrown previously to the firing, although their situation at the time was such as to enable them to see most of the proceedings in the square.
Under these circumstances the firing commenced.—With regard to any order having been given to fire the evidence is very contradictory. Several of the Americans swear positively, that captain Shortland gave that order; but the manner in which from the confusion of the moment, they described this part of the transaction, is so different in its details that it is very difficult to reconcile their testimony. Many of the soldiers and other English witnesses, heard the word given by some one, but no one of them can swear it was by captain Shortland, or by any one in particular, and some, amongst whom is the officer commanding the guard, think, if captain Shortland had given such an order that they must have heard it, which they did not. In addition to this captain Shortland denies the fact; and from the situation which he appears to have been placed at the time, even according to the American witnesses, in front of the soldiers, it may appear somewhat improbable that he should then have given such an order.
But, however, it may remain a matter of doubt whether the firing first began in the square by order, or was a spontaneous act of the soldiers themselves, it seemed clear that it was continued and renewed both there and elsewhere without orders; and that on the platforms, and in several places about the prison, it was certainly commenced without any authority.
The fact of an order having been given at first, provided the firing was under the existing circumstances justifiable, does not appear very material in any other point of view, than as shewing a want of self possession and discipline in the troops if they should have fired without order.
With regard to the above most important consideration, of whether the firing was justifiable or not, we are of opinion, under all the circumstances of the case, from the apprehension which the soldiers might fairly entertain, owing to the numbers and conduct of the prisoners, that this firing to a certain extent was justifiable in a military point of view, in order to intimidate the prisoners, and compel them thereby to desist from all acts of violence, and to retire as they were ordered, from a situation in which the responsibility of the agents, and the military, could not permit them with safety to remain.
From the fact of the crowd being so close and the firing at first being attended with very little injury, it appears probable that a large proportion of the muskets were, as stated by one or two of the witnesses, levelled over the heads of the prisoners; a circumstance in some respects to be lamented, as it induced them to cry out "blank cartridges," and merely irritated and encouraged them to renew their insults to the soldiery, which produced a repetition of the firing in a manner much more destructive.
The firing in the square having continued for some time, by which several of the prisoners sustained injuries, the greater part of them appear to have been running back with the utmost precipitation and confusion to their respective prisons, and the cause for further firing seems at this period to have ceased. It appears, accordingly, that captain Shortland was in the market square exerting himself and giving orders to that effect, and that lieutenant Fortye had succeeded in stopping the fire of his part of the guard.
Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to find any justification for the further continuance and renewal of the firing, which certainly took place both in the prison yards and elsewhere; though we have some evidence of subsequent provocation given to the military, and resistance to the turnkeys in shutting the prisons, and of stones being thrown out from within the prison doors.
The subsequent firing rather appears to have arisen from the state of individual irritation and exasperation on the part of the soldiers, who followed the prisoners into their yards, and from the absence of nearly all of the officers who might have restrained it as well as from the great difficulty of putting an end to a firing when once commenced under such circumstances. Captain Shortland was from this time busily occupied with the turnkeys in the square, receiving and taking care of the wounded. Ensign White remained with his guard at the breach, and lieutenants Ayelyne and Fortye, the only other subalterns known to have been present, continued with the main bodies of their respective guards.
The time of the day, which was the officers' dinner hour, will in some measure explain this, as it caused the absence of every officer from the prison whose presence was not indispensable there. And this circumstance which has been urged as an argument to prove the intention of the prisoners to take this opportunity to escape, tended to increase the confusion, and to prevent those great exertions being made which might perhaps have obviated a portion at least of the mischief which ensued.
At the same time that the firing was going on in the square, a cross fire was also kept up from several of the platforms on the walls round the prisoners where the sentries stand, by straggling parties of soldiers who ran up there for that purpose. As far as this fire was directed to disperse the men assembled round the breach, for which purpose it was most effectual, it seems to stand upon the same ground as that in the first instance in the square.—That part which it is positively sworn was directed against straggling parties of prisoners running about the yards and endeavoring to enter in the few doors which the turnkeys, according to their usual practice, had left open, does seem, as stated, to have been wholly without object or excuse, and to have been a wanton attack upon the lives of defenceless, and at that time, unoffending individuals.
In the same, or even more severe terms, we must remark upon what was proved as to the firing in the door-ways of the prisons, more particularly into that of No. 3 prison, at a time when the men were in crowds at the entrance. From the position of the prison and the door, and from the marks of the balls which were pointed out to us, as well as from the evidence, it was clear this firing must have proceeded from soldiers a very few feet from the door way; and although it was certainly sworn that the prisoners were at the time of part of the firing at least, continuing to insult and occasionally to throw stones at the soldiers, and that they were standing in the way of, and impeding the turnkey, who was there for the purpose of closing the door, yet still there was nothing stated which could, in our view, at all justify such excessively harsh and severe treatment of helpless and unarmed prisoners, when all idea of escape was at an end.
Under these impressions, we used every endeavor to ascertain if there was the least prospect of identifying any of the soldiers who had been guilty of the particular outrages here alluded to, or of tracing any particular death, at that time to the firing of any particular individual, but without success; and all hopes of bringing the offenders to punishment would seem to be at an end.
In conclusion, we, the undersigned, have only to add, that whilst we lament, as we do most deeply, the unfortunate transaction which has been the subject of this inquiry, we find ourselves unable to suggest any steps to be taken as to those parts of it which seem to call for redress and punishment.
Plymouth, April 26, 1815.SIR—In pursuance of the instructions received from Messrs. Clay and Gallatin, I have now the honor to transmit to you the report prepared by Mr. Larpent and myself on behalf of our respective governments, in relation to the unfortunate transactions at Dartmoor Prison of War, on the 6th of the present month. Considering it of much importance that the report, whatever it might be, should go forth under our joint signatures, I have forborne to press some of the points which it involves, as far as otherwise I might have done, and it therefore may not be improper in this letter to enter into some little explanation of such parts of the report.Although it does appear that a part of the prisoners were on that evening in such a state, and under such circumstances as to have justified in the view which the commander of the depot could not but take of it, the intervention of the military force, and even in a strict sense, the first use of fire arms, yet I cannot but express it as my settled opinion, that by conduct a little more temporising this dreadful alternative of firing upon unarmed prisoners might have been avoided. Yet as this opinion has been the result of subsequent examination, and after having acquired a knowledge of the comparatively harmless state of the prisoners, it may be but fair to consider, whether in such a moment of confusion and alarm, as that appears to have been, the officer commanding could have fairly estimated his danger, or have measured out with precision the extent and nature of the force necessary to guard against it.But when the firing became general, as it afterwards appears to have been, andcaught with electric rapidity from the square to the platforms, there is no plea nor shadow of excuse for it, except in the personal exasperation of the soldiery, nor for the more deliberate, and therefore more unjustifiable firing which took place into three of the prisons, No. 1, 3 and 4, but more particularly into No. 3, after the prisoners had retired into them, and there was no longer any pretence of apprehensions, as to their escape.—Upon this ground, as you, sir, will perceive by the report, Mr. Larpent and myself had no difference of opinion, and I am fully persuaded that my own regret was not greater than his at perceiving how hopeless would be the attempt to trace to any individuals of the military these outrageous proceedings.As to whether the order to fire came from captain Shortland, I yet confess myself unable to form any satisfactory opinion, though perhaps the bias of my mind is, that he did give such an order. But his anxiety and exertions to stop it after it had continued for some little time, are fully proved, and his general conduct previous to this occurrence, as far as we could with propriety enter into such details, appears to have been characterized with great fairness, and even kindness, in the relation in which he stood towards the prisoners.On the subject of anycomplaints against their own governmentexisting among the prisoners, it was invariably answered to several distinct questions put by me on that head,that none whatsoever existed or had been expressed by them, although they confessed themselves to entertain some animosity against Mr. Beasly, to whom they attributed their detention in this country; with what justice, you, sir, will be better able to judge. They made no complaint whatsoever as to their provisions and general mode of living, and treatment in the prison.I have transmitted to Mr. Beasly, a list of the killed and wounded on this melancholy occasion, with a request that he would forward it to the United States, for the information of their friends at home, and I am pleased to have it in my power to say, that the wounded are for the most part doing well.I have also enclosed to Mr. Beasly, the notes taken by me of the evidence adduced before us, with a request that he would have them fairly copied, as also a copy of the depositions taken before the Coroner, and desired him to submit them to you when in order.I cannot conclude, sir, without expressing my high sense of the impartiality and manly fairness with which this enquiry has been conducted on the part of Mr. Larpent, nor without mentioning that every facility was afforded to us in its prosecution, as well by the military officers commanding here and at the prison, as by the magistrates in the vicinity.I have the honor to be, with much respect, your most obedient humble servant.(Signed)CHARLES KING.His Excellency John Q. Adams, &c. &c.
Plymouth, April 26, 1815.
SIR—In pursuance of the instructions received from Messrs. Clay and Gallatin, I have now the honor to transmit to you the report prepared by Mr. Larpent and myself on behalf of our respective governments, in relation to the unfortunate transactions at Dartmoor Prison of War, on the 6th of the present month. Considering it of much importance that the report, whatever it might be, should go forth under our joint signatures, I have forborne to press some of the points which it involves, as far as otherwise I might have done, and it therefore may not be improper in this letter to enter into some little explanation of such parts of the report.
Although it does appear that a part of the prisoners were on that evening in such a state, and under such circumstances as to have justified in the view which the commander of the depot could not but take of it, the intervention of the military force, and even in a strict sense, the first use of fire arms, yet I cannot but express it as my settled opinion, that by conduct a little more temporising this dreadful alternative of firing upon unarmed prisoners might have been avoided. Yet as this opinion has been the result of subsequent examination, and after having acquired a knowledge of the comparatively harmless state of the prisoners, it may be but fair to consider, whether in such a moment of confusion and alarm, as that appears to have been, the officer commanding could have fairly estimated his danger, or have measured out with precision the extent and nature of the force necessary to guard against it.
But when the firing became general, as it afterwards appears to have been, andcaught with electric rapidity from the square to the platforms, there is no plea nor shadow of excuse for it, except in the personal exasperation of the soldiery, nor for the more deliberate, and therefore more unjustifiable firing which took place into three of the prisons, No. 1, 3 and 4, but more particularly into No. 3, after the prisoners had retired into them, and there was no longer any pretence of apprehensions, as to their escape.—Upon this ground, as you, sir, will perceive by the report, Mr. Larpent and myself had no difference of opinion, and I am fully persuaded that my own regret was not greater than his at perceiving how hopeless would be the attempt to trace to any individuals of the military these outrageous proceedings.
As to whether the order to fire came from captain Shortland, I yet confess myself unable to form any satisfactory opinion, though perhaps the bias of my mind is, that he did give such an order. But his anxiety and exertions to stop it after it had continued for some little time, are fully proved, and his general conduct previous to this occurrence, as far as we could with propriety enter into such details, appears to have been characterized with great fairness, and even kindness, in the relation in which he stood towards the prisoners.
On the subject of anycomplaints against their own governmentexisting among the prisoners, it was invariably answered to several distinct questions put by me on that head,that none whatsoever existed or had been expressed by them, although they confessed themselves to entertain some animosity against Mr. Beasly, to whom they attributed their detention in this country; with what justice, you, sir, will be better able to judge. They made no complaint whatsoever as to their provisions and general mode of living, and treatment in the prison.
I have transmitted to Mr. Beasly, a list of the killed and wounded on this melancholy occasion, with a request that he would forward it to the United States, for the information of their friends at home, and I am pleased to have it in my power to say, that the wounded are for the most part doing well.
I have also enclosed to Mr. Beasly, the notes taken by me of the evidence adduced before us, with a request that he would have them fairly copied, as also a copy of the depositions taken before the Coroner, and desired him to submit them to you when in order.
I cannot conclude, sir, without expressing my high sense of the impartiality and manly fairness with which this enquiry has been conducted on the part of Mr. Larpent, nor without mentioning that every facility was afforded to us in its prosecution, as well by the military officers commanding here and at the prison, as by the magistrates in the vicinity.
I have the honor to be, with much respect, your most obedient humble servant.
His Excellency John Q. Adams, &c. &c.
A Return of American prisoners of war killed and wounded in an attempt to force the military guard on the evening of the 6th of April, 1815.
Current No.Number on general entry book.Names.Quality.Ship.Whether man of war, merchant vessel, or privateer.Remarks.KILLED.14884Wm. Leveridge,Seaman,Enterprize, prize to Saratoga.Privateer,2970James Mann,do.Siro.Lett. Marque,33134John Haywood,do.Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Scipion.Impres'd.41347Jo. T. Johnson,do.Paul Jones,Privateer,53936John Washington,do.Rolla,Merch. vessel,WOUNDED.16520Tho. Jackson,Boy,Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Pontes.Imp. died Ap. 7, 181522647James Campbell,Seaman,Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Volontaire.Imp. died Ap. 7, 181535769John Gier,do.Rambler,Merch. vessel,41722William Penn,do.Dispatch,do.Impres'd, at London55003Cornel. Garrison,do.Invincible,Lett. Marque63614H. Hontcalm,do.Homeby. p. G. Tom.Privateer,71965Robert Willett,do.Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Andromache.Impres'd.85326John Peach,do.Enterprize,Privateer,92148Edw. Wittlebark,do.Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Ro. William.Impres'd.101881James Thornbull,Boy,Elbridge Gerry,Privateer,113652James Wells,Seaman,Thorn,do.121236Philip Ford,do.Gave himself up from H. M. S. Sult.Impres'd.13685James Bell,do.Joel Barlow,Merch. vessel,1494John Grey,do.St. Martin's Planter,do.15436Wm. Leversage,do.Magdalene,do.161024Edw. Gardner,do.Joseph,do.171546Stephen Phipps,do.Zebra,Lett. Marque,18486John Roberts,do.Two Brothers,Impres'd, at Cork.191640Thomas Smith,do.Paul Jones,Privateer,201819Caleb Codding,do.Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Swiftsure.Impres'd.215015John Davis,do.Charlotte, p. to Mammoth,Privateer,222013James Esdaille,do.G. Tomkins,do.23380Peter Wilson,do.Virginia Planter,Merch. vessel,242834Wm. Blake,do.Gave himself up from H. M. S. Repu.Impres'd.25338John Hogabets,2d Mate,Good Friends,Merch. vessel,264153Eph. Lincoln,Seaman,Argus,do.274493Thomas Findlay,do.Enterprize,Privateer,284109John Howard,do.Flash,do.291228Joseph Masick,do.Gave himself up from H. M. Ship Furieux.Impres'd.306123Robert Fillez,do.Grand Turk,Privateer,311812John Willet,do.Ga. himself up from H. M. S. Rosario.Impres'd.323080John Perry,do.Do fr H. M. S. Tiger.Impres'd.332662John Wilson,do.Do fr H. M. S. Fortuna.Impres'd.
To the People of the United States.
Having perused, with attention, the report of Mr.Charles King, andFrancis Seymour Larpent, on their examination of theunfortunateoccurrence at Dartmoor, on the 6th of April last:We, the undersigned, being there at the time thisunfortunateoccurrence took place, deem it a duty we owe to the surviving sufferers of that bloody transaction, to our fellow citizens, and ourselves, to make some remarks upon such a singular report. Although we presume the door is forever closed against any further investigation of that ever to be remembered transaction, we cannot help, however contrary it may be to our wishes to irritate the public feeling, already so much excited, entering into a detailed investigation of that report.In the committee's address to the public on the 27th of June last, preceding the publication of the affidavits of some of the prisoners, taken on that melancholy affair, they have justly anticipated what would be the report of the commissioners, after their investigation; they drew their conclusions from the singular manner in which the investigation was conducted. The report commences by stating, that, after carefully perusing the proceedings of the several courts of inquiry, instituted immediately after that event, they proceeded immediately to the examination, upon oath, of ALL the witnesses, both American and English, who offered themselves for that purpose.—How far this part of the report is correct, we shall leave the public to judge.On the arrival of the commissioners at the depot, the committee of the prison were sent for; after waiting some time at the door of the room, where the inquiry was held, they were called in separately and questioned as to their knowledge of the transactions of the sixth.—The depositions of those who were eye witnesses of that disgraceful scene were taken; some were questioned as to the general conduct of Shortland, previous to that affair; it was represented by them as it would have been by all, as being universallycruel, overbearing and oppressive. After having finished the examination of the committee, they requested them to bring forward all the evidence that was likely to cast any light on the subject of inquiry. They accordingly returned into the prison, and drew up a list of the names of some of the eye-witnesses of that day's occurrence. Although they could have brought hundreds to the examination, and the sum of whose evidence would have amounted to the same, yet the committee not wishing to impede the progress of the investigation, by a redundancy of evidence, they were careful to select such men as were most likely to give a clear and distinct account of all the circumstances as they occurred under their knowledge, taking care, at the same time, to procure those whose different situations afforded them an opportunity of witnessing that transaction, from the commencement to the close. Such was the evidence the committee had selected, to the number of about fifty,VERY FEWof whom were ever examined, although they werekept waiting in the turnkey's lodge (where they were ordered to stay until called for) during the hours of investigation. In the course of the inquiry, it seems, the commissioners found it necessary to survey the particular situation of the prisons, and the points from which the different attacks were made; they accordingly came into the yard for that purpose, and after having been shown all the places from whence the firing was continued, where the crowd of prisoners had assembled on the first alarm, and where the hole, so much made a handle of, had been made—after a slight survey of these different places, they retired into their session room, leaving orders, once more, with the committee to hold their evidence in readiness, as they would soon be called upon for examination. The committee replied that they had been in readiness since the commencement of the inquiry, and were then only waiting their orders to appear before them, feeling happy in the idea of having it in their power to show to the court, and to the world, by the evidence they had to produce, that the attack of Shortland on the defenceless prisoners, was premeditated and unjustifiable inANYpoint of view.After attending in the turnkey's lodge during the sitting of the commissioners, until the middle of the third day, without having but very few of the evidences sent for, and being fearful that they might be waiting for them, the committee sent them word that the witnesses were still in attendance. No answer being returned to this message for some time, the committee became uneasy on account of the long examination of the officers, soldiers, clerks, and turnkeys, attached to the depot, without admitting the prisoners to an equal privilege; and understanding the commissioners were about closing their inquiry, they again sent word they would be glad to have an interview for a few moments, for the purpose of explaining the nature of their evidence, and the necessity of a full hearing on both sides of the question.No answer being returned to this request, and still waiting with the anxious hope that they would soon send for some of us, when we were told by one of the turnkeys, that the commissioners were prepared to depart, having finished the examination. Astonished to think they meant to leave the depot without clearly investigating the circumstances that were the cause of their meeting, and feeling indignant that a cause of so much importance should be passed over so partially, the committee addressed a note to Mr. King, begging him not to shut the door of communication against the prisoners, by closing the inquiry without giving them the privilege of a hearing, as the greatest part of our witnesses were yet unexamined, and their evidence they conceived to be of the utmost importance to the investigation.No reply was made to this note; but, in a few moments, we were told, that the commissioners had left the depot. How far they are justifiable in saying they examinedALLthe evidences that offered themselves, we think is sufficiently shewn.The commissioners next go on to mention the insurrection of the prisoners about the bread, on the 4th, two days previous to the events, the subject of that inquiry. Although the report correctly states, the prisoners quietly returned to their own yards, after their demands having been complied with, Mr. King forgot to mention, that it was clearlyrepresented to him, had the prisoners been so disposed, on that night, they could have easily made their escape. Although that transaction had nothing to do, as relates to the prisoners, with the events of the 6th, we merely represent this circumstance to show, that there was no intention whatever on their part to break out of the prison, as Shortland and his adherents have attempted to prove.The report now goes on to mention, that on the evening of the 6th of April, about six o'clock in the evening, a hole was made in one of the walls of the prison sufficient for a full-sized man to pass, and others had been commenced, but never completed, and that a number of the prisoners were over the railing erected to prevent them from communicating with the sentinels on the walls, and that they were tearing up pieces of turf, and wantonly pelting each other, in a noisy manner.As to the hole made in the wall, we believe the causes and reasons have been already sufficiently explained by the affidavits laid before the public. With respect to the prisoners being between the iron paling and the wall, it could have been, if it was not, easily explained to Mr. King, had he given an opportunity. It seems, that on the afternoon of the 6th, some of the prisoners having obtainedleaveof the sentinels on the walls to go over and lay upon the grass, others seeing them laying so much at their ease, went over to enjoy the same privilege; and as the sentinels made no objection to this proceeding, the number was soon increased to such a degree, that it became no longer an enjoyment to those who first obtained the privilege; some scuffling then ensued among themselves, and they began to pelt each other with turf and old shoes, principally in play, and among so many, no doubt, there must have been considerable noise; but how they can possibly connect this circumstance with the hole made in the wall, is entirely out of our power to conceive, as the iron railings separated them from the pretended breach in the wall, and distant from it more than half the length of the yard; of course, had the hole been intended as a breach, the iron paling would have become a barrier, instead of facilitating the means of an escape.As to that part of the report which mentions the guard-barracks being the repository for the arms of the guard off duty, and of its standing in the yard to which the hole in the wall would serve as a communication, and of its being a further cause of suspicion and alarm to Captain Shortland—to one acquainted with the situation of the prison, such an idea would be ridiculous; but to those who are not acquainted with it, it will be only necessary for us to mention, that if the prisoners had the intention of breaking out through this passage, and had actually got into the barrack-yard, the difficulties they would then have to encounter would be much greater than to break a passage through the market square, or the back part of the yard. As to the idea of their possessing themselves of the muskets standing in the racks in the guard-barracks (even if they knew of any being there) it is childish; for how easy would it have been for the commanding officer, on the shortest intimation of such an attempt, with one blast of his bugle, to have called all his guards to the spot before a hundredthpart of the prisoners could have got into the yard, and by that means instantly put a stop to any further proceedings on their part.We cannot conceive how Mr. King can possibly come forward and say, on these grounds, it appeared to him that Captain Shortland was justified in giving the order for sounding the alarm bell, when, if he found the prisoners were conducting themselves improperly, had he sent for the committee (as always had been his custom heretofore, when he had any charge against the prisoners for improper conduct) and told them that the prisoners were breaking the wall (which circumstance, as has been published before, was not known to one tenth of the prisoners) and requested them to have represented to those engaged in it, the consequences that must ensue if they persisted in such conduct, we have not a moment's hesitation in saying, they would have put a stop to any further proceedings of that kind.That part which relates to the breaking of the iron chain which fastened No. 1 gate, and which follows next in the report, says there was no evidence to show whether it was done before or after the alarm bell rang. As this was a material point on which they grounded Shortland's justification, we have to regret that the evidence we had to lay before the commissioners, and which would, in our opinion, have sufficiently cleared up that point, was not examined.On the ringing of the alarm bell, the rush towards the gates leading into the market square was so great (attracted as has been before stated by curiosity) that those in front were irresistibly pushed forward by those in the rear, and if the chain had not broke, the lock must have given way to the pressure, and by this opening, it is but natural to suppose, that a number must have been shoved into the square, in front of the soldiers, who were drawn up in a line across the square, with Shortland at their head.If, as the report now goes on to state, there was no direct proof before them of a previous concert or preparation on the part of the prisoners, and no evidence of their intention or disposition to effect their escape on this occasion, excepting that which arose byinferencefrom the whole of the detailed circumstances connected together, had Mr. King examined the evidence on the part of the prisoners, as minutely as it seems he examined those on the part of Shortland, he could not even have drawn theshadow of an inferenceof that being their intention.Where the commissioners got their evidence for asserting that Captain Shortland, by quiet means and persuasion, endeavored to persuade the prisoners to retire into their respective yards, is unaccountable to us, as those who know Captain Shortland, know he is not a man of persuasion. It is correct that Dr. M'Grath used every exertion to persuade the prisoners to retire out of the square, which if Shortland had allowed sufficient time, would have been quietly done; but the crowd, by this time, had become so great, and the pressure from the rear so strong, that those in front could not retreat until time should be allowed for those in the rear to fall back, but the hasty, haughty, and overbearing temper of Shortland, could not allow him to use such conciliatory means. He orders (the report says) fifteen file of the guard fronting the open gate, to the charge; and after somelittle time the charge was so effectual, with but very little or no injury to the prisoners, as to drive them, for the most part, quite out of the square, with the exception of a small number who continued their resistance about No. 1 gate. Under these circumstances, continued the report, the firing commenced.Here we beg leave to request an attentive perusal of the affidavits of some of the prisoners, taken by the committee, and which relate particularly to this part of the transaction. It is there positively stated, that on the soldiers coming to the charge, the prisoners ALL retreated into the yard, and pushed the gate to after them. If the commissioners had examined the evidence, this part of the report ought to have been differently expressed.We cannot conceive how Mr. King finds it difficult to reconcile the testimony respecting Captain Shortland's giving the orders to fire; when he reports thatSEVERALof the AmericansSWEAR POSITIVELY, that Captain Shortland gave that order—and many of the soldiers and the English witnesses heard the word given by some one, but could not swear it was by Captain Shortland; and some of them (among whom is the officer commanding the guard)THINK, if Captain Shortland had given such an order, they must have heard it, which they did not. Thus, then, stands the foundation for this part of the report. An English officerTHINKSit is not so, and several AmericansSWEARit is so; and he finds it very difficult to reconcile their testimony.—The lightness with which they seem to have passed over this most important point of that day's transaction, cannot but be deeply regretted by those who feel for the unhappy sufferers, when they go on to state, "It may remain a matter of doubt whether the firing first began in the square by anORDER, or whether it was a spontaneous act of the soldiers themselves; it seemed clear it was continued and renewed both there and elsewhere, without orders—and that on the platforms and several places about the prison it wascertainly commenced without any authority." We must once more request the attention of the public to the affidavits already published; it is there sworn by one of the witnesses, thatPREVIOUSto the alarm bell being rung, and while walking in the yard,a soldier called to him from the walls, andtold him to go in, as they would soon be fired upon. How, then, can it be possible, that a soldier on the walls should know that they would soon be fired upon, if the order had not been previously given to that effect? And had the bugle-man been examined, he could have stated that, previous to the ringing of the alarm bell, he received orders tosound to fire; so that when the soldiers took their stations on the walls, they were charged and prepared for that purpose. With such information, we conceive the committee to stand fully justified in stating in their report, the belief of its being a pre-concerted plan, on the part of Shortland; and if the commissioners had possessed themselves with a knowledge of these circumstances, which they could and ought to have done, would they, then, reported Shortland as justifiable, even in amilitarypoint of view?The next thing we have to notice in the report is, that very singular paragraph, which says, "from the fact of the crowd being so close, and the firing atfirstbeing attended withvery little injury, it appearsprobable, that a large proportion of the muskets were, as stated by one or two of the witnesses, levelled over the heads of the prisoners, a circumstance, in some respects, to belamented." Is it, then, to belamented, that the soldiers did not level their pieces, on thefirstfire, directly into the crowd, which they have stated to be so great and so close that a soldier declared he could not come fairly down to a charge? or is it to belamented, that one or two hundred were not killed at the first discharge, and a thousand or two wounded? If so, we think it much to belamented, that the reporters were not there, and placed foremost in the crowd.The circumstance of so few being hurt at the first discharge is not strange to those who are acquainted with the situation; and this occurrence alone corroborates the American evidence, and ought to have been sufficient proof to the commissioners, that the prisoners upon being charged upon, retreated through the gates, and shut them after them, before the firing commenced; and which circumstance, alone, should have shut the door of justification against Shortland for commencing a fire upon them, as they were in their own yards. As this was the actual situation of the prisoners on the first discharge, and the soldiers having to fire through the iron paling, and the prisoners retreating on a descending ground, of course brought the muskets, when down to a level, over the heads of the prisoners—it was owing to thisfortunatecircumstance that so few were injured on the first discharge of the musketry; and it seems the inhuman Shortland was aware of this circumstance, when he was distinctly heard to order his soldiers to fire low. This does not appear to correspond with that part of their report which says, "Captain Shortland was in the market square, exerting himself in giving orders to stop the firing."That there was any provocation given to the soldiers to justify their subsequent brutal conduct, the commissioners themselves seem to find it very difficult to trace any evidence, although they say, it appears, that there was some resistance made to the turnkeys in shutting the prison, and that stones were thrown at the military. Had they examined theprisonerssufficiently, they would have been convinced that no resistance was made to the turnkeys in shutting the doors. As to throwing stones at the military, while they were chasing them from corner to corner, and firing at them in every place where they had taken shelter from the balls, could it be expected but they would seize on something for self defence, when they saw the soldiers running at them with their bayonets, and having no possible means of escape, as it has been before stated, all the doors in the prisons had been previously closed except one, and that one perhaps, the length of the prison from him. Is there a man, in such a situation, but would seize on the first weapon that offered itself, and sell his life as dear as possible. How can they, then, make that the slightest justification for such outrageous conduct on the part of Shortland or the military?As to most of the officers being absent is erroneous; it could have been proved that there was an officer in every yard, and in one instance where he was heard to give the order to fire on a party of prisoners close by the door, and running and making every exertion to enter the prison.As to Captain Shortland being busy in the square with the turnkeys, receiving and taking care of the wounded, certainly shows the commissioners' want of correct information, for it is already before the public, in affidavit, the cruel manner in which the wounded were treated by him, and of his abuse to the prisoners who were bearing the wounded to the hospital gate. That part of the report which relates that the time and commencement of this transaction was the officers' dinner hour, is too ridiculous for a comment. We do not believe that there was a prisoner in the depot that knew when or where the officers dined, and therefore, can be no ground for an argument, that the prisoners were taking this opportunity to escape.The report goes on to state, "the cross fire, which was kept up from several of the platforms on the walls round the prison, and directed against straggling parties of prisoners, running about the yard, endeavoring to enter the prison by the door which the turnkey left open, according to their usual practice,does seemto have been without object or excuse, and to have been a wanton attack upon the lives of defenceless, and, at the same time, unoffending individuals." In answer to this paragraph, we shall only reply, that had the commissioners examinedALLthe American evidence, and attached the same credit to it, which it appears they have done toALLthe English evidence, similar expressions would have been made use of against Shortland's conduct throughout the whole of their report.It appears to us, after an attentive examination of this report, that the commissioners meant to justify Shortland in commencing his murderous attack upon the prisoners, and to condemn the soldiers for continuing it. Singular as this idea appears, it is no less strange to us, how it can be possible they could reconcile it to their feelings to make up a report containing such a direct contradiction to reason; for surely if Shortland could be justified in using coercive measures in the first instance, the military certainly should be acquitted for the subsequent massacre, as the whole was conducted under his immediate command;—and if he hadA RIGHTto kill one, on the same ground he might have extended it to a thousand. And, on the other hand, if any part of the transaction is to be condemned, Shortland should answer for the whole; for what necessity could there be made to attempt identifying any of the soldiers? Surely the commissioners could not think of bringing them to punishment, as they acted by the direct orders of Shortland and his officers!—and if any one could or ought to be made to answer for the outrage, it should be Shortland.In addition to the contradictions contained in the commissioners' joint report, Mr. King, in his letter to his excellency J. Q. Adams, almost denies the ground on which they have, in part, founded Shortland's justification, when he says (alluding to have heard several Americansswear, positively, that Shortland did give the order to fire, and an officer of the guardthinkingthat he did not, as he should have heard him) "perhaps the bias of my mind was, that Shortland did give that order; and wishing the report to go forth under our joint signatures, I forbore to press some of the points so far as otherwise IMIGHThave done."If, then, any part has been neglected, or passed over for accommodation, or any other purpose (and one there certainly has, in not paying the same attention to the American as was done to the English evidence) it is to be regretted that Mr. King should so far forget the sacred duties attached to the appointment of a commissioner to enquire into the murder of his countrymen, as to pass over any points which might have brought to light the means of punishment for the murder, or obtained in some measure an indemnity for the surviving unhappy sufferers.Will not the shades of the departed victims haunt him in his midnight slumbers, and, pointing to their lacerated bodies, say, these still remain unavenged? Will not the unhappy survivors show the stumps of their amputated limbs, and say, these wounds fester, and still remain unatoned? Will not the widow and the helpless orphan raise their innocent hands to heaven, and cry, why was justice denied us? Why was the heart so callous to our sufferings? And why was the bosom shut to sympathy? Let Mr. King point out some means to appease these bitter complaints, and we shall be satisfied.We shall now close these unpleasant remarks, by noticing another unaccountable error in Mr. King's letter to Mr. Adams, where he mentions, speaking of Shortland, "and his general conduct, previous to this occurrence, as far as I could with propriety enter into such details, appears to have been characterized with great fairness, and even kindness, in the relation in which he stood towards the prisoners."—We shall not pretend to ask Mr. King where he obtained the evidence on which he grounds this assertion; we are sure it was not from the prisoners, who ought to have been the best judges of that circumstance; but, instead of all that, all the Americans who were permitted to express an opinion on that subject, at the examination, declared, without reserve, as would all the prisoners in the depot, had they been asked the question, that Shortland's conduct, from the commencement of his appointment to that station, had been cruel, oppressive, and overbearing; and, instead of taking measures to alleviate the distresses of the wretched objects under him, as a feeling man would have done, he seemed to take a pleasure in harrassing them whenever he could find the slightest pretext for so doing.W. Colton,Joseph Swain,Arch'd Taylor,David Ingalls,Reuben Sherman,Arch'd I. Mackay,Philip Black,Homer Hall,James B. Mansfield,Abr'm M'Intire,Wm. Cochran,Henry Dolliver,John Jones,B. Weeks,Wm. Demerell,Thomas Ward,William K. White.
Having perused, with attention, the report of Mr.Charles King, andFrancis Seymour Larpent, on their examination of theunfortunateoccurrence at Dartmoor, on the 6th of April last:
We, the undersigned, being there at the time thisunfortunateoccurrence took place, deem it a duty we owe to the surviving sufferers of that bloody transaction, to our fellow citizens, and ourselves, to make some remarks upon such a singular report. Although we presume the door is forever closed against any further investigation of that ever to be remembered transaction, we cannot help, however contrary it may be to our wishes to irritate the public feeling, already so much excited, entering into a detailed investigation of that report.
In the committee's address to the public on the 27th of June last, preceding the publication of the affidavits of some of the prisoners, taken on that melancholy affair, they have justly anticipated what would be the report of the commissioners, after their investigation; they drew their conclusions from the singular manner in which the investigation was conducted. The report commences by stating, that, after carefully perusing the proceedings of the several courts of inquiry, instituted immediately after that event, they proceeded immediately to the examination, upon oath, of ALL the witnesses, both American and English, who offered themselves for that purpose.—How far this part of the report is correct, we shall leave the public to judge.
On the arrival of the commissioners at the depot, the committee of the prison were sent for; after waiting some time at the door of the room, where the inquiry was held, they were called in separately and questioned as to their knowledge of the transactions of the sixth.—The depositions of those who were eye witnesses of that disgraceful scene were taken; some were questioned as to the general conduct of Shortland, previous to that affair; it was represented by them as it would have been by all, as being universallycruel, overbearing and oppressive. After having finished the examination of the committee, they requested them to bring forward all the evidence that was likely to cast any light on the subject of inquiry. They accordingly returned into the prison, and drew up a list of the names of some of the eye-witnesses of that day's occurrence. Although they could have brought hundreds to the examination, and the sum of whose evidence would have amounted to the same, yet the committee not wishing to impede the progress of the investigation, by a redundancy of evidence, they were careful to select such men as were most likely to give a clear and distinct account of all the circumstances as they occurred under their knowledge, taking care, at the same time, to procure those whose different situations afforded them an opportunity of witnessing that transaction, from the commencement to the close. Such was the evidence the committee had selected, to the number of about fifty,VERY FEWof whom were ever examined, although they werekept waiting in the turnkey's lodge (where they were ordered to stay until called for) during the hours of investigation. In the course of the inquiry, it seems, the commissioners found it necessary to survey the particular situation of the prisons, and the points from which the different attacks were made; they accordingly came into the yard for that purpose, and after having been shown all the places from whence the firing was continued, where the crowd of prisoners had assembled on the first alarm, and where the hole, so much made a handle of, had been made—after a slight survey of these different places, they retired into their session room, leaving orders, once more, with the committee to hold their evidence in readiness, as they would soon be called upon for examination. The committee replied that they had been in readiness since the commencement of the inquiry, and were then only waiting their orders to appear before them, feeling happy in the idea of having it in their power to show to the court, and to the world, by the evidence they had to produce, that the attack of Shortland on the defenceless prisoners, was premeditated and unjustifiable inANYpoint of view.
After attending in the turnkey's lodge during the sitting of the commissioners, until the middle of the third day, without having but very few of the evidences sent for, and being fearful that they might be waiting for them, the committee sent them word that the witnesses were still in attendance. No answer being returned to this message for some time, the committee became uneasy on account of the long examination of the officers, soldiers, clerks, and turnkeys, attached to the depot, without admitting the prisoners to an equal privilege; and understanding the commissioners were about closing their inquiry, they again sent word they would be glad to have an interview for a few moments, for the purpose of explaining the nature of their evidence, and the necessity of a full hearing on both sides of the question.No answer being returned to this request, and still waiting with the anxious hope that they would soon send for some of us, when we were told by one of the turnkeys, that the commissioners were prepared to depart, having finished the examination. Astonished to think they meant to leave the depot without clearly investigating the circumstances that were the cause of their meeting, and feeling indignant that a cause of so much importance should be passed over so partially, the committee addressed a note to Mr. King, begging him not to shut the door of communication against the prisoners, by closing the inquiry without giving them the privilege of a hearing, as the greatest part of our witnesses were yet unexamined, and their evidence they conceived to be of the utmost importance to the investigation.No reply was made to this note; but, in a few moments, we were told, that the commissioners had left the depot. How far they are justifiable in saying they examinedALLthe evidences that offered themselves, we think is sufficiently shewn.
The commissioners next go on to mention the insurrection of the prisoners about the bread, on the 4th, two days previous to the events, the subject of that inquiry. Although the report correctly states, the prisoners quietly returned to their own yards, after their demands having been complied with, Mr. King forgot to mention, that it was clearlyrepresented to him, had the prisoners been so disposed, on that night, they could have easily made their escape. Although that transaction had nothing to do, as relates to the prisoners, with the events of the 6th, we merely represent this circumstance to show, that there was no intention whatever on their part to break out of the prison, as Shortland and his adherents have attempted to prove.
The report now goes on to mention, that on the evening of the 6th of April, about six o'clock in the evening, a hole was made in one of the walls of the prison sufficient for a full-sized man to pass, and others had been commenced, but never completed, and that a number of the prisoners were over the railing erected to prevent them from communicating with the sentinels on the walls, and that they were tearing up pieces of turf, and wantonly pelting each other, in a noisy manner.
As to the hole made in the wall, we believe the causes and reasons have been already sufficiently explained by the affidavits laid before the public. With respect to the prisoners being between the iron paling and the wall, it could have been, if it was not, easily explained to Mr. King, had he given an opportunity. It seems, that on the afternoon of the 6th, some of the prisoners having obtainedleaveof the sentinels on the walls to go over and lay upon the grass, others seeing them laying so much at their ease, went over to enjoy the same privilege; and as the sentinels made no objection to this proceeding, the number was soon increased to such a degree, that it became no longer an enjoyment to those who first obtained the privilege; some scuffling then ensued among themselves, and they began to pelt each other with turf and old shoes, principally in play, and among so many, no doubt, there must have been considerable noise; but how they can possibly connect this circumstance with the hole made in the wall, is entirely out of our power to conceive, as the iron railings separated them from the pretended breach in the wall, and distant from it more than half the length of the yard; of course, had the hole been intended as a breach, the iron paling would have become a barrier, instead of facilitating the means of an escape.
As to that part of the report which mentions the guard-barracks being the repository for the arms of the guard off duty, and of its standing in the yard to which the hole in the wall would serve as a communication, and of its being a further cause of suspicion and alarm to Captain Shortland—to one acquainted with the situation of the prison, such an idea would be ridiculous; but to those who are not acquainted with it, it will be only necessary for us to mention, that if the prisoners had the intention of breaking out through this passage, and had actually got into the barrack-yard, the difficulties they would then have to encounter would be much greater than to break a passage through the market square, or the back part of the yard. As to the idea of their possessing themselves of the muskets standing in the racks in the guard-barracks (even if they knew of any being there) it is childish; for how easy would it have been for the commanding officer, on the shortest intimation of such an attempt, with one blast of his bugle, to have called all his guards to the spot before a hundredthpart of the prisoners could have got into the yard, and by that means instantly put a stop to any further proceedings on their part.
We cannot conceive how Mr. King can possibly come forward and say, on these grounds, it appeared to him that Captain Shortland was justified in giving the order for sounding the alarm bell, when, if he found the prisoners were conducting themselves improperly, had he sent for the committee (as always had been his custom heretofore, when he had any charge against the prisoners for improper conduct) and told them that the prisoners were breaking the wall (which circumstance, as has been published before, was not known to one tenth of the prisoners) and requested them to have represented to those engaged in it, the consequences that must ensue if they persisted in such conduct, we have not a moment's hesitation in saying, they would have put a stop to any further proceedings of that kind.
That part which relates to the breaking of the iron chain which fastened No. 1 gate, and which follows next in the report, says there was no evidence to show whether it was done before or after the alarm bell rang. As this was a material point on which they grounded Shortland's justification, we have to regret that the evidence we had to lay before the commissioners, and which would, in our opinion, have sufficiently cleared up that point, was not examined.
On the ringing of the alarm bell, the rush towards the gates leading into the market square was so great (attracted as has been before stated by curiosity) that those in front were irresistibly pushed forward by those in the rear, and if the chain had not broke, the lock must have given way to the pressure, and by this opening, it is but natural to suppose, that a number must have been shoved into the square, in front of the soldiers, who were drawn up in a line across the square, with Shortland at their head.
If, as the report now goes on to state, there was no direct proof before them of a previous concert or preparation on the part of the prisoners, and no evidence of their intention or disposition to effect their escape on this occasion, excepting that which arose byinferencefrom the whole of the detailed circumstances connected together, had Mr. King examined the evidence on the part of the prisoners, as minutely as it seems he examined those on the part of Shortland, he could not even have drawn theshadow of an inferenceof that being their intention.
Where the commissioners got their evidence for asserting that Captain Shortland, by quiet means and persuasion, endeavored to persuade the prisoners to retire into their respective yards, is unaccountable to us, as those who know Captain Shortland, know he is not a man of persuasion. It is correct that Dr. M'Grath used every exertion to persuade the prisoners to retire out of the square, which if Shortland had allowed sufficient time, would have been quietly done; but the crowd, by this time, had become so great, and the pressure from the rear so strong, that those in front could not retreat until time should be allowed for those in the rear to fall back, but the hasty, haughty, and overbearing temper of Shortland, could not allow him to use such conciliatory means. He orders (the report says) fifteen file of the guard fronting the open gate, to the charge; and after somelittle time the charge was so effectual, with but very little or no injury to the prisoners, as to drive them, for the most part, quite out of the square, with the exception of a small number who continued their resistance about No. 1 gate. Under these circumstances, continued the report, the firing commenced.
Here we beg leave to request an attentive perusal of the affidavits of some of the prisoners, taken by the committee, and which relate particularly to this part of the transaction. It is there positively stated, that on the soldiers coming to the charge, the prisoners ALL retreated into the yard, and pushed the gate to after them. If the commissioners had examined the evidence, this part of the report ought to have been differently expressed.
We cannot conceive how Mr. King finds it difficult to reconcile the testimony respecting Captain Shortland's giving the orders to fire; when he reports thatSEVERALof the AmericansSWEAR POSITIVELY, that Captain Shortland gave that order—and many of the soldiers and the English witnesses heard the word given by some one, but could not swear it was by Captain Shortland; and some of them (among whom is the officer commanding the guard)THINK, if Captain Shortland had given such an order, they must have heard it, which they did not. Thus, then, stands the foundation for this part of the report. An English officerTHINKSit is not so, and several AmericansSWEARit is so; and he finds it very difficult to reconcile their testimony.—The lightness with which they seem to have passed over this most important point of that day's transaction, cannot but be deeply regretted by those who feel for the unhappy sufferers, when they go on to state, "It may remain a matter of doubt whether the firing first began in the square by anORDER, or whether it was a spontaneous act of the soldiers themselves; it seemed clear it was continued and renewed both there and elsewhere, without orders—and that on the platforms and several places about the prison it wascertainly commenced without any authority." We must once more request the attention of the public to the affidavits already published; it is there sworn by one of the witnesses, thatPREVIOUSto the alarm bell being rung, and while walking in the yard,a soldier called to him from the walls, andtold him to go in, as they would soon be fired upon. How, then, can it be possible, that a soldier on the walls should know that they would soon be fired upon, if the order had not been previously given to that effect? And had the bugle-man been examined, he could have stated that, previous to the ringing of the alarm bell, he received orders tosound to fire; so that when the soldiers took their stations on the walls, they were charged and prepared for that purpose. With such information, we conceive the committee to stand fully justified in stating in their report, the belief of its being a pre-concerted plan, on the part of Shortland; and if the commissioners had possessed themselves with a knowledge of these circumstances, which they could and ought to have done, would they, then, reported Shortland as justifiable, even in amilitarypoint of view?
The next thing we have to notice in the report is, that very singular paragraph, which says, "from the fact of the crowd being so close, and the firing atfirstbeing attended withvery little injury, it appearsprobable, that a large proportion of the muskets were, as stated by one or two of the witnesses, levelled over the heads of the prisoners, a circumstance, in some respects, to belamented." Is it, then, to belamented, that the soldiers did not level their pieces, on thefirstfire, directly into the crowd, which they have stated to be so great and so close that a soldier declared he could not come fairly down to a charge? or is it to belamented, that one or two hundred were not killed at the first discharge, and a thousand or two wounded? If so, we think it much to belamented, that the reporters were not there, and placed foremost in the crowd.
The circumstance of so few being hurt at the first discharge is not strange to those who are acquainted with the situation; and this occurrence alone corroborates the American evidence, and ought to have been sufficient proof to the commissioners, that the prisoners upon being charged upon, retreated through the gates, and shut them after them, before the firing commenced; and which circumstance, alone, should have shut the door of justification against Shortland for commencing a fire upon them, as they were in their own yards. As this was the actual situation of the prisoners on the first discharge, and the soldiers having to fire through the iron paling, and the prisoners retreating on a descending ground, of course brought the muskets, when down to a level, over the heads of the prisoners—it was owing to thisfortunatecircumstance that so few were injured on the first discharge of the musketry; and it seems the inhuman Shortland was aware of this circumstance, when he was distinctly heard to order his soldiers to fire low. This does not appear to correspond with that part of their report which says, "Captain Shortland was in the market square, exerting himself in giving orders to stop the firing."
That there was any provocation given to the soldiers to justify their subsequent brutal conduct, the commissioners themselves seem to find it very difficult to trace any evidence, although they say, it appears, that there was some resistance made to the turnkeys in shutting the prison, and that stones were thrown at the military. Had they examined theprisonerssufficiently, they would have been convinced that no resistance was made to the turnkeys in shutting the doors. As to throwing stones at the military, while they were chasing them from corner to corner, and firing at them in every place where they had taken shelter from the balls, could it be expected but they would seize on something for self defence, when they saw the soldiers running at them with their bayonets, and having no possible means of escape, as it has been before stated, all the doors in the prisons had been previously closed except one, and that one perhaps, the length of the prison from him. Is there a man, in such a situation, but would seize on the first weapon that offered itself, and sell his life as dear as possible. How can they, then, make that the slightest justification for such outrageous conduct on the part of Shortland or the military?
As to most of the officers being absent is erroneous; it could have been proved that there was an officer in every yard, and in one instance where he was heard to give the order to fire on a party of prisoners close by the door, and running and making every exertion to enter the prison.
As to Captain Shortland being busy in the square with the turnkeys, receiving and taking care of the wounded, certainly shows the commissioners' want of correct information, for it is already before the public, in affidavit, the cruel manner in which the wounded were treated by him, and of his abuse to the prisoners who were bearing the wounded to the hospital gate. That part of the report which relates that the time and commencement of this transaction was the officers' dinner hour, is too ridiculous for a comment. We do not believe that there was a prisoner in the depot that knew when or where the officers dined, and therefore, can be no ground for an argument, that the prisoners were taking this opportunity to escape.
The report goes on to state, "the cross fire, which was kept up from several of the platforms on the walls round the prison, and directed against straggling parties of prisoners, running about the yard, endeavoring to enter the prison by the door which the turnkey left open, according to their usual practice,does seemto have been without object or excuse, and to have been a wanton attack upon the lives of defenceless, and, at the same time, unoffending individuals." In answer to this paragraph, we shall only reply, that had the commissioners examinedALLthe American evidence, and attached the same credit to it, which it appears they have done toALLthe English evidence, similar expressions would have been made use of against Shortland's conduct throughout the whole of their report.
It appears to us, after an attentive examination of this report, that the commissioners meant to justify Shortland in commencing his murderous attack upon the prisoners, and to condemn the soldiers for continuing it. Singular as this idea appears, it is no less strange to us, how it can be possible they could reconcile it to their feelings to make up a report containing such a direct contradiction to reason; for surely if Shortland could be justified in using coercive measures in the first instance, the military certainly should be acquitted for the subsequent massacre, as the whole was conducted under his immediate command;—and if he hadA RIGHTto kill one, on the same ground he might have extended it to a thousand. And, on the other hand, if any part of the transaction is to be condemned, Shortland should answer for the whole; for what necessity could there be made to attempt identifying any of the soldiers? Surely the commissioners could not think of bringing them to punishment, as they acted by the direct orders of Shortland and his officers!—and if any one could or ought to be made to answer for the outrage, it should be Shortland.
In addition to the contradictions contained in the commissioners' joint report, Mr. King, in his letter to his excellency J. Q. Adams, almost denies the ground on which they have, in part, founded Shortland's justification, when he says (alluding to have heard several Americansswear, positively, that Shortland did give the order to fire, and an officer of the guardthinkingthat he did not, as he should have heard him) "perhaps the bias of my mind was, that Shortland did give that order; and wishing the report to go forth under our joint signatures, I forbore to press some of the points so far as otherwise IMIGHThave done."
If, then, any part has been neglected, or passed over for accommodation, or any other purpose (and one there certainly has, in not paying the same attention to the American as was done to the English evidence) it is to be regretted that Mr. King should so far forget the sacred duties attached to the appointment of a commissioner to enquire into the murder of his countrymen, as to pass over any points which might have brought to light the means of punishment for the murder, or obtained in some measure an indemnity for the surviving unhappy sufferers.
Will not the shades of the departed victims haunt him in his midnight slumbers, and, pointing to their lacerated bodies, say, these still remain unavenged? Will not the unhappy survivors show the stumps of their amputated limbs, and say, these wounds fester, and still remain unatoned? Will not the widow and the helpless orphan raise their innocent hands to heaven, and cry, why was justice denied us? Why was the heart so callous to our sufferings? And why was the bosom shut to sympathy? Let Mr. King point out some means to appease these bitter complaints, and we shall be satisfied.
We shall now close these unpleasant remarks, by noticing another unaccountable error in Mr. King's letter to Mr. Adams, where he mentions, speaking of Shortland, "and his general conduct, previous to this occurrence, as far as I could with propriety enter into such details, appears to have been characterized with great fairness, and even kindness, in the relation in which he stood towards the prisoners."—We shall not pretend to ask Mr. King where he obtained the evidence on which he grounds this assertion; we are sure it was not from the prisoners, who ought to have been the best judges of that circumstance; but, instead of all that, all the Americans who were permitted to express an opinion on that subject, at the examination, declared, without reserve, as would all the prisoners in the depot, had they been asked the question, that Shortland's conduct, from the commencement of his appointment to that station, had been cruel, oppressive, and overbearing; and, instead of taking measures to alleviate the distresses of the wretched objects under him, as a feeling man would have done, he seemed to take a pleasure in harrassing them whenever he could find the slightest pretext for so doing.
W. Colton,Joseph Swain,Arch'd Taylor,David Ingalls,Reuben Sherman,Arch'd I. Mackay,Philip Black,Homer Hall,James B. Mansfield,Abr'm M'Intire,Wm. Cochran,Henry Dolliver,John Jones,B. Weeks,Wm. Demerell,Thomas Ward,William K. White.