Invasion of Canada: the American Revolution - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Early modern era & beginning of the modern era. Exploration, enlightenment, industrialisation, colonisation & empire (1492 - 1914 CE).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#499837
In the early spring of 1776 Congress had appointed Dr. Franklin, Samuel Chase, and Charles Carroll a board of commissioners invested with full authority to proceed to Canada and direct military affairs there; to promise a guaranty of the estates to the clergy; to establish a free press; to offer the Canadians free trade with all nations; to invite them to form a free and independent government for themselves, and to join the confederated colonies. The commissioners arrived at Montreal, where Arnold was in command, at the close of April. They were too late. A general impression prevailed there that the American army would soon be driven out of the province, for reinforcements for Carleton were on their way. Without an army, without hard money, and without credit, the commissioners could not ask the Canadians to join them. They perceived that the main objects of their mission could not be obtained, and it was determined to withdraw the troops to St. Johns, and there to fortify and reinforce them, so that they might be an impassable barrier to an army that might attempt to penetrate the country below.

General Thomas arrived at Quebec on the first of May. He found there nineteen hundred troops, one-half of whom were sick with the small-pox and other diseases. They had, in the magazine, only one hundred and fifty pounds of powder. Some of the troops were clamorous for a discharge, for their term of enlistment had expired. This inauspicious state of affairs caused Thomas to prepare for a retreat toward Montreal. While he was making ready for the movement, British ships arrived at Quebec with troops, when a thousand men of the garrison, with six cannon, sallied out and attacked the Americans, who fled in their weakness far up the St. Lawrence, to the mouth of the Sorel. A fortnight after this retreat, Captain Foster, with some British regulars and Canadians, and about five hundred Indians under Brant, the celebrated Mohawk chief, came down the river from Oswegatchie (now Ogdensburg) and captured a small garrison at the Cedars Rapids, not far above Montreal. They were a part of Colonel Bedel's New Hampshire regiment. The colonel was sick at Lachine, and his major (Butterfield), terrified by a threat made by Forster, surrendered without fighting. Arnold went out to attack the captors, but to prevent the prisoners being murdered by the Indians, he consented to a compromise for an exchange.

While the enemy was thus pressing upon Montreal from the river, word came from below that General Thomas was sick with the small-pox. He died on the 2nd of June, when the command devolved on General Sullivan, who felt sure that in the course of a few days he would "reduce the army to order," and "put a new face on affairs" there. To Washington he wrote: "I am determined to hold the most important posts as long as one stone is left upon another." But Sullivan did not know that British and German troops, under Generals Burgoyne and Riedesel, were then landing at Quebec, and so putting the republican army in Canada in a position of great, peril. By the arrival of these reinforcements, Governor Carleton found himself in command of about thirteen thousand soldiers, most of them thoroughly equipped for war. Some of the vessels, with troops, were sent directly up the river, and assisted in repelling an attack upon a British post at Three Rivers by a force under General Thompson, composed of Pennsylvania troops commanded respectively by Colonels St. Clair, Wayne, and Irvine. Thompson was badly beaten, and he and Irvine, with one hundred and fifty private soldiers, were made prisoners.

This disaster was discouraging to Sullivan. It was immediately followed by the startling news of an overwhelming military force coming up the river by land and water. Sullivan was compelled to retreat up the Sorel, carrying most of his boats and his cannon around the rapids at Chambly. He pressed on to St. Johns. Arnold, who seeing approaching danger had abandoned Montreal without waiting for orders, had joined him near Chambly, and on the 17th of June the remainder of the invading army were all at that post which Montgomery had captured when he entered Canada about seven months before. The fugitive troops were in a most pitiable condition. Nearly one-half of them were sick, and all of them were half-clad, and scantily fed with salt meat and hard bread. "At the sight of so much privation and distress," wrote Dr. Stringer, the medical director, "I wept till I had no more power to weep." The force was too weak to make a successful stand at St. Johns against the great army of Burgoyne that were slowly pursuing, and they continued their flight to Crown Point, in open boats without awnings (for they could get none), exposing the sick to the fiery sun and the drenching rain.

Terrible were the scenes at Crown Point after the fragments of the army were gathered there. More than thirty victims of disease were buried daily, for awhile. Every spot and every thing seemed to be infected with pestilence. For a short time the troops were poorly housed, half-naked, and inadequately fed; their daily rations being raw salt pork, hard bread, and unbaked flour. Five thousand men were there. During two months the Northern Army had lost by desertion and sickness full five thousand soldiers. So ended in disaster the remarkable invasion--one of the boldest ever undertaken, all things considered.

Source[/url]
By Un Owen
#499905
What exactly did they expect to get from this action?

The majority of citizens of what came too be known as British North America had already voiced their opinions concerning the colonialists’ ambitions with the Quebec Act. If they had succeeded they would have been an occupying force and not the great liberator as they wished to be seen. Many of the leading military officers of the Colonial Army took part in the conquest of New France in 1758, I cannot see them now being hailed as great liberators twenty years later.

to promise a guaranty of the estates to the clergy

Already guaranteed by the Quebec Act and I doubt the colonialists would have given the Catholic population of Canada the full religious rights they enjoyed under British rule. The Colonialists, for the majority, adamantly feared Catholicism; just as their descendants would continue too long into the later years of the 19th century and even today.

to offer the Canadians free trade with all nations

It was true Mercantilism was harming the economies of the British colonies, but I cannot see this as being enough of a reason to garner their support for a war against Britain. The British born citizens would have been loyal to Britain and the Francophone population would have seen the Quebec Act as having guaranteed more freedoms then anything the Colonists could, or did, offer.

to invite them to form a free and independent government for themselves, and to join the confederated colonies.

I honestly find this a little funny. They are encouraged to former a free and independent government, but then they are invited to join the colonies in their new government. What do you think would have happened if they refused to join this colonial confederation? The War of 1812 would have just been between a Canadian state and the USA; this time the USA would have actually won as we would not have had the might of the British Army and Navy to save us from annexation and manifest Destiny.
By Un Owen
#499911
Blackbeard wrote:
A really good movie to rent is " the last of the mohicans " .


This film was about the Seven Years War and not the American War of Independence.
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#499941
Many don't seem to understand how close Quebec came to being the 14th Colony.

During Montgomery & Arnold's initial attack on the city, all of the French-speaking people of the city laid down their arms and allowed the Americans to continue on, leaving the British to fend for themselves. 100 yards a two pieces of shrapnel kept Quebec from falling.
The attack on Quebec occured in the middle of a blinding snowstorm, taking the British by surprise but also confusing the Continentals. The Americans were withing 100 yards of the center of the city, and its central defenses, the British general contemplated surrender! However, he ordered that one last cannon volley be fired, the first cannon sent shrapnel flying into the oncoming Americans, wounding Arnold and killing Montgomery. The Americans were imediately thrown into confussion and fled.

100 yards and two pieces of metal were all that separated Quebec from being the 14th Colony.
By blackbeard
#506624
No your right but it has some of the best cinemetography of what it must have been like fighting in the colonial days .
User avatar
By TROI
#506670
all of the French-speaking people of the city laid down their arms


Ahem.
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#506725
TROI wrote:Ahem.


Well maybe it wasn't the whole French Citizenry. It was late at night and I know for a fact that the French militiamen threw down their arms and cheered the Americans. (The French were drunk)
By Deicidus
#507079
We cheered no one. Neither side was going to give us anything. We refused to fight for americans, who understood nothing about the french, catholicism and the ``Segneuries`` concept. And we refused to be used as cannon fodder for the british, wich we were for their imperial wars for the next 200 years. If you look at real historian books, you'd see that, when continental troops arrived, the streets were empty. French militias were not permitted, unless with special oders from the lieutenant-governor, as the results of french militias bearing arms was seen in 1837.
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#507255
From what I've read, the French-Canadians were somewhat indifferent. They did not particularly like the Americans, but they hated the British. Hence the lack of French resistance when the Continental Army arrived.

EDIT: Also, the Continental Congress, was willing to give the French in Canada "something" if you will. If you read ZK's article, Congress sent Benjamin Franklin (the most famous American at the time) and Charles Carroll (a Catholic) to talk to the French to convice them to make Quebec the 14th Colony.
By Deicidus
#507909
Promises of politicians. The clergy was already sleeping in the governor's bed by then. threatening reprecussions against those who wanted to oppose the british authorities. ``Submit, all authority comes from god. Peace, peace, nothing is more important than peace....`` While we had peace, they had the money, the land and the power alltogether.

Yeah, be a minority in the british empire or a minority in the american colonies. Wooooo, very tempting. Americans proved their disloyalty toward the french-canadians when american officials agreed to give arms to the insurgency of 1837-1839, and then denounced us to the british authorities, pointing out every drop points along the border, arresting every insurgent that tried to get across the border after the revolution failed and sending them back into british hands to be deported, emprisonned and hanged. Americans prefered to deal with the british goverment than with the new democracy the Patriotes wanted to create.

If the americans proposed their deal sooner, we might have had joined the revolution. But everything they offered us had already been granted by the british in the Quebec act in 1774, by fear of the french rising up in the north and coming down on two fronts with the continental army from the south. We had people who were shooting at us and then asking for our participation in their goals ``as if we were friends`` on one side, and opressors who were playing the generosity card every 50 years to appear to be ``not so bad after all``. We choosed neither.

We still had the sour taste of defeat in our mind, with the memories of red coats all over the place, burning and raping as they went. And then, americans wanted us to sympathyse with their revolution, claiming to be opressed by the LOndon. Like they know what opression is.
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#508125
And the French Canadians knew what oppression was? You said yourself that the British gave Quebec basically everything it wanted in 1774.

The same act that granted Quebec religious toleration and other concessions established military rule in Massachusetts, closed the port of Boston, forbid town meetings in all of New England, dissolved the Massachusetts legislature indeffinitely, and all judges were to be appointed by the Governor, as opposed to popular election as it had been.

Meanwhile, the Governor of Virginia threatened all who opposed the crown with death or banishment, attempted to confiscate the weapons of the Virginia Militia, and then when forced to leave Virginia a year later, burned the city of Norfolk.

I don't know particularly much about the 1837-1839 revolt, so I will plead ignorance there and stick to the Revolution.

I agree with you, however, that poor timing and poor luck damaged Congress's Commission to Canada. By the time Franklin, Chase, and Carroll reached Montreal, the Continetal Army had been defeated at Quebec and the British were forming a counter-attack. So, to the French, the American victories in Canada up to that time seemed like a flash in the pan.
By Deicidus
#508720
I never said they gave us what we wanted. I said they gave us what the americans wanted to propose us.

And yes, we know what oppression is. Seems that the 1837 revolt is not the only thing you dont know about.

-The deportation of acadians. Among those deported in 1758 from Charlottetown, we know, for example, that about 700 were drowned at sea in the ships, the Duke William and the Violet. In Virginia, the Acadians were not allowed to disembark; months later, 1,500 exiles were sent to internment camps in jolly England in the ports of Bristol, Portsmouth, Liverpool. Southampton, Falmouth and Penh. In the State of Massachusetts (including Maine), the Acadians were never allowed off the ships that brought them and 1,500 exiles died of smallpox. In Connecticut, 750 exiles were dispersed among 50 townships where their movements were restricted. In New York, of the 340 exiles, a third were sold as indenture servants, the rest restricted to nearby coastal islands. In Pennsylvania, many of the 450 exiles were imprisoned for not giving up their children to English-speaking families.In Maryland, laws were passed to restrict the freedoms of 900 exiles. In North Carolina, 230 exiles escaped en route. In South Carolina, 940 exiles fled to the interior. Some returned to Acadia to fight guerrilla warfare against the English. In Georgia, 900 exiles died escaping in open boats and 200 were sold as indentured servants.

And that is only one thing, that happenned even before the conquest of the rest of New-France. Try a little reading, try finding out what 250 years of rape and murder does to people. Families of political protestors were throwed out of their homes that was then burned to the ground, oftenly in the middle of winter. Neighbors who agreed to shelter them exposed themselves to the same treatement, or even worse in some cases. French-speakers of Montreal were reguraly beaten and killed by drunken brits or uniformed soldiers. Receiving no protection whatshoever from the authorities. We fled the cities. We retreated to be farmers or cheap labor for english companies. Our revolts were crushed in 1837, 1879, 1917, 1942, 1960-1970.

Ever been spiten in your face for only reason of the language you're speaking ?
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#509012
Ah, forgive me ( :knife: ), I actually do remember the Acadian Diaspora. I read a book about it, and as a matter of fact, a great deal of the Acadians settled in Baltimore, Maryland, if I'm not mistaken.

From what I recall, the Acadians were simple farm people, living in what is now New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The British were impatient and intlolerant of the Acadians and acted unwisely against them. What they did was horrible.

It is a shame, and much of the blame is relegated to the British and probably influenced the revolution. Although oppression may not have been as wide throught out the 13 colonies before 1774, I suppose that the founders were influenced by the repression being exercised by Great Britian in not just Acadia but also in Ireland, Scotland and elsewhere in the empire.
User avatar
By Captain Hat
#510468
Wait, what does this have to do with the negotiations between Congress and the French in 1776? Much less with the Acadia dispersal?

The two posts you just made were incoherent rants.
World War II Day by Day

May 22, Wednesday Bletchley Park breaks Luftwaf[…]

You might be surprised and he might wind up being[…]

He may have gotten a lot more votes than Genocide[…]