Review of Sir Henry Clinton's "Narrative"

AMERICAN WAR.

Art. 29. Narrative of Lieutenant General Sir Henry Clinton, K.B. relative to his Conduct during Part of his Command of the King's Troops in North America, particularly that which respects the unfortunate Issue of the Campaign in 1781. With an Appendix, containing Copies and Extracts of those Parts of his Correspondence with Lord George Germain, Earl Cornwallis, Rear Admiral Graves, &c. which are referred to therein. 8vo. 2s. Debrett.

It had been happy for this country [we are to write now in the preterpluperfect tense], that the conduct of our commanders had been so clear and decisive as to save them the trouble of penning narratives and defences. Ill success is the parent of accusation, exculpation, and recrimination; and in this detail Sir Henry Clinton acquits himself of all share in Lord Cornwallis's misfortune; leaving that general to answer for misconceptions of the orders sent him, and for the choice of the post which he was reduced to surrender. A counter representation may probably follow from the other side; and such is all the satisfaction we have, and are likely to have, for the loss of America!

[Source: Monthly Review, Jan 1783, p88-89.]

Review of "A Reply to Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative"

AMERICAN.

Art. 31: A Reply to Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative. Wherein his numerous Errors are pointed out, and the Conduct of Lord Cornwallis fully vindicated from all Aspersion: including the whole of the Public and Secret Correspondence between Lord George Germaine, Sir Henry Clinton, and his Lordship; as also intercepted Letters from George Washington. 8vo. 2s. Faulder, &c. 1783.

In this anonymous reply, Lord Cornwallis is vindicated from the misconception of orders, and discretionary conduct, stated in Sir Henry Clinton's narrative; and Sir Henry is charged with holding out delusive promises of succour to his Lordship. It is not always easy, after reading both sides, in such complicated transactions, clearly to determine where the blame rests; but it is easy to see who is best acquainted with decency; and we cannot avoid remarking, that Sir H.C. relates his story in a plain modest stile, that gives dignity to his narrative: whereas, every page in this reply is debased with such illiberal epithets and sarcastic turns of expression, as (whatever may be the concealed writer's intentions) are very far from doing any service to the cause he has undertaken.

Lord C.'s own defence of himself in our next.

[Source: Monthly Review, February 1783, p183.]

Review of Cornwallis's reply to Clinton

AMERICAN.

Art. 22. An Answer to that Part of the Narrative of Lieutenant-General Sir Henry Clinton, K.B. which relates to the Conduct of Lieutenant-General Earl Cornwallis, during the Campaign in North America, in the Year 1781. By Earl Cornwallis. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Debrett.

From the tendency of Sir Henry Clinton's relation of facts, the appearance of an exculpatory state of transactions was naturally to be expected; the claim of which to the public attention, is now, alas! merely on private considerations, that characters may, if possible, be fairly estimated. This answer consists of a chain of correspondence between the two Commanders, during the campaign referred to; which, as Lord Cornwallis has summed up the whole in his Introduction, is to shew, 'that our failure in North Carolina, was not occasioned by our want of force to protect the rising of our friends, but by their timidity, and unwillingness to take an active and useful part, -- that the move to Wilmington was rendered necessary from the distress of the troops, and the sufferings of the numerous sick and wounded, -- that the march into Virginia was undertaken for urgent reasons, which could not admit of my waiting for the approbation of the Commander in Chief, -- that I did not establish the station in Virginia, but only reinforce it, -- that I occupied the posts of York and Gloucester by order; and was induced to remain in them by the prospect of relief, uniformly held out to me by the Commander in Chief, -- and that, during the considerable interval between my arrival at Petersburgh, and that of the French fleet in the Chesapeak, my corps was completely in the disposal of Sir Henry Clinton, either to be withdrawn, or employed in the Upper Chesapeak, or sent back to the Carolinas, -- and consequently, that my conduct and opinions were not the cause of the catastrophe which terminated the unfortunate campaign of 1781.

So far from pretending to decide on the complicated circumstances of difference between these noble Commanders, we shall leave them to the judgment of their military Peers, with only this remark; that the vicissitudes attending the joint operation of detached armies, will frequently furnish occasions for ill-humour, that would never have discomposed their minds had their endeavours been crowned with success.

[Source: Monthly Review; March, 1783, pp266-267.]

Observations on Some Parts of the Answer of Earl Cornwallis

AMERICA.

Art. 42. Observations on Some Parts of the Answer of Earl Cornwallis to Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative. By Lieutenant General Sir Henry Clinton, K.B. To which is added, an Appendix; containing Extracts of Letters and other Papers, to which Reference is necessary. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Debrett.

After much rejoinder, about the times of sending orders, receiving dispatches, producing and withholding letters, &c. which the parties concerned will understand much better than any of our readers; Sir Henry Clinton repeats that Lord Cornwallis misconceived his orders and his intentions¹; that 'it will appear from the correspondence, that his Lordship's discretionary powers were unlimited from the first moment of his taking charge of a separate command: and it will, I believe, be admitted, that his lordship acted in most cases as if he considered them as such².' Upon this ground, Sir Henry declares, 'I will frankly own that I ever disapproved of an attempt to conquer Virginia, before the Carolinas were absolutely restored. However, when I saw that Lord Cornwallis had forced himself upon me in that province, I left him at liberty to act there as he judged best³.' He closes these observations with the following paragraph: 'I shall now beg leave to conclude with an opinion, which I presume is deducible from the foregoing (I trust candid) review of circumstances; which is, that Lord Cornwallis's conduct and opinions, if they were not the immediate causes, may be adjudged to have at least contributed to bring on the fatal catastrophe which terminated the unfortunate campaign of 1781⁴.'

It is to be hoped, an altercation, from which the Public have nothing to hope, will not be any longer continued.

[Source: Monthly Review, April, 1783, pp362-363.]

Notes:

¹ P. 24. [ back ]

² P. 32. [ back ]

³ P. 16. [ back ]

⁴ P. 34. [ back ]