Naval History – Military History
Errors in Fact
And
Ltd Com Miller Worsley and Lt Com Newdigate Poyntz
Never spoke of Lt Col Robert McDouall
As the Military Recorded Events on Georgian Bay 1814
The Voyage of the Newfoundland Fencibles - Spring of 1814
According to Keith Bacon's paper below, Nine Mile Portage built in the middle of the 20 mile by 8 mile mosquito and Mississauga rattle snake infested Minesing Swamp and Willow creek became important to the British military efforts in 1813, after the loss of the Lake Erie fleet and control of that Lake required some form of access to Georgian Bay and their fort at Michillimackinac now Mackinaw Island, Michigan (*).
A party of soldiers from the Newfoundland Fencible Regiment, and “some sailors and naval artificers” (*), set out from Kingston in early 1814. Marching to York [Toronto along what is known as Kingston Road], they travelled up Yonge Street to the Holland Landing, [up the Holland River] across the ice on Lake Simcoe [into Iroquois Bay - Kempenfelt] and eight miles west into the woods, following the Nine Mile Portage.
Near the head of Willow Creek, the soldiers constructed 29 batteaux, loaded them with supplies and travelled down Willow Creek and the Nottawasaga River and through the ice of Georgian Bay to Michillimackinac.
Below is an account of that voyage, taken from the London Gazette [England] of August 1814.
COLONIAL DEPARTMENT.
Downing Street, August, 1814.
DISPATCHES, of which the following are an extract and copy, have been this day received from Lieutenaut-General Sir George Prevost, by Earl Bathurst, His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the War and Colonies.
Head-Quarters, Montreal, July 10, 1814
I HAVE the honour to report to your Lordship, the safe arrival at Michilimackinac on the 18th of May last, of Lieutenant-Colonel [Robert] M'Douall, with the whole of the reinforcements of troops and seamen, and of the supplies of stores and provisions with which he sailed from Nottawasaga River on the 25th April preceding. The difficulties experienced in conducting open and deeply laden batteaux, across so great an extent of water as Lake Huron, covered with immense fields of ice, and agitated by violent gales of wind, could only have been surmounted by the zeal, perseverance and abilities, of the officers commanding this expedition for nineteen days it was nearly one continued struggle with the elements, during which time the dangers, hardships and privations, to which the men were exposed, were sufficient to discourage the boldest amongst them, and at times threatened the total destruction of the flotilla. By uncommon exertions, however, the obstacles to the progress of the boats were surmounted, and the whole, with the exception of one only (the lading of which was saved), reached the place of their destination, to the great joy of the garrison, who had been anxiously looking out for this timely relief.
Measures were taken by Colonel M'Douall, immediately after his arrival, to strengthen the defences of the fort; and I have had the satisfaction of hearing from him as late as the .18th of June, that the works had assumed so formidable an attitude, as to leave him no apprehension of the result of any attack which, the enemy might make upon this post. Colonel M'Douall reports to me the arrival at the fort of nearly two hundred of the Western warriors, under Mr. [Robert] Dickson [North West Company fur trader and Indian Agent for the British during the War and buried on Drummond Island at the Fort Drummond cemetery]; a reinforcement which he considers highly important. He describes these Western warriors to be a warlike and determined race, on whom great reliance may be placed.
As the Royal Navy Recorded Events on Georgian Bay 1814
In reviewing history in general it is well worth noting that dispatches written by Royal naval officers rarely if ever mention the officers or names of British military officers as they left it up to the British military establishment to promote their “own causes”. So it comes as no surprise that dispatches written by military officers hardly ever mention the names of Royal naval officers and or their ships even if in some cases the ships were contracted to carry supplies for the military. What occurs are errors in judgement and geography and a sense of disproportion and guidance that is seen to this very day in terms of the general lack of co-operation between various services including those involved in security operations.
An interesting case in point involves four men who were involved with the Lake Huron squadron during the closing stages of the War of 1812 in 1814 during the war of 1812. The players here are of course Captain Alexander MacIntosh of Moy Hall and the NANCY based at Sandwich next to Fort Amherstburg [Windsor] and the NANCY’s ship’s Master Jacob Hammond and crew under the employ of the North West Company and the local British Indian Agent, Mr. Robert Dickson. These men through their allies from the Three Fires Confederacy [Ottawa-Ojibwa-Potawatani and Sauk] where in control of everything and had been since well before 1807.
Into this mix post the loss of the Lake Erie fleet under Commodore Barclay to Commodore Perry the previous year, all that was left of the Royal navy and military [both with their own list of bad and ineffective officers] west of Fort Henry in Kingston was the North West Company’s executive express schooner the very beautiful NANCY. [See previous Blogs]
The British navy now decided to bless the NANCY with a naval commission and call her HMS NANCY as she was the sole surviving vessel from the Lake Erie squadron and armed to the teeth. In fact her crew had trained with the Captain Dolsen’s rifle company with the baker Rifle – not the old Brown Bess. To this we now add the son of a well connected aristocrat from north London, one Lt. Com Newdigate Poyntz who arrived with the spring break-up of the ice on Georgian Bay in May of 1814 to take control of the now HMS NANCY and what formed the Lake Huron squadron. A certain self opinionated Lt Col Robert McDouall from the British military establishment had proceeded him by only a month. And his had no political or lordly connections. Needless to say they were instantly at odds with each other as to who or whom controlled what – when – and where.
Correspondence and the ship’s logs of the NANCY indicated that both men wanted the other replaced and as a result of volumes of correspondence between them and General Proctor, Lord James Yeo, Lord Drummond, Lord Halifax – Lt Col Robert McDouall was on his own and Lt Com Poyntz was seconded to Sir James Yeo staff in Kingston to be replaced by another scions son, one Lt Com Miller Worsley. He too had no real use for Lt McDouall.
If you read the correspondence as shown above the results can be clearly seen in what is not mentioned and who is left out in Lt. McDouall dispatches. In reading the dispatches of Lt Com’s Poyntz and Worsley that same can be said on the other side. That my friend is the “thrust of history”
This same military over naval dispatches is carried on even to day. In the later part of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century one military historian by the name of Breithaupt CE [which was ridiculed by journalist from the Toronto Evening Telegram as Breithaupt of the common error] repeated much of the erroneous information above perpetuating the dispatches of McDouall.
(*) The NANCY, now HMS NANCY and “her Batteaux” under the able command of both Alexander MacIntosh and Lt Com Poyntz carried most of the supplies to take the island fortress of Fort Mackinaw while the little wooden palisade of Fort Michilimaquinac on the mainland across from Fort Mackinaw was left to be taken by Lt Col McDouall with the Batteaux that they could scrounge up made by the “sailors and seamen and men of the North West Company” from the Upper Canada lake squadron on Lake Huron. Oh really.
(*) As for the major supply route from Lake Simcoe to the Georgian Bay - the British navy and the British army diverge. The military took the low road through the mosquito and Mississauga snake [poisonous rattle snake] infested Minesing swap and had to use it after the ice break-up in March and certainly before the middle of May or face the dreaded black fly season. This route had very limited uses and could not be used again until late fall. The Royal navy took the advice of the Ojibwa and went north to Lake Couchiching to the north and west and what is now the Severn River to “la chute” [the falls] at the juncture of Matchdash Bay and on into Georgian Bay. Only had to tranship their cargoes once past a 700 foot portage on this route and avoided the use of back-packing it through the eight mile swamp.
Even today, I leave it to the reader to chose which route he or she would take. Hence the NANCY’s main supply bases were at Saint Mary’s Falls to the north where we pick up the story of the NANCY last four months in here Log beginning with march 31, 1814 and ending on August 14, 1814. Lt. Com Miller Worsley only had command of HMS NANCY [actually HM Schooner NANCY] from the last days of July to August 14, 1814 and for two weeks after that of her crew as they made their way back to Fort Mackinaw in the Batteaux to retake it again; this time with MacIntosh and Worsley fully in control and McDouall pulling up the rear with his men equipped with the old Brown Bess Muskets. The NANCY crew were equipped with the very best courtesy of William MacGillivray of the North West Company – the Baker Rifle.
Just to make sure all is fair in love and war, we will not mention a certain fort lost long ago in the Minesing Swap and they will not mention the very beautiful and highly successful HMS NANCY and her War Log.
The NANCY is as important to Upper Canada [Ontario] and the rest of Canada as the Alamo is to Texas and hence to the United States. Ah - but do our history teachers teach this … I doubt it very much !
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
HMS NANCY - War of 1812 Bi-Centennial
HMS NANCY – War of 1812 Bi-Centennial
In writing Blogs one is always aware of its audience large or small and for marine history buffs I would dare to say that it is on the smallish side and rather unique. In terms of fund raising it is more unique still and when it comes to raising funds for the Bi-Centennial of the war of 1812 which is being celebrated from 2012 to the spring of 2015.
For larger corporations who donate in the five figure range there is a slightly different format than for those commercial enterprises businesses who donate in the four figure range that format is again different still from those who are small businesses who donate in the three figure range. For this grouping the tax write-off is essential but with the commercial tax rate in Canada being effectively 19% the incentive here is modest.
Beyond this group there is the unique corporation, usually a developer, who looks at it from the commercial advertising point of view and form an investment syndicate to underwrite the project from a commercial marketing purposes and this can revolve around a timing schedule rather than a tax schedule. In other words for them it is a direct cost of doing business. For the Nancy Project we luckily have a representative from each group.
The last threshold in terms of fund raising, and this is always asked by each group, and that is what is the government doing [read contributing] towards marine heritage here in Canada. The answer to that question is as expected – not much. For marine heritage other than say building a wharf or building there is some funding, but for anything that “floats” or might move, the answer is clearly no.
For the Nancy project, the Foundation did talk with the Trillium Foundation and because the NANCY floats, the answer is no support. Also we would have to have a history of raising funds on an annual basis equivalent to that which we would be seeking. For the Federal Government the answer is that same, the olde phrase –“whatever floats your boat” is clearly not working. While we did make a full Business Plan presentation and indicate our corporate support they still refused to answer even after a year and with the full support of the two major cities involved.
They, the Federal Ministry of Heritage did, after a year, refer us to a local group for the Bi-Centennial Committee who refused to support the project because they wanted a full listing of corporate supporters – which any Foundation would never do, and they took their lead from the Federal Government and didn’t like anything that floats – and the fact that we were a “private” Foundation, even though we have a heritage like none other, with our Directors and previous programs going back some 125 years. The local Committee was aghast that we would ask and that they were fully aware that we knew that they had 15 other museums with no relationship to the war of 1812 at all and were developing programs just so they could attract Federal funding. The Nancy be damned.
It didn’t help that the corporate developer, which has the Nancy’s syndicated funding, delayed their input for one year. Even more thrilling for the local group, for if the Nancy were to proceed, then it would be seen as the “elephant in the room” except in this case it would have been all of Simcoe County. The tourism impact would have been enormous; but “what the hey” as they say.
So then, what is next in terms of fund raising while we wait for one more river to cross before we get to Jordan as the olde camp song goes, or in our case cross from Jordan into Israel where our sponsor and their funding base is from.
So we develop our “QR code” and start a secondary funding program for what is called the “deck furniture” for the new Nancy and here it is:-
Subject: HMS NANCY Project – War of 1812 Bi-Centennial – 2012 to 2015
While most of the activity and Federal funding initiatives will be along the Niagara frontier there is one program which is essential to Simcoe County and that is of course the project to build a replica of the very famous 100’ HMS NANCY from the War of 1812. The events around the NANCY during the final year of the war in 1814 were essential to the British retaking strategic territory on Georgian Bay [Lake Huron] such that we were able to regain all southern Ontario taken by the Americans, even though all the Forts along the Niagara frontier were lost, and the boundary finally settled at the 49th parallel.
Since the crew of the NANCY and her allies later settled for the most part in Simcoe County, we believe that we should also be a focal part of the celebrations. While we anticipate a private corporate sponsor looking at the cost of the new ship next year, we are now looking a supplementary funding program to raise sufficient funds for her armaments - six new cannons at $5500 each along with twelve replica muskets-rifles at $750 each [two to a case] as well as her ships bell at $1100 and her two main admiralty anchors at $2300 each.
For this endeavour then, we, the NANCY-GRIFFON Foundation, Federally registered charity, asked for your financial support for this supplementary program for the replica of the NANCY, which will be based in Port McNicoll, the closest deepwater harbour to both Barrie and Orillia. Once finished she will sail around the Great Lakes representing the truly great heritage of Barrie - Simcoe County and southern Georgian Bay. For Cell phone users please scan the image below and visit our website for further information. Your financial support would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you very much.
Yours truly
Eric J. Macklin
Chairman
The NANCY Project
In writing Blogs one is always aware of its audience large or small and for marine history buffs I would dare to say that it is on the smallish side and rather unique. In terms of fund raising it is more unique still and when it comes to raising funds for the Bi-Centennial of the war of 1812 which is being celebrated from 2012 to the spring of 2015.
For larger corporations who donate in the five figure range there is a slightly different format than for those commercial enterprises businesses who donate in the four figure range that format is again different still from those who are small businesses who donate in the three figure range. For this grouping the tax write-off is essential but with the commercial tax rate in Canada being effectively 19% the incentive here is modest.
Beyond this group there is the unique corporation, usually a developer, who looks at it from the commercial advertising point of view and form an investment syndicate to underwrite the project from a commercial marketing purposes and this can revolve around a timing schedule rather than a tax schedule. In other words for them it is a direct cost of doing business. For the Nancy Project we luckily have a representative from each group.
The last threshold in terms of fund raising, and this is always asked by each group, and that is what is the government doing [read contributing] towards marine heritage here in Canada. The answer to that question is as expected – not much. For marine heritage other than say building a wharf or building there is some funding, but for anything that “floats” or might move, the answer is clearly no.
For the Nancy project, the Foundation did talk with the Trillium Foundation and because the NANCY floats, the answer is no support. Also we would have to have a history of raising funds on an annual basis equivalent to that which we would be seeking. For the Federal Government the answer is that same, the olde phrase –“whatever floats your boat” is clearly not working. While we did make a full Business Plan presentation and indicate our corporate support they still refused to answer even after a year and with the full support of the two major cities involved.
They, the Federal Ministry of Heritage did, after a year, refer us to a local group for the Bi-Centennial Committee who refused to support the project because they wanted a full listing of corporate supporters – which any Foundation would never do, and they took their lead from the Federal Government and didn’t like anything that floats – and the fact that we were a “private” Foundation, even though we have a heritage like none other, with our Directors and previous programs going back some 125 years. The local Committee was aghast that we would ask and that they were fully aware that we knew that they had 15 other museums with no relationship to the war of 1812 at all and were developing programs just so they could attract Federal funding. The Nancy be damned.
It didn’t help that the corporate developer, which has the Nancy’s syndicated funding, delayed their input for one year. Even more thrilling for the local group, for if the Nancy were to proceed, then it would be seen as the “elephant in the room” except in this case it would have been all of Simcoe County. The tourism impact would have been enormous; but “what the hey” as they say.
So then, what is next in terms of fund raising while we wait for one more river to cross before we get to Jordan as the olde camp song goes, or in our case cross from Jordan into Israel where our sponsor and their funding base is from.
So we develop our “QR code” and start a secondary funding program for what is called the “deck furniture” for the new Nancy and here it is:-
Subject: HMS NANCY Project – War of 1812 Bi-Centennial – 2012 to 2015
While most of the activity and Federal funding initiatives will be along the Niagara frontier there is one program which is essential to Simcoe County and that is of course the project to build a replica of the very famous 100’ HMS NANCY from the War of 1812. The events around the NANCY during the final year of the war in 1814 were essential to the British retaking strategic territory on Georgian Bay [Lake Huron] such that we were able to regain all southern Ontario taken by the Americans, even though all the Forts along the Niagara frontier were lost, and the boundary finally settled at the 49th parallel.
Since the crew of the NANCY and her allies later settled for the most part in Simcoe County, we believe that we should also be a focal part of the celebrations. While we anticipate a private corporate sponsor looking at the cost of the new ship next year, we are now looking a supplementary funding program to raise sufficient funds for her armaments - six new cannons at $5500 each along with twelve replica muskets-rifles at $750 each [two to a case] as well as her ships bell at $1100 and her two main admiralty anchors at $2300 each.
For this endeavour then, we, the NANCY-GRIFFON Foundation, Federally registered charity, asked for your financial support for this supplementary program for the replica of the NANCY, which will be based in Port McNicoll, the closest deepwater harbour to both Barrie and Orillia. Once finished she will sail around the Great Lakes representing the truly great heritage of Barrie - Simcoe County and southern Georgian Bay. For Cell phone users please scan the image below and visit our website for further information. Your financial support would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you very much.
Yours truly
Eric J. Macklin
Chairman
The NANCY Project
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
