In order to show American readers in what fashion British historians have handled the stories of the actions in which British seamen were badly defeated by the Yankees, the entire report which Allen wrote of this affair is here given verbatim:
“On the 26th of September, a squadron, consisting of the 74-gun ship Plantagenet, Captain Robert Lloyd; 38-gun frigate Rota, Captain Philip Somerville; and 18-gun brig Carnation, Commander George Bentham, cruising off the Western Islands, discovered at anchor in Fayal Roads the American schooner privateer General Armstrong, Captain Camplin, of seven guns and ninety men. The neutrality of the port having been violated by the American captain in firing on a boat from the Plantagenet, by which two men were killed and two wounded, Captain Lloyd determined to attempt the capture of the privateer by the boats of the squadron. At 8 h. P.M. the Plantagenet and Rota anchored off Fayal Road, and at 9 h. seven boats from the two ships, containing one hundred and eighty men, under the orders of Lieutenant William Matterface of the Rota, departed on this service. At midnight, after a fatiguing pull, the boats arrived within hail, when they received from the schooner, and from a battery erected with some of her guns on a point of land, a heavy fire of cannon and musketry. Two of the boats were sunk, and more than half the men that had been sent away in them killed or wounded. The remainder returned, and about 2 h. A.M. on the 27th reached the Rota. The Rota’s first and third lieutenants (Matterface and Charles R. Norman), one midshipman, and thirty-one seamen and marines were killed; and her second lieutenant, Richard Rawle, Lieutenant of Marines Thomas Park, —— Bridgeman (acting) purser, two midshipmen, and eighty-one men wounded. Soon after daylight the Carnation stood into the roads to attack the privateer; but the Americans set fire to and destroyed her.”
A careful examination of this report will be found most interesting.
First of all let the reader observe that the American consul in his official report says that the captain of the Rota admitted a loss of seventy from that one ship. But Allen says that the Rota’s loss was thirty-four killed and eighty-five wounded—in all one hundred and nineteen.
This is important because it proves that Consul Dabney in his report of the British losses understated at least the loss of the Rota; it proves that he was entirely candid and fair in his report. He truthfully reported what the British officers told him. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that when he says the British officers admitted to him that they had lost one hundred and twenty of their best men, he also tells the truth. It is not unreasonable to suppose further that these British officers understated the facts, as did the captain of the Rota when talking to him.
Let us now consider the number of boats attacking the little schooner. Dabney says that twelve large boats “crowded with men” came at the schooner. Observe that this is a statement by a spectator whose candor is proved by the enemy’s historian, and then read Allen’s report which says that “the Plantagenet and Rota anchored off Fayal Road, and at 9 h. seven boats from the two ships, containing one hundred and eighty men,” were sent. He says “Captain Lloyd determined to attempt the capture of the privateer by the boats of the squadron,” and then he omits saying whether boats were sent from the Carnation, and leaves the reader to infer that none was sent from her. Will a fair-minded student accept Consul Dabney’s count of twelve boats or will he do as Allen would have him do—will he believe that after Lloyd determined to attack with “the boats of the squadron” only the seven boats from the two ships and no more were sent? Is this unfairly accusing Allen of lack of candor? If anyone thinks it is unfair, let him note further that Allen gives in detail the losses among the Rota’s crew and does not say a word—not one word—about losses on the boats from the Plantagenet.
There were “seven boats from the two ships.” The one was a line-of-battle-ship and the other a frigate. Would not the larger ship send more boats than the smaller one? But grant that the larger ship sent three and the smaller one four, what was the loss on the Plantagenet? Were the Plantagenet’s men cowards that they did not fight and get hurt? Certainly the loss on the Plantagenet was as great in proportion to the number of men engaged as on the Rota. Captain Reid of the Armstrong says that he learned from a lieutenant belonging to the Plantagenet, that all but four men were killed in one of the Plantagenet’s boats under the Armstrong’s quarter. Shall we believe this explicit statement or must we infer, because Allen says nothing about any loss on the Plantagenet, that there really was no loss there? And in connection with this let the reader note once more that no boat from the Carnation is mentioned by Allen and that no loss among her crew is recorded by him.
And then consider once more that one hundred and nineteen were killed and wounded on the Rota’s boats. How many men were there in each of her boats that she should have lost that number of killed and wounded in four? These boats carried carronades. By referring to the accounts of other battles of the kind (that at Craney’s Island, for instance, where James himself admits that there were seven hundred men in fifteen boats, or forty-six to the boat) we learn that an ordinary ship’s cutter would carry at least twenty-five men, and a long-boat or launch anywhere from forty men up to sixty or more. Recalling now that the Americans credit two of the Rota’s boats with seventeen men escaping ashore by swimming, it is fair to suppose that part of them were unhurt. And if she had four boats to the Plantagenet’s three, part of each of her other two also escaped. In short, if she lost one hundred and nineteen it is fair to suppose that twenty-one escaped unhurt—it is fair to suppose that she averaged at the very least thirty-five men to the boat. The candid Dabney says the boats were crowded with men. We are at liberty, in view of these facts, to doubt Allen’s statement that only one hundred and eighty men were in the seven boats. Because he omits to tell the loss of the Plantagenet, and because he deliberately omits to tell how many men the Carnation had in the fight as well as how many she lost, we are compelled to believe that Allen deliberately understated the number of men in the boats he admits were sent. In short there is every good reason for supposing that when Consul Dabney wrote that “near four hundred men were in the boats when the attack commenced,” he was not only entirely sincere but reasonably accurate. If there were but thirty men to the boat there were three hundred and sixty in the entire flotilla of twelve, and that is “near four hundred.” Let any reader look up the stories of boat actions and then say whether even thirty-five is too large an estimate for the average number of men in a boat’s crew.
Allen says that the “neutrality of the port having been violated by the American captain in firing on a boat from the Plantagenet,” an attack was planned. The consul says Reid fired only when four boats dashed at the Yankee schooner. In view of the omissions in the British account we would be justified in believing the candid consul rather than Allen, but here, fortunately, we have the testimony of the enemy to prove that they were the aggressors, for not only did the British admit to the Portuguese that the British ships had violated the neutrality of Fayal; they made an ample apology and they paid for damages done.
To complete the story of the Armstrong it must be told that after the British were beaten off the Americans remained on guard. They had lost but two killed and seven wounded, and although a few had fled on shore there were enough left to meet another attack of the kind repelled. At 3 o’clock in the morning of the 27th Captain Reid was called ashore by Consul Dabney, and there he learned that the Portuguese Governor had sent a note to Captain Lloyd begging that hostilities cease, but Lloyd had replied that he was determined to have the privateer at the risk of knocking down the whole town.