FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148  
149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   >>   >|  
permanent lodgment; but in no case was the success at all commensurate with the expense of life and treasure sacrificed, and no permanent hold was made on either the maritime frontiers of France or her allies. This certainly was owing to no inferiority of skill and bravery on the part of the British navy, as the battles of Aboukir and Trafalgar, and the almost total annihilation of the French marine, have but too plainly proven. Why then did these places, escape? We know of no other reason, than that _they were fortified_; and that the French knew how to defend their fortifications. The British maritime expeditions to Quiberon, Holland, Boulogne, the Scheldt, Constantinople, Buenos Ayres, &c., sufficiently prove the ill-success, and the waste of life and treasure with which they must always be attended. But when her naval power was applied to the destruction of the enemy's marine, and in transporting her land forces to solid bases of operations on the soil of her allies, in Portugal and Belgium, the fall of Napoleon crowned the glory of their achievements. [Footnote 18: Only eighteen and a half miles across the Channel at the narrowest place.] Let us now examine the several British naval attacks on our own forts, in the wars of the Revolution and of 1812. In 1776 Sir Peter Parker, with a British fleet of nine vessels, carrying about two hundred and seventy[19] guns, attacked Fort Moultrie, in Charleston harbor, which was then armed with only twenty-six guns, and garrisoned by only three hundred and seventy-five regulars and a few militia. In this contest the British were entirely defeated, and lost, in killed and wounded, two hundred and five men, while their whole two hundred and seventy guns killed and wounded only thirty-two men in the fort. Of this trial of strength, which was certainly a fair one, Cooper in his Naval History, says:--"It goes fully to prove the important military position that ships cannot withstand forts, when the latter are properly armed, constructed, and garrisoned. General Moultrie says only thirty rounds from the battery were fired, and was of opinion that the want of powder alone prevented the Americans from destroying the men-of-war." [Footnote 19: These vessels _rated_ two hundred and fifty-four guns, but the number actually carried is stated to have been two hundred and seventy.] In 1814 a British fleet of four vessels, carrying ninety-two guns, attacked Fort Boyer, a small re
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148  
149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

British

 
hundred
 

seventy

 

vessels

 

wounded

 

killed

 
thirty
 
attacked
 

Moultrie

 
garrisoned

carrying

 

Footnote

 

maritime

 

permanent

 

success

 

allies

 

treasure

 

marine

 
French
 

commensurate


defeated

 

militia

 

expense

 

contest

 
strength
 

inferiority

 
Charleston
 

frontiers

 

France

 
harbor

Cooper

 

sacrificed

 

twenty

 

regulars

 

destroying

 

Americans

 
powder
 

prevented

 

number

 

ninety


carried

 

stated

 

opinion

 

important

 
military
 
position
 

Parker

 

History

 
General
 

rounds