Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
January 19, 1782
The New Hampshire Gazette And General Advertiser
Portsmouth, Exeter, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
What is this article about?
Editorial from Pennsylvania Packet harshly critiques Lord Cornwallis's competence as a general, soldier, politician, and gentleman after the British surrender at Yorktown, highlighting his strategic errors and praising American magnanimity.
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
From the Pennsylvania Packet.
AFTER so attentive perusal of Lord Cornwallis's letter to Sir Henry Clinton, containing the account of the reduction of his posts army in Virginia, I think the following observations are equally just and natural.
I. That his Lordship is no General-- This is evident, 1. From the nature of the posts he occupied. 2. From the structure of his works. 3. From his presuming it practicable to escape to New York by land. 4. From his neglecting to obtain earlier intelligence of the approach of General Washington at the head of the allied army.
II. His Lordship is no Soldier,--This is evident. 1: From his neglecting to attack the Marquis la Fayette and the French troops, before the arrival of General Washington. 2. From his evacuating his out posts at the approach of the French grenadiers. 3. From his not daring to make a sortie, by which means he might have injured our works, and protracted the siege for several weeks.
III. His Lordship is no Politician.- This is evident, 1. From his neglecting to take notice of the conduct of the German troops during the siege. This impolitic omission will probably be resented by large and immediate desertions from the German corps, who are now in captivity among us. 2. From his account of the strength of the American army. The powers of Europe must soon see the impossibility of conquering America, when they perceive from Lord Cornwallis's letter, that only one of our armies consisted, after a war of near six years, of 8000 regulars, & 20000 militia men.
IV. His Lordship is no GENTLEMAN.- This is evident from his ungrateful silence as to the noble and generous conduct of General Washington and the American officers to him and his army after the capitulation. The magnanimity, humanity, and politeness of the Commander in Chief of the American armies, would have extorted expressions of gratitude and respect from an Indian savage, a Tartar, or a Turk. A British General and an English nobleman is the only human being that could have treated such superlative virtue with such sullen disrespect.
AFTER so attentive perusal of Lord Cornwallis's letter to Sir Henry Clinton, containing the account of the reduction of his posts army in Virginia, I think the following observations are equally just and natural.
I. That his Lordship is no General-- This is evident, 1. From the nature of the posts he occupied. 2. From the structure of his works. 3. From his presuming it practicable to escape to New York by land. 4. From his neglecting to obtain earlier intelligence of the approach of General Washington at the head of the allied army.
II. His Lordship is no Soldier,--This is evident. 1: From his neglecting to attack the Marquis la Fayette and the French troops, before the arrival of General Washington. 2. From his evacuating his out posts at the approach of the French grenadiers. 3. From his not daring to make a sortie, by which means he might have injured our works, and protracted the siege for several weeks.
III. His Lordship is no Politician.- This is evident, 1. From his neglecting to take notice of the conduct of the German troops during the siege. This impolitic omission will probably be resented by large and immediate desertions from the German corps, who are now in captivity among us. 2. From his account of the strength of the American army. The powers of Europe must soon see the impossibility of conquering America, when they perceive from Lord Cornwallis's letter, that only one of our armies consisted, after a war of near six years, of 8000 regulars, & 20000 militia men.
IV. His Lordship is no GENTLEMAN.- This is evident from his ungrateful silence as to the noble and generous conduct of General Washington and the American officers to him and his army after the capitulation. The magnanimity, humanity, and politeness of the Commander in Chief of the American armies, would have extorted expressions of gratitude and respect from an Indian savage, a Tartar, or a Turk. A British General and an English nobleman is the only human being that could have treated such superlative virtue with such sullen disrespect.
What sub-type of article is it?
War Or Peace
Military Affairs
Satire
What keywords are associated?
Yorktown Surrender
Cornwallis Critique
British Incompetence
American Victory
Allied Army
Military Strategy
What entities or persons were involved?
Lord Cornwallis
Sir Henry Clinton
General Washington
Marquis De Lafayette
French Troops
American Army
German Troops
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Critique Of Lord Cornwallis After Yorktown Surrender
Stance / Tone
Mocking And Critical Of British Leadership, Praising American Conduct
Key Figures
Lord Cornwallis
Sir Henry Clinton
General Washington
Marquis De Lafayette
French Troops
American Army
German Troops
Key Arguments
Cornwallis's Poor Choice Of Defensive Positions And Works
Failure To Escape Or Detect Approaching Allied Forces
Neglect To Attack Lafayette And French Before Washington's Arrival
Evacuation Of Outposts And Avoidance Of Sorties
Omission Regarding German Troops' Conduct, Risking Desertions
Underestimation Of American Army Strength In His Report
Ungrateful Silence On Washington's Generous Treatment Post Surrender