Troublous Times in Canada, John A. MacDonald [surface ebook reader TXT] 📗

was on the point of cutting off his command by an overwhelming force, the dispositions of his party and the orders given by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis were carried out and given in a perfectly collected and regular manner, and that on the retreat of his force his position was not such as to warrant the use of the language in which this charge has been framed, nor did Lieut.-Colonel Dennis, as alleged, leave his force without orders, and that therefore not only is this charge not sustained, but this Court are further of opinion that the imputation contained herein against Lieut.-Colonel Dennis is by no means supported by the evidence.

As to the 5th Charge.-That as to this charge nothing which has transpired in the evidence offered before this Court having varied the report made by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis to Colonel Lowry, the officer commanding on the Niagara frontier, as published in the Gazette of the 23rd of June last, and finding that the statements therein contained are fully supported by evidence before the Court, this Court are further of opinion that this charge is not sustained.

As to the 6th Charge.-That with reference to the allegation of misconduct on the part of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis contained in this charge, the officers preferring it, having based that assertion on an opinion which they appear to have formed as to the course which ought to have been, but was not adopted by Lieut.-Colonel Dennis with the force at his disposal, the Court are of opinion that although subsequent events and results may have properly led to the conclusion that such a course might have resulted in the manner alleged in the charge, no charge of misconduct in not adopting such a course is sustained, first, because it does not appear from the evidence that at the time when it is alleged that this course might have been successfully adopted, the officer in command had foreseen occasion for it. And also because it is by no means clear to the Court that there was time after he became aware of the vicinity of the enemy to have taken the steps suggested in this charge.

(Signed) GEO. T. DENISON,
Colonel, President.

J. SHANLY,
Lieut.-Colonel.

S. B. FAIRBANKS,
Lieut.-Colonel.

Fort Erie. 8th November, 1866.


Colonel Denison, the President, having been overruled by the majority of the Court, has signed the proceedings as its President, and now desires to express his dissent from the finding of the majority for the following reasons:-

Second Charge.-That as to the first allegation, "that he had received information that a large and overwhelming force of the enemy was within a very short distance from his command, and that his command was in danger of being captured," it appears to be proved by the evidence that this fact is established. The evidence of Drill Instructor McCracken, Lieutenant McDonald, Henry Cole, Thomas Carlisle, Lieutenant Nimmo, and of Lewis Palmer, show clearly that messenger after messenger arrived with this information, that most of the officers and men were aware of it, and that the remonstrances of Capt King and Capt. McCallum show not only their appreciation of the danger, but also afford the strongest presumption that Lieut.-Colonel Dennis must have been aware of it before he marched his command off the dock. This is also further established by the admission of Lieut.-Colonel Dennis in his "Statement of Facts" submitted to the Court, that he himself, after hearing the report, saw at least one hundred and fifty of the enemy before landing his men, and his further statement of his having sent word to the "Robb" to secure the boat and prisoners in case he was overpowered, and his having withdrawn his men from Ramsford's Corner to a position near the "Robb," all prove the evidence of doubts in his mind as to whether he had sufficient strength in his command to successfully resist the force which he was informed was about to attack him. And as to the remainder of the second charge the evidence proves it conclusively.

Third Charge.-Colonel Denison also dissents from the finding of the Court upon the third charge, as he is of opinion that the third charge is proved, with the exception that the allegation that Lieut.-Colonel Dennis did not allow a fire to be opened on the enemy. On this point there is a certain amount of rebutting evidence, although the weight of evidence seems to support the charge.

(Signed) GEO. T. DENISON. Colonel. President.

Fort Erie, 8th November, 1866.


With respect to the foregoing charges and opinion, and to the evidence generally taken by the Court of Inquiry, His Excellency directs the publication of the following remarks:

1. Although the order for the assembly of the Court was general in its terms, the special memorandum of instructions furnished for the guidance of the President and members, stated that the Court was assembled to give Lieut.-Col. Dennis an opportunity of refuting charges which had been "made against his personal conduct on the 2nd June, at Fort Erie," and directed the reception of any evidence which might tend to elucidate the truth.

2. The only one of the above six charges which, strictly speaking, the Court was required to consider, was the 4th, which imputed disgraceful and cowardly conduct to the accused officer.

3. His Excellency approves of the opinion of the Court with respect to the 1st. 3rd. 4th. 5th and 6th charges.

4. With respect to the second charge. His Excellency is of opinion that Lieut.-Col. Dennis committed an error in judgment in removing the small force under his command, from the means of secure retreat afforded by the steamer, before he had ascertained with some degree of certainty the probable force of the enemy, of whose near approach he was informed; but if the accusation made against Lieut.-Col. Dennis in this charge be correct, that he did so remove his force from the shelter of the steamer for the purpose of attacking an enemy, whose numbers he knew to be overwhelming-the proceeding savours rather of rashness than of timidity. Had Lieut.-Col. Dennis been the coward which his accusers would have the public believe, he would in such a case have eagerly availed himself of the remonstrances which it is stated were made to him, to return with the men under his command to the deck of the steamer.

5. The first charge being one of imputed intention only, the fulfilment of which it was not attempted to establish, was not a proper charge for investigation by any Court.

6. The sixth charge is also an improper charge to have preferred or investigated. No Commanding Officer would be safe if his subordinates could be allowed to frame a charge of misconduct against him for not having adopted a particular course, which, judging deliberately after the event, his accusers might think to have been advisable. There is no pretence that the course which Lieut.-Col. Dennis is accused of misconduct for not adopting, was suggested to him and rejected.


END
Imprint

Publication Date: 05-21-2008

All Rights Reserved