Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MasterGunner01
In 1778, Virginia forces under Colonel George Rogers Clark captured several undermanned British posts in the Illinois country, including Fort Sackville at Vincennes. Hamilton set out from Detroit on 7 October 1778 to recapture the post, 600 miles away. His small force gathered American Indian allies along the way, and entered Vincennes on 17 December 1778, capturing Fort Sackville and the American commandant, Captain Leonard Helm. In February 1779, Colonel Clark returned to Vincennes in a surprise march, recapturing the outpost and taking Hamilton prisoner.

Indeed. But there's a bit more to the story:

At about 9:00 a.m. on February 24, Clark sent a message to the fort demanding Hamilton's surrender. Hamilton declined, and the firing continued for another two hours until Hamilton sent out his prisoner, Captain Helm, to offer terms. Clark sent Helm back with a demand of unconditional surrender within 30 minutes, or else he would storm the fort. Helm returned before the time had expired and presented Hamilton's proposal for a three-day truce. This too was rejected, but Clark agreed to meet Hamilton at the village church.

Before the meeting at the church, the most controversial incident in Clark's career occurred. Unaware that Clark had retaken Vincennes, a war party of Indians and French-Canadians came into town. There was a skirmish, and Clark's men captured six. Two of the prisoners were Frenchmen and were released at the request of the villagers and one of Clark's French followers. Clark decided to make an example of the remaining four Indian prisoners. They were made to sit down in view of the fort and then tomahawked to death; the bodies were scalped and then thrown into the river. Although Hamilton did not witness the executions, he later wrote that Clark had killed one or more of the Indians with his own hands. Some historians believe that Hamilton exaggerated because, after being imprisoned by the Americans for war crimes, he had motivation to make his captors seem even worse. Clark did not claim to have been one of the executioners, but he wrote about the killings without apology, believing them to be justifiable revenge for murdered Kentucky settlers and a means to intimidate Indians into stopping their raids.

55 posted on 08/27/2012 5:18:31 PM PDT by archy (I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: archy
The war on the frontier was a war fought without mercy by both sides. You are exactly correct how Col. Clark finally forced Major Hamilton's surrender. The Indians were not shy when it came to committing atrocities on their enemies and the colonists gave it back to them.
56 posted on 08/27/2012 5:35:53 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson