246 Naval War of 1812 



whose defenders, regulars and artillerymen, fought 

 to the last with their bayonets and clubbed muskets, 

 and were butchered to a man. Without delay Ren- 

 nie flung his men at the breastworks behind, and, 

 gallantly leading them, sword in hand, he and all 

 around him fell, riddled through and through by 

 the balls of the riflemen. Brave though they were, 

 the British soldiers could not stand against the 

 singing, leaden hail, for if they stood it was but to 

 die. So in rout and wild dismay they fled back 

 along the river bank to the main army. For some 

 time afterward the British artillery kept up its fire, 

 but was gradually silenced; the repulse was entire 

 and complete along the whole line; nor did the 

 cheering news of success brought from the west 

 bank give any hope to the British commanders, 

 stunned by their crushing overthrow. 43 



43 According to their official returns the British loss was 

 2,036; the American accounts, of course, make it much 

 greater. Latour is the only trustworthy American con- 

 temporary historian of this war, and even he at times ab- 

 surdly exaggerates the British force and loss. Most of the 

 other American "histories" of that period were the most 

 preposterously bombastic works that ever saw print. But 

 as regards this battle, none of them is as bad as even such 

 British historians as Alison ; the exact reverse being the case 

 in many other battles, notably Lake Erie. The devices each 

 author adopts to lessen the seeming force of his side are gen- 

 erally of much the same character. For instance, Latour 

 says that 800 of Jackson's men were employed on works at 

 the rear, on guard duty, etc., and deducts them; James, for 

 precisely similar reasons, deducts 853 men: by such means 



