Charles Lee’s Disgrace at the Battle of Monmouth

By Noah Andre Trudeau | MHQ  | one comment  |  Print This Post  |  Email This Post

For the British side, Monmouth was a successful rear-guard action. The trains had been protected, the retrograde movement had continued to its conclusion without further interruption. The fact that Clinton had hoped for much more when he accepted battle (this would prove to be the only combat fought under his personal supervision) and he had not seriously damaged the American army was more a personal disappointment than a strategic reverse. Perhaps the greatest impact of this battle was the irreplaceable nature of the losses Clinton did suffer. Under the pressure from London to transfer troops elsewhere, he could ill afford to write off his battle casualties. The human cost of Monmouth guaranteed that future British military actions in the North would be limited to minor operations.

The great personal loser in this affair was Charles Lee. For such a proud, vain, egotistical individual, his very public humiliation required satisfaction. A court-martial was convened, and Lee was charged with disobeying positive orders to attack on June 28, misbehavior in retreating before the enemy, and acting in a disrespectful manner toward the commander in chief. The court assembled on July 4, heard testimony while on the march, and delivered a guilty verdict on all counts on August 12. For a while it seemed that Washington’s enemies in Congress might reverse the findings, but the court’s decision was sustained. Lee fought a duel over the matter and came close to fighting several other duels. Although suspended for only one year, Lee never held another command.

Politics and passions had dictated the charges against Lee while failing to address his overall weaknesses as a field commander. The particular makeup of Lee’s strike force’select units or composites of ?picked men? that had never operated together?put a premium on effective communication and required energetic leadership. Lee was not up to these standards. He made no effort to share his thinking with his subordinates, perhaps believing that their duty was merely to obey orders. The price paid was a sour dissonance between him and his subcommanders, with Wayne and Scott following their own more aggressive agenda in ways that would prove fatal to Lee’s designs. Faced with the collapse of his flanking scheme, Lee let control of the battle slip from his fingers and lacked the personality to salvage it.

Most critical, Lee misread his commander’s intent. Washington expected there to be a fight?not a full-scale engagement, but he wanted his best troops to draw British blood, as he demonstrated in the battle’s last phase when he contented himself with very limited counterstrokes. Lee’s failure to seriously challenge the enemy at any point in the engagement became, in Washington’s eyes, proof that his services were no longer required. An officer close to Washington later gave voice to this complaint when he wrote: ?All this disgraceful retreating, passed without the firing of a musket, over ground which might have been disputed inch by inch.? Washington later admitted that he had always acted with nothing more than ?common civility? toward the officer whose ?temper and plans were too versatile and violent to attract my admiration.?

Washington’s hesitations and evolving strategy prior to the battle indicate that he still had things to learn about leading an army and effectively communicating with subordinates. His predilection for composite units made up of picked men, while understandable, also created problems he did not foresee. Once on the field in sight of the enemy, his personal leadership came to the fore. Washington’s forceful will and determination infused the retreating American soldiers with fighting spirit. His stature rose accordingly. ?Every Lip dwells on his Praise,? declared a member of Congress. Alexander Hamilton was on the mark when he declared, ?America owes a great deal to General Washington for this day’s work.?

While the British did not lose a battle that hot June day in New Jersey, George Washington saw an American army come of age at Monmouth Courthouse.

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to

Tags: 17th - 18th Century, American Revolutionary War, Historical Conflicts, Historical Figures

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.