| |

Charles Lee’s Disgrace at the Battle of MonmouthBy Noah Andre Trudeau | MHQ | one comment | Print This Post | Email This Post In adjourning the council, Washington strongly suggested to Lee that he hold a strategy session with his subordinates. Not long after Washington departed for the main army, a pair of couriers reached Lee with some of the commander in chief’s afterthoughts. Worried that the British might launch a spoiling attack, Washington wanted Lee to alert the militia then watching the enemy. A second message instructed Lee to send forward a strong (six-hundred- to eight-hundred-man) observation force to fix the British rear guard in place come morning. Lee convened the requested meeting, but little if anything was accomplished. As Anthony Wayne recollected, Lee ‘had nothing further to say on the subject’ since ‘the position of the enemy might render any previous plan invalid.’ Lee later commented that ‘if the country is un-reconnoitered, and the force, disposition, and situation of the enemy doubtful, I must profess that I cannot persuade myself that a precise plan can be attended with any good consequences, but that it must distract, lead astray, and in effect be ruinous.’ That night, Lee made little effort to rectify those intelligence gaps. He did instruct Brig. Gen. Philemon Dickinson, whose eight hundred New Jersey militia were shadowing the enemy, to alert him when the British column began moving. Lee also attempted to coordinate with the expert riflemen under Colonel Morgan operating against the British right flank. However, a clerical error and the note’s imprecise wording resulted in Morgan’s experienced fighters missing the start of the next day’s action. For Sir Henry Clinton, pondering the same situation just a few miles to the east, the withdrawal to this point had been successful, though not without its vexations. His command endured energy-draining heat broken only briefly by violent rain showers that turned the dirt roads into mud and slowed the cumbersome wagons to a crawl, while the enemy militia remained busy ‘filling up the wells and breaking down and destroying the bridges and causeways before us.’ Clinton had expected a run-in with Washington’s regulars at a choke point near Mount Holly, but when no serious opposition appeared, the English commander became convinced that his opposite ‘had no thoughts of risking a general action.’ Clinton continued to worry most about protecting his exposed wagon train, yet even in this defensive stance, he watched for a chance to strike. Clinton’s sources of local intelligence were good enough for him to form an accurate appraisal of Washington’s movements. Indeed, his only significant miscalculation was his unwavering belief that he would face the combined armies of Washington and Gates. Clinton halted his long columns around the small village of Monmouth Courthouse on the afternoon of June 26, where he anticipated a serious attack the next day. When nothing developed on June 27, Clinton carefully reconnoitered the area. He observed the relatively open plains northwest and south of the village. The area west of Monmouth Courthouse was more undulating and creased by several ravines. He saw that the lone road that wriggled between the ravines west of the village came to a boggy morass spanned by a small bridge. Should the enemy attack him at Monmouth Courthouse, his best course would be to press the Americans against the swampy barrier. However pleasant the prospect, Clinton concluded that the always careful and cautious Washington would never jeopardize his army in such terrain. At 4 a.m. on June 28 (an hour later than he had intended), Clinton started his forward division and the long wagon train toward Middletown and prospective safety. In piecing together the strike force, Washington mixed and matched commands and officers to a degree that would totally confuse many of the battle’s historians. He wanted the point of his sword to be as sharp as possible, and so many of the various commands he was committing to the upcoming action were special composites drawn from the most able troops of different brigades and regiments. This blending of units posed a serious challenge to effective control. Hours later, when he was in the midst of a desperate effort to choreograph this admixture, Charles Lee would comment on the’shocking situation’ as he ‘hardly knew a single man or Officer’ under his command. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Tags: 17th - 18th Century, American Revolutionary War, Historical Conflicts, Historical Figures
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
One Comment to “Charles Lee’s Disgrace at the Battle of Monmouth”
I”m reeling from the disappointment of the plans. A commander has to
be whole hearted and convey to his staff the ernest sense of the mission. Lee failed to do this. He doomed himself by being a critic of Washington, and goes down in history being blamed for the very things he was focusing on George. The results of this battle are about
equal but as you summarize it whittled down the British manpower and morale. Whiners are not honored, only brave doers. A most
excellent historical account, thank you.
By Larry Foss on Aug 28, 2008 at 1:52 pm