Welcome back to part two of Thomas gage. In the last episode we discussed the American colonists. Selective approach to following laws, despite their apparent belief that they were all lawyers. We also delved into how the Adams boys together with John Hancock. Fueled the flames of rebellion until anarchy and mob rule took hold. In this episode, general gauge will share his perspective on the similarities between George Washington and John Hancock, . Particularly regarding their true intentions.
He will also reflect on his own missteps actions that had they been different, might have ended the war quickly and prevented the United States of America from ever coming into existence. Dr. Church, Dr. Benjamin Church.
If you were, this is a man who has that on both sides, there are strong feelings, I believe, because on your side of the fence, this man is a Patriot that gave you information about what was going on And from the colonists side, from the American side, he is going to be seen as a traitor that deserve nothing less than death. Are you the one that turned him? oh no. He was he simply, he was a, and is today, a gentleman who simply felt as I do, that these radicals , were taking this too far.
He is a I would say he is a patriot for Massachusetts, as were many others such as again, my predecessor governor Hutchinson, , argued for the repeal of many of the more onerous acts of parliament, which I agree, many of them were not pleasant and some of them were ill thought through. But when the bricks begin flying, when the houses are burned down, when the mob takes to the street, when Soldiers are set upon as they walk the streets, these are unacceptable developments.
And , I believe it was in that period of time that he began to realize that what had begun as a struggle for, I would call them colonial rights, if you wish had become a criminal activity, indeed. And it is then he began to to tell us and provide small hints. About about where these where these arms, for example, were being stored.
Again, one must remember, here we have we have conspiratorial behavior where there are arms, ammunition and supplies in support of an army being stored for the avowed purpose of rebellion. Again, watch government. What government anywhere would tolerate that anywhere on the earth in any Yeah. Concerning Ben Church, he was actually going to meetings. with the Sons of Liberty, Yes, very much. So and then turning that information over to you. Was he paid for that?
he was Rewarded but not greatly It was mostly for his expenses he did this out of a patriotic sense and we helped him for he had expenses associated with these activities, but it was not like a bounty. No, he did this , I think out of the patriotic motivations of his own heart. And his horror at the at the increasingly radical and violent. And a seditious turn that this that this political movement, if I can call it that had actually taken.
When you say radical and violent, you had mentioned tarring and feathering at one point, you said burning houses, you're talking about violence in the streets, of course you'd mentioned the destruction of the T. Can you give me some specific examples besides the big ones, the destruction of the T, of something that happened to someone? Like, do you know someone who was actually tar and feathered? Oh, yes, there was a, I do not recall the exact name, but there was a tax collector.
It was one of the customs agents in Boston. They refer to him as a tax collector, but it was, these were duties paid upon landing of cargo in Boston which is what pays for the port, for the the facilities and the protection. I mean, there are pirates out there and the Royal Navy. Protects our commerce. This has to be paid for so, one of our, or duty collectors was hauled out of his house one night his clothes ripped off. And he was doused in hot tar, and then covered in feathers.
And I will tell you that is something that sometimes can be fatal. In his case, it was not. But it this was a mob directed by and peopled by the very Sons of Liberty that you had spoken of earlier. Therefore, Samuel Adams and his ilk were behind it, absolutely. Absolutely. Well, I was speaking with John Hancock a while back ago. And while speaking with John Hancock I guess I wasn't sure that he was involved in the destruction of the T, which you clearly are already aware of that.
And he said, absolutely. He was absolutely a hundred percent involved in that. And. When I think of John Hancock, I think, why in the world is he getting involved with all of this? I mean, this man has everything. He has a reputation. He's loved by the people. He has everything. He has respect and money and everything. Yes, in the world is he getting involved in this?
One of the things you had said earlier, you had said that, you know, you think maybe these people might be doing this for riches and for money. But he has all of that, and that leads me to believe that maybe the taxes and the restrictions that the crown is putting on people like him are so egregious that even somebody like him , he had to stand up and risk everything because the taxes were too high. I wish it were that simple.
Of course, to get a truthful answer, you might have to just ask him but I will opine this far I believe that indeed the issues of the taxes and all is a cover, it's a sham yes, it's it's an issue Of some amount of money, but certainly, as I think you have pointed out, something he would be completely capable of, my sense is that his issue and that of other merchants and mercantiles and mechanics and such in Boston and in Byron's has to do with their future or
their perceptions of their own future. They see opportunity to trade outside of the British system directly with other parts of Europe. for that. They are prohibited from doing so and from purchasing, for example, tea on that subject from the Dutch East India Company or other entities in Europe that also have tea. But if the entire purpose, and this is returning to the entire concept of the colonies.
Is to operate within the British system and not be independent and that there is plenty of wealth to be made inside of that system. But if it is to survive and if the wealth is to stay within and aggrandize up into the British system, we must control this trade. We must control the taxation within it and we must control. where the materials are, where they're sold regulate the commerce. Otherwise, yes, it is a free for all. And I believe that's really what they want.
They want to be able to simply take their ships and go anywhere on the planet. The difficulty with that is simply that his majesty the monies that are required to support the army, the Navy, the government, the regulations. The protection are not collected and we would then end up with a Navy that was insufficient to protect our own commerce on the high seas. And again, that would lead to many of these European nations thinking that they could then horn in and grab what they wanted.
, the Americans, I believe, do not entirely understand the level of protection and the bubble, if you wish, that they live in. And should they succeed in this? Endeavor and actually become more independent. , I imagine they will be somehow more independent. I'm hoping that there will be some agreement to maintain their loyalty within a . A higher empire here, but should they succeed in going out on their own, they're going to find out that it's a very nasty and very difficult world out there.
And right now they, they have all of the benefits. Of being English subjects, British subjects, and they're paying very low taxes compared even to their compatriots in England. And they're going to find that it's a very different world out there when you don't have somebody at hand like the British nation to assist you and to protect you. So the Americans are just entitled children, basically.
In many ways yes, as I said, I love many of them, but boy they do seem to, they do seem to have taken the idea of entitlement and some sort of destiny to their heads. Made it a creed. Are you when you talk about John Hancock, , are you implying that , this may have just been a business decision for him and where he is making, let's say X amount of money that his ability to trade freely throughout the entire world instead of.
Within the confines of the rules of the British government, that maybe whatever he's making, he might be able to do 10 or 20 times that. Is that what you're saying? yeah, I suspect you are correct. Yes. Of course, I am not a mind reader. I do not know his innermost thoughts. But I believe that is at the heart of this entire affair.
I believe that the the slogans that you hear that taxation without representation and all of that, those are very nice slogans, but people go to war as they have here over blood, money, land, children, progeny, the future.
And I am hopeful that there will be some enlightenment on both sides, both in parliament In the mind of the king and his ministers, but also very much so in the minds of the people and I believe there is a silent majority in America that wishes this dreadful situation to be resolved. Peacefully and soon, I'm hoping that they are able to come to the fore, and that cooler heads will prevail. I do not know that, but I wish for it. Well, cooler heads is not the American strong point.
I can tell you that I have noticed. You know, I'm going to move past John Hancock in a minute here, but I gotta be honest with you, your view on that really makes a lot of sense. Because somebody that is that good at doing one thing, which is basically networking with the people of that area and turning those relationships into dollars and coordinating all the agreements that are required to make a successful business. It really does make more sense in a way that the liberty that he would be
looking for isn't necessarily freedom for the people . But a liberty to do more business because that's what he's good at. Yes, and if something can be figured out, that would be wonderful. Remember, liberty and freedom are not exactly the same thing. They are often used in the same sentence. Freedom is freedom to do what you wish to do. But liberty allows you to operate freely, but within a framework. And it is a concept the British concept of liberty is deep.
And abiding and strong in the English people . It is our great pride, the great pride of our nation. And , it should not be misused, Okay. So you mentioned earlier, George Washington. Is he one of the rabble rousers is what can you tell me about him? Well, he has become one, it seems. He is a wealthy landowner , from the colony of Virginia. Member of the House of Burgesses there, perhaps I think. He has long wanted I understand, to expand his holdings into the Ohio Valley.
And of course, that is an area that Parliament, in its either wisdom or not, but has decided to restrict that the , provincials could not move west of the mountains there, and you could go there, but you could not own the land legally and, I know that he is a a proponent of wishing to move out over the mountains and able to to expand. In many of the same ways one can see him perhaps as a parallel to Mr. Hancock. He sees himself as being restricted from the very thing that he wants.
And that he can see and taste, but he cannot have. And so, I think that in their minds, these Americans, and I, there's a piece of me that sympathizes. They wrap all of this up in their concept, their newfound concept of liberty. And their own freedoms. They see, and they chafe.
At the restrictions, what they consider to be restrictions of operating within this British system of trade and law and responsibility perhaps these Americans were for too long allowed to conduct business on their own without a great deal of interference from the government in London. And they've become very used to that. And now the technology and commerce and monetary systems and all of these are modernizing. They seem now to want to simply go back to being left alone.
That's simply not the way of the world and it's not going to happen. So Mr. Washington, I think is , perhaps a Virginia equivalent of Mr. Hancock. , his wealth. Has given him a taste for more and more, and he conflates this with his newfound concepts of liberty. George Washington fought? In several English wars, didn't he? Oh, very much so. Well, he particularly fought as a militia officer in the recent French war.
And about 20 years ago or so it was in fact, it was an expedition of his out into the vicinity of Fort Duquesne, out near the close to the Ohio River that created the conflagration in America in the first place and in the French War, when he basically got himself captured and signed a paper apparently he does not read French and so signed a paper that basically blamed him for the entire affair. But also for the death of several French officers. And yes he was there.
He was, in fact released, but then actually came and he and I were both captured. On the expedition with General Braddock again, out to Fort Duquesne and in that area that ended in that massacre along the Mauna Kehila River. He and I fought side by side virtually in that battle commanding what remnants of the army and the militia that we could find as we extricated ourselves. From the debacle. So he is no doubt a brave officer. I have no doubts about that.
And he is probably a capable leader of men. I just wish that he would devote these talents to more peaceful endeavors. So he's not a coward, he's not a dishonorable man. It's just your desires for the future, they just don't align. that's correct. I do hope for a day where I might sit down with the man with a glass. Might not happen very soon.
Unfortunately I'm afraid that if this war continues this civil unrest and this militarization of this conflict continues that he will go further and further down the road of Of rebellion and sedition and revolution. How is all of this affecting England? So, you're in England now. Is this just a like a piece of dust that they can just flick off? Or is this a Oh, this is a big thing in this is right now.
No, . So there are many in England, there are many in parliament who look to the Americans as the that they have the fire of liberty and that they are showing the rest of us how it's really done. They may not agree with the military choices and the actual rebellion against authority, but there is great admiration for this concept of liberty. Sort of in a state of nature these Americans have discovered something new.
I don't particularly agree with that but there is great sympathy and that the Continental Congress actually has friends in Parliament who speak in its favor. And speak against our military responses to this rebellion. They may someday, they may get their way, but at present, the majority in Parliament is the King's party, the Tories, the Conservatives, and they are determined to carry on, to meet military force with military force.
And and carry on appropriately there, but this has caused great strife in the newspapers, in the broadsides, in debates in Parliament, and even in fights in the streets. What was the first spark of the revolution? Was it the Stamp Act? Was it something before that? Oh that was early, yes, I would say Stamp Act, and there were several other acts at the same time of course, in many regards, it was suddenly, the sudden absence of the French.
And the driving back of their native allies from the frontiers of the various colonial provinces.
So I wouldn't call that necessarily a spark, but , that was the requisite condition that suddenly all of these colonies and remember, there are actually 26 colonies in America, only 13 of them have chosen this road of rebellion but the sudden absence of the French armies and the French Navy from threatening these colonies has allowed them, ironically, to think more freely about their relationship to the world.
With the mother country whereas prior to that, they were highly dependent upon us for protection, for military prowess, for for all of the things as well as commerce and such now that the French are not there, they think, oh, we are free and easy , we can now just act upon Any thought that we have entirely on our own. I go back to your analogy of children in the playground and suddenly the big bad wolf has been taken away.
, the spark here was that circumstance and then the very necessary raising of taxes in America and in order to align them much more closely to the taxation structure in the United Kingdom. Okay, I think I've got all the pieces now. This is interesting because I've never quite put this together . But now I think I can see it. So tell me if I'm characterizing the events as you see them happening. So you've got the 13 colonies that rebelled.
You say there's 26. And before I say this, what are the others? Oh, they are, for example, the various sugar islands The Caribbean islands, the East Florida the Canadian provinces of upper and lower Canada, which are largely peopled by the Quebecois French. And there is Bermuda, there are several others. So there are a number of other ones, both in the Caribbean, as well as north of the border of Massachusetts. Their makeup is different. The ones in Canada are largely French.
The the islands are largely British. People buy the various slaveholding territories and the the estates that grow the sugar cane and such. And so the 13 colonies, think of them in the middle, are rather unique. They are people largely from the British Isles and they have brought with them all of the. Concepts of liberty that have grown up in the British Isles. Okay. So now let me characterize what I'm seeing. Is this how you see things going down?
So what happened is , would you say the 13 colonies are all part of England. They're all British citizens. And from the West, And from the North and may, I don't know, maybe even from the South somewhat, they've got an Indian presence and a French presence constantly pushing on them. , , the British are basically providing border patrol and sending in troops and protecting them from the French and the Indians on all sides.
So, At that time, the French and Indian wars, or the Seven Years War, basically some of those militias that you were talking about were recruited to fight with English soldiers from the mainland to fight those wars. And then once, as you're saying, the , big, bad wolf, which that was contained, now it's no longer there. Now it's no longer a problem. Well, there's all this money and treasure that has been spent to protect them.
And then right at that moment, The English say, look, we're going to have to raise your taxes a little bit because, , we did all that work for you. And then the Americans say, no, thanks. We're good. We'll take it from here. You have put a rather succinct wrap on it all. Yes. I would say that you've summarized rather succinctly exactly what's going on, and I would simply add that they are doing this under the veneer of liberty and the rights of Englishmen could argue that is theft.
Oh, very much so. Yes. Yes, very much so, and his majesty agrees I have corresponded with his majesty on this subject and my position, and he is very much in agreement, as are his ministers, Dartmouth Barrington, and others in the war office this is High political theft, if you wish. Okay. So let's take it to the next level. So now let's say this, let's say that the Americans, they had adopted this proper way that the English are, , this very civil way. And they didn't even think about.
Revolution, because that would be uncivil. And instead they got a couple of their smartest people. And let's say that those people were George Washington and John Hancock and some other guy. Okay. And they came over to meet with the King. And they said, here's the thing, gosh, we really appreciate what you've done. Thank you for that. But you know, it's just never going to work with you way over there and us over here. It's just not going to work with our people. So here's what we want to do.
Okay. You guys have spent a lot of money. We're thankful for that. We're gonna pay you back or we're gonna make a payment. So for the next 20 years, , we're gonna make a payment of X dollars and we're going to buy our liberty or our freedom. could a negotiation like that have happened? I do believe it is possible. It would have taken, I think some more elegant minds that were actually at hand in, in the moment, but the concept , of equal partners under the umbrella of the monarchy.
I believe is one that would have been very acceptable to the Americans and would have provided them the level of independence that they sought. Now, it may not have been perfect and we may still have come to blows, but I do believe that there are still many Americans. Who looked to his majesty for protection of their liberties. They consider his majesty to be the great protector of British liberties against the ingresses of. For example, a parliament an invasive and an aggressive parliament.
And at the moment, his majesty is surrounded by gentlemen who feel that Parliament should be absolutely supreme and should be able to carry out its acts and laws throughout the domains of British rule. And that there should be no great limits upon those things. And, , they may still happen there, there have been petitions. I am aware of petitions being passed back and forth. Cooler heads may still prevail here. I know that the the Howe brothers have been given plenipotentiary powers.
To settle this matter. They're wearing two hats. They are peace agents, as well as military officers. So we shall see how that works. But I do believe there were, and perhaps remain opportunities , , to find a compromise. I believe personally under the guise or under the umbrella of his majesty guaranteeing the political independence of these various entities while all pledging an allegiance. To the common good and the symbol of that being the monarchy.
I think there's a chance of that, but it may or may not happen. One of the things about people in my experience is that people generally tell you who they are. , they say a cheetah doesn't change its spots. If somebody tells you who they are, believe them. I think at this point we've well established.
That the Americans are going to move forward on this and they have the right people to get the word out, , to keep people fired up and fighting, and they probably have enough intelligence and leadership to do that. Is this not the time to stop being proper and stop being civil and to take the gloves off and start raising some villages? it may be, I think that we are still in a moment when we are attempting to bring hearts and minds over.
And I know that of course I must leave some of these matters to my successors. In General Howe and I know that General Howe plans to offer general and specific amnesties to all who will come back across and , pledge fealty and and, call that bending the knee now. Ah, I believe one can both be proud and make a decision, Okay, that's fair. but yes perhaps I think it in the eyes of many of these Americans, perhaps bending the knee, yes, you're correct. Again, I would return to one of two paths.
One must either acquiesce and find a political compromise that ends this matter, or one must raise. An army such as one has never seen before and a Navy that simply arrives with overwhelming force. And I know that his majesty is already seeking and is he is preparing speeches and to the combined houses of parliament in which he will be proposing that we import both recruits as well as.
regiments from several of the German principalities and expand the army and the navy to a level that is truly capable of this intercontinental warfare, which is relatively new to us all. We saw some of it in the recent French war but here we are doing it again. And I believe that his majesty may very well be on the path of Going down the military road without limit and with as much overwhelming force as he can muster. I wish him well in either endeavor, should he choose peace or war.
, speaking of war, , I'd like to hear your views on Lexington and Concord. Because it seems like, the direction that went, it spiraled out of control, and that wasn't your original plan for that to turn out the way that it did. Could you just give me your perception of what happened there? Ah, yes.
Well, first of all it is clear that while making protestations of love and loyalty to the mother country and even to me as governor these Yankees and again, ill designing men were all the while preparing for war and they had been doing so for a number of months. One must remember that these are not simply farmers who pick up grandpa's gun from the mantle and run. into the fields.
They are themselves an army, and Massachusetts alone was capable of putting thousands of men well armed into the field. One of my officers, after the fact described them in the following, he said anyone who sees, I believe it was Earl Percy, Anyone who sees them as an irregular mob is much mistaken. They have men amongst them who know very well what they are about. So this was a concerted effort to arm their own men, the populace, and the countryside.
, upon instructions from London, my intent was to pull the fangs from this snake, this monster, before it could rear its ugly head. Unfortunately, I believe that we were simply too late. We had made efforts to Seized powder in previous September in Charlestown and elsewhere and increasingly the countryside was armed well beyond our ability to properly deal with. So what we resorted to was secrecy and a lightning raid out to conquer, to seize and destroy the city.
Unfortunately, as we have discussed earlier, word of this effort got out. Most of the material had been moved by the time Colonel Smith and his expedition got to Concord.
And due to an unfortunate incident on the way in a little town called Lexington And also because of the riders, the countryside was alarmed and began to close in on the soldiers in a most outrageous manner, with little provocation, they began to shoot And to pepper the column with gunfire all the way back as they attempted to retreat from Concord. There was also an incident at a small bridge where the militia literally attacked the companies that were there. This is civil war.
They are attacking their own soldiers. And there's no excuse for that. And then they behaved in most outrageous manner firing against our people all the way back until they were rescued by a a party under the Brigadier Earl Percy and then further fighting to return to Boston where they found themselves besieged. I do believe this was all a pre concerted plan. And then in fact, in hindsight, I realize that the arms and ammunition that were held in the town of Concord were not.
Put farther away and not further in to Boston, but it exactly the correct distance that it would take approximately one day to march out and seize and return and that was in fact a giant trap and That the the Yankees intended in every way , to attack the King's soldiers and to bring on this war, they needed only the excuse. And in hindsight, I'm afraid we gave it to them. , you believe that whole setup was a trap, , and , everything went down exactly as they were planning it.
Very much so, at least as some of them were planning. I'm sure not all of them, because Yankees don't agree with each other. Right? Or anybody. But certainly when you look at the Samuel Adams's, the Committee of Safety, as they called it, And there are various regimental commanders like Barrett and others. Yes I suspect that they may have been momentarily surprised by the effort made by His Majesty's soldiers, but it was in fact the very day that they had all been preparing for.
How do you like that name? The committee of safety. There's a nice piece of marketing in that. It is indeed, yes, Whose safety it's all in the eye of the beholder, I always thought that name was really good. . That's very helpful by the way. It makes a lot of sense what you're saying. Now , let me see your impression of the Boston tea party now, or I'm sorry, the destruction of the tea, because that is a catchy name, it might catch on, It's all marketing in America.
So what is your impression of that? Cause the Americans, , they see that, , they were being treated very fairly at the Sol T situation. And they're like, that's it enough already. Well, I think that it's plain that this was an attempt to stick from their perspective, the Americans. It was the, or the Bostonians, I should say, specifically. It was their opportunity to stick a poke in the eye to what they considered to be the high and the mighty.
In fact, it was an opportunity for the East India Company. To sell a tea and get itself out of a financial bind and a situation but it was also an opportunity to undercut uh, and sell below market and you have to remember that much of the tea and much of the commerce is being run by people like, and here he is again, John Hancock. So Hancock. Whips up the crowd with probably Sam Adams is help. And they plot in the night to throw this tea into the Harbor. It is criminal activity.
It is destruction of private property and they do it. Because it is, in fact, so outrageous, things had been settling down in Boston. We actually had reached a point where nothing terrible had happened for even the better part of a year. There were small fights in the streets, things of that nature. But the soldiers had been withdrawn. They were out at Castle William. The the streets were relatively peaceful and Boston was getting on with its business.
I believe that the the radicals, the revolutionaries here were sensing that they needed a bold step or the whole thing would be gone, was going to slip away from them. So they needed something. That was going to both outrage the authorities, which it did, and radicalize their own base, which it did. And so, when in doubt, sometimes you do the outrageous and then you play the victim when retribution comes your way.
This then prompted the coercive acts by parliament, very proper, to close the port. And to redress the insane method of government at the time in Massachusetts , and to reestablish the rule of law in the province the critical thing here is that, I do believe that this was an act of outrage that was intended deliberately, it was , the most outrageous thing they could do at the time, in the moment to reinvigorate their seditious and rebellious plans.
It's this coordinated effort to just keep throwing logs on the fire. Just to keep it burning until everybody caught up. Exactly and then when the fire burns down you come by with some pitch Or more wood, or something to cause the flames to leap back up into the sky. Throw a little tea in there. That would do it. Yes. So what about Bunker Hill? It seems like this is a big changing, In directions of your future prospects. Well, yes the three generals were sent over.
Clinton, Burgoyne, and Howe. And on the ship Cerberus. In fact, someone wrote a ditty about that. Noting that Cerberus is the three-headed dog , ending the poem with Bow Wow. Wow. Rhyming with how so, the three generals arrived and the matter was that the town of Boston was besieged. It was the Army's intent and job to break that siege. And we had plans to attack the Dorchester Peninsula.
On the south side of the town of Boston but the Yankees caught wind again of these plans and established a small fort on the top of Breed's Hill, which overlooks the harbor on the north side by the the estuary of this, of the Charles River. We flipped the plan and attacked the Charlestown Peninsula and were successful. in driving the Yankees off the hill but as I have said earlier, , they are well armed and several of our tactics failed.
One was to envelop, attempt to envelop the fort, the small fort with a flanking attack up the Mystic River along the beach. But there were Yankee. Companies that prevented that from happening. And the day was taken and the day was decided only through the valiant efforts of the soldiers and horrific casualties in overwhelming , the militia on the Hill. The initial feeling was that we had won a great victory, but realizing that we had left large parts.
Of our number on the field and that in fact, the army was largely crippled after that simply caring for the wounded and Boston the siege was redoubled and Boston became a rather miserable besieged town dependent upon supplies delivered by the Royal Navy. It was quite the sight to see from the rooftops.
In Boston, with the entire town of Charlestown in flames, the ships in the harbor firing their guns at elevation to hit the top of the hill, and the line of soldiers clad in, in their red coats moving up and down the hill, and eventually overwhelming and driving. All the way back to the land, the link with the rest of Charlestown a devastating battle and one which perhaps could have done better.
I feel that if, , Admiral graves, who was our naval commander had sounded the mystic river more properly, he could have sent one of his ships up there and it would have been. Quick work to deal with these Yankee divisions that were up there . So, a Pyrrhic victory as they say, and one which I think has had a deleterious effect upon hopes for a peaceful resolution of this conflict. We now find ourselves. In real warfare, I think up until that point, there was a chance.
That if we had, if the army had been able to prevail much more easily, it may have taken the sails out of the wind of this revolt. Unfortunately, the casualties that were taken and the death toll that was inflicted on, upon our armies has given hope and wind to this rebellion. And I now feel that the future is, has a much more difficult path. Yeah. It's hard to imagine shaking hands and working things out after the number of casualties that happened in that battle. It was savage.
, what do you what would you have to say about the way that the Americans fight because Do the British you still line up in straight lines and shoot at each other? Don't you and the Americans don't do that. Is that correct? I would disagree. I believe that the tactics that the army uses and that the militia uses are more similar than they are different. We have for example, our light infantry, who are well trained in the use of terrain.
And in what is known as Petite Guerre, the small war flanking moving around behind the entire effort at Bunker Hill or Breed's Hill in Charlestown was to fix the Yankees in front of us. With these battalions of grenadiers and regulars and all the while run the light infantry up behind them and to envelop the entire army of militia to basically bag them up. And unfortunately when that effort on the mystic beach failed the battle degenerated into the great frontal assault that we witnessed.
the Yankees in the field will very often use very similar tactics. They have the same weapons and they read the same books. So , yes, there are opportunities and this happened during the retreat from Lexington and from Concord, that they will use the land and they will use the stonewalls and the trees and the terrain. But our soldiers are trained in how to do that. Also the disadvantage that they had. On the road from Concord was that was the only way back to Boston and at
Bunker Hill, they are . Similarly, they were in the attacking force. They had to get up and climb that hill. And so, in doing so, you expose yourself. There was savage fighting in the town of Charlestown as it burned. Street by street and house by house. So, our soldiers are the equal of any of these Yankees. Unfortunately, I think we're finding that they are the equal to ours also. So what is your situation now?
, obviously we've reached a point where it doesn't look like we're going to be turning back. You're in England. What has happened to your rank ? , have you been given the responsibility for this failure at bunker or breeds Hill? mutterings of that. I am no longer the Commander in Chief in North America. I remain Governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, at least in name and , I have my rank in the Army and I am now an advisor to His Majesty and to the Ministers.
However, I will say that there is a scent in the air that Somehow this was not all handled well, and there is some bit of scapegoating that I believe is going on in the back rooms. But , these are political matters, and some of these people, they do what they must do. I will not concern myself, I've given it my best, and we sought peace at every turn. But again some of my advice was not followed as I have said earlier, either acquiesce or overwhelm.
And the ministers and many others chose a middle path. Which has ended us where we are now. So yes, I will take my responsibility for those parts of this, that I had a part in and that I was responsible for, and I wish his majesty all the best and the army all of the best. And I hope for victory in our force of arms, but , I suspect that I will be given some sort of , as they call it, a desk job. now that you are away from the battlefield and, , you're not on the front lines,
. Do you still have empathy or sympathy or some understanding of their cause? Or are you just completely fed up? And if you never see a Yankee again, it'll be too soon. I would tend towards the latter. I think I've had a belly full. Do recall as I took ship, I said some unkind words. About the town of Boston and wishing that it simply been burned. You must remember that I had an excellent career in the army until I became the governor of Massachusetts.
And I could sit here and complain and say that I was given an impossible job. But as a military officer, you take on very often impossible jobs. very much. And this was simply another one. I, I did my very best. The situation was already rather out of hand by the time I arrived on the scene. And I did what I could. And so, it is now up to others. General Gage, it is so enlightening that get this perspective from your side of these events. And I thank you for all this time. It is.
I've really enjoyed this conversation. I guess there's one last question that I'd like to ask. And then if there's anything you'd like to share, I'd certainly like to hear it. that last question is, is there one mistake that haunts you? answer would be two possible points. The first would have been to send a more overwhelming force out to Concord. We eventually sent 2, 000 men. It might have been very different had I simply sent them all out at the same time.
But in fact, we only sent the Grenadiers and Light Infantry on the initial effort, and then reinforced them later. The second was later. In that same event, when we withdrew our soldiers from the Charlestown peninsula, because that is where they retreated to at the end of that day of April 19th. Unfortunately, there were concerns and fears that the town of Boston itself would rise up beneath us. That his people would engage in fights in the street.
So we pulled everyone back into the town, only to have to take Charlestown back again two months later. I see. If we had simply stayed out there, we would have been more secure. If we had managed to occupy , that peninsula, then that battle in June may have never been necessary. You wouldn't have had to fight it twice. Exactly. Yeah. Gosh, that's interesting. Well, we're all brilliant with hindsight. Absolutely. Heh. Sir, again, thank you. Is there anything else you'd like to add?
I think simply that I am hopeful that someday America and Britain will be friends. That is my heartfelt wish, and someday it may happen. I can tell you that does happen, but we have a couple, couple tough years between now and then. I'm gratified to hear it. Thank you again for your time, thank you very much, and it's been a pleasure speaking with you this day. When the British occupied Boston, the Americans fighting for independence, treated them like they were invaders.
Coming to take their guns and trying to steal their Liberty. But the reality is that the American colonies were part of the British empire and both sides thought they were fighting for what was theirs prior to this conversation. I'd really never heard the other side of this argument as general gauge referred to this as a civil war. Which is probably the most accurate description of what was happening until the declaration of independence was signed. This was the English fighting the English.
If the south had won the American civil war, there would have been two countries. Which more or less is exactly what happened when the Americans beat the British. You could argue that for the United States to exist as it does right now, the Americans had to somehow win two civil wars. One to break a nation apart and one to hold a nation together.
And if Thomas gauges request for enough, troops had not been ignored, we'd all be reading history books, telling the story of the brave general gage that squashed that rebel George Washington, like a bug. Thanks for listening. And don't forget that when you tell a friend about the calling history podcast. Uh, pirate somewhere decides it's time to get a library card. I'm Tony Dean. And until next time I'm history.