An Account of the Battle of Chateauguay - Being a Lecture Delivered at Ormstown, March 8th, 1889 by W. D. (William Douw) Lighthall
page 27 of 40 (67%)
page 27 of 40 (67%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
Mr. Dion, of Chambly, to whom the erection of a fine bronze statue of De Salaberry is due, has related to me a number of particulars from De Salaberry's letters held by his relatives. The hero complains bitterly of Prevost and De Watteville--"those two Swiss"--and that on account of his religion he could get no higher than a Lieut.-Colonel. From the same letters it appears that the "Temoin Oculaire" was a young lawyer named O'Sullivan, later, Judge O'Sullivan, a man partly of Irish family, in person large and handsome, and a great friend of De Salaberry, who ever remained grateful to him for preserving record of his deed in his celebrated letter. It is commonly attributed to D.B. Viger. Another little fact mentioned in the correspondence of De Salaberry is that his men in the battle were barefooted. The almost unique nature of the victory strikes one. Its keystone was De Salaberry's masterly use of illusion. Of it was the choice of a thick wood to conceal his small force, their entrenchment behind the abatis and in bush positions, the unexpected fire from the left bank upon Purdy, the Indians in the woods, and, more than everything, the ruse of the multiplied bugles. But besides illusion there was the ablest possible disposition, for there seems no doubt but that no spot could have keen chosen along his projected route greater in strength when fortified and guarded just as that was. The enemy could only reach it fatigued, and far from sources of supply, the wood was thick, the ravines occurred happily, the river was free from fords for a long distance, and a frightful swamp occupied the opposite bank. How would De Watteville's small and raw army have acted in the open country had this position not been tried? Next, how ought the credit of the affair to be apportioned, for it is |
|