total six killed, 76 wounded, (an unusual pro portion,) and one missing; grand total 83. Commodore Patterson's guns, and not the rifles of the flying Kentuckians," the meritorious conquerors of Tecumseh," occasioned the chief of colonel Thornton's loss. The American loss is not distinctly specified in the returns, but was very trifling. The behaviour of the American troops on the right, shews what we should have had to fear from the "valor" of those on the left bank, had only half of sir Edward's army got behind their works. Colonel Thorn. ton, at the end of his letter, is very positive, that lieutenant-colonel Gubbins, whom, on crossing over to have his wound dressed, he had left, with a force that, including the reinforcement of seamen and marines, did not exceed 700 men, would retain possession of the captured lines. But colonel Dickson, of the artillery, "did not think it could be held with security by a smaller corps than 2000 men."* The consequence of this unfortunate report was, that major-general Lambert, now the commanding officer, ordered the right bank of the river to be instantly evacuated. "I need not tell you," says general Jackson, "with how much eagerness, I immediately regained possession of the position he had thus happily quitted."† Major general Lambert had previously applied to * App. No. 96. + App. No, 101.

general Jackson for a suspension of hostilities; in granting which the latter considers, and, apparently, with reason, that he completely outwitted the British general.

Of the six vessels ordered up the Mississippi to bombard Fort-St. Philip, the Herald, two bombs, and Thistle and Pigmy only, could ascend the river. The fort mounted twenty-nine 24pounders, one 6-pounder, a 13-inch mortar, an 8 and a 52-inch howitzer; and, in the covert-way, two long 32-pounders, mounted on a level with the water; and was garrisoned by 366 men.* The particulars of the bombardment are given in the American official account: † we have no British account to compare it with, or from which to state our loss on the occasion. It appears that the garrison lost only two men killed, and seven wounded. On the 11th the 40th regiment arrived; but no movement took place in consequence. On the morning of the 15th, a British deserter informed general Jackson that major-general Lambert would retreat in a few days. On the night of the 18th the retreat took place; and the army remained in bivouac, near its first point of disembarkation, unmolested, till the 27th; when the whole reembarked. Our loss between the 9th and 26th of January, owing to the enemy's cannonade, App. Nos. 107 and 108.

* Latour's War in Louis. p. 191.

amounted to one killed, and five wounded, including lieutenant D'Arcy, of the 43d;* who; according to the American accounts, had both his legs carried off by a shell, at the moment when, after having been on guard for several days in succession, he was taking some repose, stretched on the ground, at the entrance of his bivouac. This makes the loss sustained by the British, from first to last, in this ill-fated expedition, 385 killed; 1516 wounded; and, including the two officers and 37 dragoons taken on the night of the 25th, 591 missing; total, not as general Jackson supposed" 4000,"† but 2492 : while the American loss, in the same expedition, amounted to 55 killed; 185 wounded; and 93 missing; total 333. Major Latour says:"The number of sick and wounded in the fleet is estimated at 2000."§ Where could he have obtained this fact? Both the army and navy employed on the expedition were, from first to last, healthy beyond example. Supposing all the British wounded to have been disabled, there would still be 5400 troops remaining; enough; surely, if properly employed, to have taken New Orleans: an object of ten-fold more importance now, than when the expedition was first thought of. As at Baltimore, so at New Orleans, the premature fall of a British general saved an American city.

* App. No. 106.

+ App. No. 104. § Latour's War in Louisiana, p. 226.

App. No. 103.

Instead of attributing their good fortune, in this their "Waterloo"* battle, to a succession of blunders and accidents on our part, the Ame→ ricans boasted, that it was their "superior valor” that had driven away the invaders. If valor

did any thing, it was the valor of Frenchmen, Spaniards, natives of New Orleans, "people of colour from St. Domingo," and Irish emigrants, but not,--as the affair on the right bank proved,

of brave but indiscreet Kentuckians." Among the several names of French generals, we find Humbert," the " hero of Castlebar," the general" to whom the French government had formerly confided the command of that expedition to Ireland, which will ever be recorded in the glorious pages of history ;" and the same who was authorized by general Jackson, after the battle at New Orleans, to form a legion, and to enrol in it all the English deserters who were willing to enter the service." The "Mexican field-marshal, Don Juan De Anaya," also fought against us at New Orleans. Generals Coffee and Carroll were both Irishmen, or of Irish extraction. As to general Jackson; he was not quite an Irishman. Both his parents, it appears, emigrated in 1765; and he was born on the 15th of March, 1767, at a place called the Waxsaw settlement, near Camden, in South-Carolina.

* Marengo, Austerlitz, Leipsiz, New Orleans, and Waterloo. Wilkinson's Mem. Vol. I. p. 654.

+ Latour's War in Louisiana, p. 176.

+ Ibid. 227.

His mother was "an exemplary woman ;" and, says Mr. Eaton, "to the lessons she inculcated on the youthful minds of her sons, was, no doubt, owing, in a great measure, that fixed opposition to British tyranny and oppression, which afterwards so much distinguished them."* We can now account for general Jackson's calling England "the common enemy of mankind, the highway robber of the world."† However, he proved himself at New Orleans, not only an able general, for the description of country in which he had to operate, but, in all his transactions with the British officers, both an honorable, and a courteous enemy. In his official despatches, too, he has left an example of modesty, worthy of imitation by the generality of American commanders, naval as well as military.

Every American history that we have seen, and, probably, every one that has been published since the war, charges the British commander at New Orleans, with having given out, on the morning of the 8th of January, for the parole and countersign, the words Booty and Beauty. The excellent moral character of the late sir Edward Pakenham renders this improbable; and we aver,without fear of contradiction, that, agreeably to the custom of our armies on the peninsula, no parole and countersign was given out at New Orleans. The same sentiment, but expresssed in * Eaton's Life of Jackson, p. 9. + Ibid. p. 282.