Ashtabula weekly telegraph. [volume] (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1853-1873, 1862-01-25
1912 md IsOa.


The magnitude of the scale upon which
the war is raging in this country, as con
ducted, is appalling The Revolution, com
pared with it, was relatively mere sue
cession Of skirmishes. The war of 1912,
measured both as regards numbers and the
field Of operation, sbrinks into contemplate
insignifcan0e beside The gigantic operations
that ere going on at the present hour. If
we look back atthe history, more especially
of the last war with Eegland aud compare
its leading incidents with those of the con.
1ict now raging, we shall find that il hard
ly rises to the dignity Of modern reconnois
ance. The "battles" dwindle down into
the vcriest martial emutes; the cansslities
are few, and The number OF prisoners taken
in victorious engagements counted rather
by hundreds than thousands.
We cite few incidents from the war Of
1912 to show what petty affairs relatively
were some Of the most brilliant victories
achieved by our arms.
The first battle of any Importance was
that Of Brownstown, near Detroit, fought
August 9th, 1912 Our force was only
coo, that of the British and Indians COM
bined, T50. Our loss was Is killed aud
sixty-three wounded; that of the enemy
100.
Gen. IIulps "army," which disgracefuIIy
surrendered at Detroit six weeks later, only
numbered trenty fee hundred men; while
that of the enemy consisted of only 700
English and coo Indians No wonder Gen.
Brock, who commanded the latter, wrote
to Sir George Provost: "When detail
my good fortune, your Excelleucy will be
surprised"
AT the battle of Queenstown, two col
umns of 800 men each, did about all thC
lighting on our side. Gen Van Rensselaer,
in his report, says: "0ne-third part Of tn
, men idle might have saved ALL" As
, was, some looked on, while "many fed I
the woods" leaving their brethren to thei
fate.
: At the seige Of Fort Erie, the Engls
threw 5000 red hot shot without hurtip
man. Our loss was only killed and
wounded
r Brigader General Smith abandoned b
favorite project of invading Canada We:
because, although he had been preparin
the greater part of the snmmer, and ha
energetically drummed up volunteers, b
had succeeded in collecting only soc meI
: and he did not think the expedition woul
be successful unless he had / 500 more
At the battle of York our force was
700; that Of the enemy, 700 English an
100 Indians. Our loss was 306 in kiIle
! and wounded; that ofthe enemy 100 killed
800 wounded, 200 taken prisoners. Thi
was one of the most brilliant of our victo
ries, yet it is not TO be compared with th
battle of Belmont or that Of Balls Bluff
either as regards numbers engaged or losse
sustained.
At the battle of Saekett's Harbor, th
enemy's force was 1000; ours SOC. Thei
loss in killed and wounded was $50, our
1854. Among his trophies taken by ou
troops were the British standard ant
mace. Orer the latter hung human scelp
Commodore Perry's victory ou LAX
Erie was esteemed "big thing" in its da!
yet his whole fleet consis ted of only 81 gun
and two swivels; that Of the enemy 62 gun
and two swivels. Onr loss in KILLED ant
wounded was 1913; that Of the enemy has
never been definitely known.
At the battle of Baltimore, the enemy
forces numbered from 1000 to 5000; our
was probably less than half that number
Our loss was about 270; that of The enem.
some 100 in killed. wounded aud missing
Even the battle of New Orleans look
insignificant to eyes that have witnessed
reconnaissance on the Potomac l6, 900 ST. on
and review Of 10, 600 troops. The BIRTHS
force, including sailors and marines, wa
about $4,000; that of Gen. jackson, 8
200 on the left bank of the river aud abou
500 distributed in positions hard by. On
loss was seven killed and six wounded
that of the enemy 700 killed, and /, 40
wounded.
! 1t is safe to say, that notwithstandin
the torpor Of large share Of our arm.
aud taunts that we have thus far "bee
, playing at war" greater number of liz,
have been lost within the past Eve montI
than during the entire war of 1872"
Col. Colt.