The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-06-16

John Fiske, the historian, says: Nov at Bunker Hill, though the, Americans had not our modern weapons of precision, yet similar effect was wrought by the remark able accuracy of their aim, due to the fact that they were all trained marksmen, who waited coolly till they could fire at short range, and then wasted no shots in random firing. Most of the British soldiers who fell in the two disastrous charges of that day were doubt less picked off as cartridges are picked of by an old Sportsmen, and thus is explained the unpre- cedented slaughter of officers. Probably nothing suite like this had yet been seen in the history of war, though the principle had been similar in those wonderful trials of the long-bow in the mediaeval battles of Crecy and Dupplin Moor. Against such odds even British pluck and endurance could not possibly prevail. Under these circumstances, had the Americans been properly supplied with pow der, Howe could not more have taken Bunker Hill by storm than Burnside could have taken the heights of Fredericksburg.
 "The moral effect of the Battle of Bunker Hill, both in America and Europe, was remarkable. The moral advantage was felt to be entirely on the side of the Americans. It was they who were elated by the days work, while it was the British who were dispir- ited. The belief that Americans could not fight was that day dis pelled forever. British officers who remembered Fontenoy and Minden declared that the firing at Bunker Hill was the hottest they had ever known, and as a reaction from their former ill-judged contempt, it was asserted that the regulars of France were less formidable foes than the militia of New Eng land"
 Washington got the news of Bunker Hill when he was riding through Connecticut on his way to take command of the American forces at Cambridge. His first questions we are told, was: How did the militia meet the attack of the regulars?" And when the messenger told him, came the con- fident words, Then the liberties of the people are secure!" And when the news reached Bnjamin Frank lin in France, he declared jubi- lantly-that England had lost her colonies forever.
 In the death of the noble Dr. Joseph Warren at Bunker Hill, the patriots suffered an irreparable loss; and no one grieved more than his friend and neighbor, Paul Revere. He was the Revere fam fly physician, and for ten years those two fearless men had been doing dangerous teamwork for the patriot cause that is not sufficient ly known and appreciated. Dr. Warren, Harvard graduate, was only 35 when he died. He stood at the head of his profession; was a clear and forceful writer, and was the most eloquent and effective orator in Massachusetts, not ex- cepting the brilliant John Adams. He was man of the highest char acter, was beloved and trusted by the people; and if, the day before he died, patriots had been dis cussing among themselves who were their most capable and trustworthy leaders-Joseph War ren would have led the list. And with all his great and noble qual- ities, he sems to have. been abso- 'lutely unselflsh. He wouldn't ask another to do what he hadn't the courage to do himself, as he dem- onstrated on Bunker Hill.
 AS we know, just before the opening of the battle he had been chosen commander of the Massa- chusetts militia, but instead of taking command over Col. Pres colt at that time, he insisted upon Prescott continuing-shouldered a musket himself and joined the rank and file on the front line