Looting Niagara

In the Niagara District, expectations of cooperation from local inhabitants clashed with the reality that ideologies often took less precedence than personal safety and property. Early in the war, officials and officers on both sides of the conflict were cautiously optimistic that the average settler of Upper Canada would support and fight for their side, either in defense of Britain or as welcome recipients of American liberty. Major-General Isaac Brock reported in 1811 that in Niagara he had “received the most satisfactory professions of a determination on the part of the principal inhabitants to exert every means in their power in defence of their property and support of the Government.”¹⁴² Once the war began, however, farmers were forced to leave their fields when called up for militia service and Brock “prepared to hear of much discontent in consequence.”¹⁴³ Support for the British government among the local residents fluctuated with the threat of invasion, need for militia service, and appropriations of food or supplies.

The inhabitants of Upper Canada were also unconvinced by the Americans’ promises of protection for private property: the scenes of looting from every invasion or raid directly contradicted those guarantees. Even after his missteps at York, Dearborn remained convinced that “a large majority [of inhabitants] are friendly to the United States and fixed in their hatred against the Government of Great Britain.”¹⁴⁴ While severely overestimating the number of sympathetic inhabitants, he was not entirely wrong that some Upper Canadians were open to switching sides for personal gain. In a successful surprise attack on Newark and Fort George in May 1813, the Americans gained control of the Niagara River from Lake Ontario to Lake Erie while the British retreated to Burlington Heights (now Hamilton). Several men in Upper Canada who had grievances with their fellow Britons chose to support and even fight alongside the Americans, hoping that a change in governance would benefit themselves and bring misfortune to their foes. Because they relied so heavily on militia who were reluctant to cross the border and rarely extended their service into additional terms, the American commanders granted commissions and enlisted local volunteers like Joseph Willcocks, a former sheriff and member of provincial parliament with opinions about arbitrary rule and liberty that had put him in opposition to more conservative Upper Canadians.¹⁴⁵ Regular army officers recognized the importance of the newly formed Canadian Volunteers and recommended the “use of the zeal, activity, and local knowledge which Colonel Willcocks certainly possesses to counteract the machinations of our enemy, and ensure the confidence of our friends amongst the inhabitants.”¹⁴⁶

In the 1817 depiction of the Battle of Fort George seen above, American soldiers are depicted landing on the far right, which was out of range for the cannons of Fort George on the other side of Newark, seen in the center. The lighthouse and two church steeples are visible along with other buildings in the town. In December 1813, the Americans burned all the buildings in the town except for the lighthouse. The stone walls of St. Mark’s Anglican Church survived the fires and the church was later rebuilt.

Rather than ensure the confidence of sympathetic locals, the Canadian Volunteers routinely plundered and raided the surrounding countryside and stole from their former neighbors. These acts directly contradicted proclamations about protections for private property and undermined the American goal of gaining support from local inhabitants to overthrow British tyranny. In Grantham township on the shore of Lake Ontario, Willcocks and his men took a horse from the farm of Margaret Darby, whose husband George had died just months earlier.¹⁴⁷ Across the district near the town of St. David’s, they stole eight cattle from Joseph and Frances Page.¹⁴⁸ Both the Pages and Margaret Darby named Willcocks specifically in their claim to the board of commissioners. One British officer denounced the Canadian Volunteers as “a lawless banditti, composed of the disaffected of the country organized under the direct influence of the American Government, who carried terror and dismay into every family.”¹⁴⁹ For the inhabitants of Niagara who had been promised protection by American commanders, being looted by men who had been their neighbors added insult to injury.

In addition to suffering at the hands of a roaming band of Canadian Volunteers, inhabitants of Niagara were also affected by the lack of authority and coordination between American officers that resulted in excessive raiding and looting. The need to raise large forces of militia gave wide latitude to individuals who could rally men to their personal causes. One of the most notorious was Dr. Cyrenius Chapin, a resident of Buffalo whose name became “synonymous with destruction.”¹⁵⁰ Chapin organized a force of mounted militia that conducted cross-border raids, participated in skirmishes, and staged a daring escape after being captured. Despite being admired by some, the company earned a reputation as uncontrollable marauders and the nickname “Dr. Chapin’s Forty Thieves.”¹⁵¹ One observer wrote, “The infamous Chapin has obtained the command of a company of militia who refused to consider themselves under the authority of the officer commanding the frontier.”¹⁵²

Chapin’s looting caused distress and suffering for the inhabitants of Niagara and damaged the American military operations in that region. Arrested on the orders of General McClure, Chapin was freed by his local followers and led a mob against McClure, who reported, “Since dismissing him and his marauding corps he has been guilty of the most outrageous acts of mutiny if not of treason.”¹⁵³ McClure soon abandoned his command, but Chapin remained until the British captured him at Buffalo and sent him to prison in Quebec. Chapin was not the only officer to ignore or misinterpret orders regarding the protection of private property, but his notoriety earned him disdain among his fellow officers and made him the most infamous American raider in the northern theater.

Chapin’s raiders and the Canadian Volunteers also participated in a large-scale program to identify and imprison local men. When the Americans captured Fort George in May 1813, General Dearborn issued paroles for any local man who requested one and met with local magistrates to approve their continued public service in the district.¹⁵⁴ In June, however, he received word from the Secretary of War to treat all male inhabitants as potential militiamen and ordered his men to scour the district and make arrests. Throughout the district, soldiers rounded up about one hundred men, including some militia, farmers, magistrates, lawyers, merchants, clergy, a young boy, and an old man. Most of this activity was carried out by “Chapin’s and Willcocks’s volunteers, with whom discipline was lax, and many outrages were committed. The inhabitants were insulted, maltreated, and pillaged mercilessly.”¹⁵⁵ Although the practice of imprisoning or paroling regular soldiers and militia was common, the arrest of ordinary men who had not served in the military was particularly galling, especially to those who had met with Dearborn in May. William Dickson, a justice of the peace, wrote to Dearborn hoping to clear up what he hoped was a misunderstanding. Dearborn rebuffed his query by stating that the imprisonment “resulted only from an obvious departure” from the agreed upon behavior.¹⁵⁶ No proof of misconduct was offered but the men were shipped to prison in Greenbush, New York.

In a letter published in the Baltimore Whig and reprinted in the New York Evening Post, an American observer applauded the precautions taken against “violent British partisans in this town and vicinity. The most conspicuous are taken up and sent over the river to be kept in the United States as hostages.”¹⁵⁷ Although meant to convey pride in actions against the enemy, the letter ignored the reality of the situation and unwittingly captured the true nature of the event: the men of Niagara were being held as hostages rather than prisoners of war. They had not been captured in a battle, many had not served in the military at all, and some were either too old or too young to serve. They were hardly “conspicuous” partisans. What separates this event most from precedents in other wars of the colonial era is that the war being fought in Niagara was not a civil war or revolution in which the local inhabitants could be considered traitors for simply being on the other side of the conflict.¹⁵⁸ Many of the men who were rounded up and imprisoned were merely lumped in with actual militia whose arrest at least reflected an accepted practice. Moreover, the order to arrest any eligible male unintentionally provided a pretext for abuses of power by men who were motivated by personal gain and revenge rather than adherence to civility and order.

The wholesale imprisonment of men throughout the district placed many women of the district in the unfortunate circumstance of tending homes and farms on their own while also coping with looting by American soldiers and their native allies. When Susannah Alexander’s husband Hugh, a prominent merchant with shops in Stamford and Fort Erie, was taken prisoner and sent to Buffalo, she remained in their home despite the risk of looting. Martha Rorbach, whose own house had been plundered after her husband had left with the retreating British army, joined Alexander at her house and witnessed “parties of the Enemy (volunteers and Indians) at different times […] forcibly take and carry away Several Waggon Loads and Horse Loads of Merchandise, wearing apparel, bedding and Household furniture.”¹⁵⁹ Around the same time, Alexander encountered Edward Hunt on the road and asked him if he could “save as much of her property as he could provided the Americans should attempt to plunder her House or Merchant Shop.”¹⁶⁰ Hunt was present when the shop and house were later looted, but was unable to convince the soldiers to stop. Alexander herself managed to save “one waggon Load of [goods], which she was induced and enabled, with a view of preserving them from plunder, to send to Buffalo in charge of her father in Law.”¹⁶¹ Despite her efforts, the Alexanders lost most of their personal property, including their house, stable, store house, and bake house as well as merchandise from Hugh’s businesses, an estimated total loss of more than £2,600 (about £183,200 in real wealth today).¹⁶² Like many other inhabitants of Niagara, Hugh and Susannah Alexander submitted claims to the board of commissioners, who set their own lower valuation of the losses. Approximately eighteen women in Niagara suffered plundering and looting by Americans or their native allies during the war and later submitted claims to seek compensation from the British government, ranging in value from £7 to over £100 (about £500 to £7,000 today).¹⁶³

In 1813, American soldiers looted the farm of Hannah Hill in Thorold, taking a horse, cattle, sheep, hogs, oats, wheat, a kettle, sheets, and cheese, for a total loss of about £107. Hill’s claim specifically names General McClure, General Peter B. Porter, and Captain Wilson, suggesting that she was familiar with the commanding officers overseeing the occupation of the district and may have been personally acquainted with those who looted her farm.¹⁶⁴ The claim submitted by Anne Graham also mentions the general in command of the troops who plundered her farm, but also includes a uncommon witness statement that further demonstrates the familiarity between the suffering inhabitants and their assailants. In a statement by American Lieutenant John Shortridge of the 1st Rifle Regiment, he admits that his force “took Eighteen Waggons & lightly loaded them with forrage consisting of Corn Wheat Oats & Hay, also about twenty Dragoons Loaded their horses with oats in the sheaf from a barn the property of the Widow Graham for the use of the U.S. Army.”¹⁶⁵ The signed statement is dated October 1814 at Fort Erie, which was at the time controlled by the Americans, so we can only speculate why he provided the account or how Graham came to possess it. When taken along with other witness statements, Shortridge’s admission was undoubtedly helpful in persuading the board of commissioners to approve compensation for Graham’s losses. On average, women who submitted claims for losses incurred by Americans looting their homes and farms lost about £53 or about £3,700 today.¹⁶⁶

This map shows the locations of the homes of the women in Niagara who submitted claims to the board of commissioners. These locations are approximate and are sometimes only accurate to the township level.

While already coping with American soldiers or their native allies looting homes and farms, the inhabitants of Niagara also had to endure billeting of soldiers, appropriations, and theft by the British army, which demanded loyalty and cooperation from inhabitants by day while its soldiers stole from them at night. During the repeated advances and retreats of both armies in the Niagara region, many townships changed hands multiple times, leaving the inhabitants vulnerable to repeated looting that was often justified as supporting the war effort or else depriving the enemy of resources. At least twenty-four women in Niagara submitted claims that included some losses incurred by British troops or native allies. Some losses were caused by the impressment of civilian property into military service. Azubah Haiger’s wagon and harness were taken by General Vincent during a retreat and were never returned. She applied for compensation after the war and her claim was approved.¹⁶⁷ Similarly, Abigail Anger’s team of two horses, a wagon, and harness were also used to carry soldiers and their wives during the retreat to Burlington Bay. However, when the team and wagon were then captured by the Americans, any chance Anger might have had to see her property returned by the British army was lost.¹⁶⁸ These cases of appropriation and subsequent loss were common for the inhabitants of Niagara, whose relationship with their so-called defenders was continually strained.

Rebecca Allison’s experiences are an exceptional example of the imposition of British troops in Niagara. Her home in St. David’s was used as a barracks and mess house for British officers at various times in 1813 and 1814. During their occupation, the officers damaged furniture and the house, for which Allison sought £25 in compensation. British soldiers also appropriated or stole potatoes, hogs, shovels, an axe, and hay to feed horses. They also broke down fences for firewood and destroyed the orchard and beehives. Allison’s claim listed four different British units as the perpetrators and attributed some losses to specific officers and staff, such as General Vincent, a Quartermaster of the 8th Regiment, and the baker for the Royal Regiment.¹⁶⁹ Many of the goods taken from Allison are not easily categorized as appropriated or looted, despite the distinction that later examiners might have sought. For Rebecca Allison and the other inhabitants of Niagara, the reason they were deprived of property and security mattered little because the end result was inevitably suffering.