WASHINGTON’S ENGINEER
WASHINGTON’S ENGINEER
Louis Duportail and the Creation of an Army Corps
NORMAN DESMARAIS
An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
4501 Forbes Blvd., Ste. 200
Lanham, MD 20706
www.rowman.com
Distributed by NATIONAL BOOK NETWORK
Copyright © 2021 by Norman Desmarais
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Desmarais, Norman, author.
Title: Washington’s engineer : Louis Duportail and the creation of an Army Corps / Norman Desmarais.
Other titles: Louis Duportail and the creation of an Army Corps
Description: Lanham, MD : Prometheus Books, 2021. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This is a unique biography about an overlooked, even obscure, French officer that was instrumental in the American cause for independence. As a complete biography, it covers Louis Deuportail’s time as the first Commandant of the Army Corps of Engineers, his return to France, and his service in the French army.”—Provided by publisher.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020033020 (print) | LCCN 2020033021 (ebook) | ISBN 9781633886568 (cloth) | ISBN 9781633886575 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Duportail, Antoine-Jean-Louis Le Bègue de Presle, 1743–1802. | United States—History—Revolution, 1775–1783—Campaigns. | United States—History—Revolution, 1775–1783—Engineering and construction. | United States. Continental Army. Corps of Engineers—History. | United States—History—Revolution, 1775–1783—Participation, French. | Generals—France—Biography.
Classification: LCC E207.D9 D47 2021 (print) | LCC E207.D9 (ebook) | DDC 973.3092 [B]—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020033020
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020033021
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.
I have a high opinion of his merit and abilities, and esteem him not only well acquainted with the particular branch he professes, but a man of sound judgment and real knowledge in military science in general.
—George Washington, in a letter to the president of Congress, November 16, 1778 (Washington, Papers, 18:168)
CONTENTS
Cover
HalfTitle
Title
Copyright
Contents
Introduction
1 Early Years
2 Valley Forge
3 West Point and the Hudson
4 The Campaign of 1779
5 The Campaign of 1780: Charleston
6 The Corps of Engineers
7 Prisoners of War
8 The Campaign of 1781: Yorktown
9 Peace
10 American Citizen and Farmer
Appendix A: Cargoes of Two of Beaumarchais’s Ships Sent to America
Appendix B: Chiefs of the Corps of Engineers, 1774–1893
Notes
Glossary
Works Cited
Bibliographic Essay
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
Guide
Cover
HalfTitle
Title
Copyright
Contents
Introduction
Start of Content
Appendix A: Cargoes of Two of Beaumarchais’s Ships Sent to America
Appendix B: Chiefs of the Corps of Engineers, 1774–1893
Notes
Glossary
Works Cited
Bibliographic Essay
INTRODUCTION
Since the Battle of Hastings in 1066, the British and the French were archenemies; the French victory resulted in a French king ruling England for more than three centuries. In the eighteenth century, American colonists, being British subjects, shared the same prejudices and dislike of the French. Moreover, the French were also their enemy in the colonial wars, particularly the French and Indian War, which was begun by George Washington. As many of the colonists came to America to escape religious persecution, especially the Catholic Church’s Inquisition, they were loath to ally themselves with the French, most of whom were Catholic. So why did the Americans turn to France for assistance in their struggle for independence?
Following the basic military principle “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” the colonists turned to France, hoping that she would desire to avenge her defeat in the French and Indian War and try to regain lost territory. Further, the French had the best military engineers, and the colonists desperately needed engineers. Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban (1633–1707) was generally regarded as the best military engineer in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, his influence extending into the mid-nineteenth century.
Military engineering in the eighteenth century combined the skills of the artilleryman and the engineer and focused on three main areas: fortification, artillery, and cartography. Defensive activities normally involved erecting small, temporary structures, such as earthwork batteries, at vulnerable points along the Atlantic coast and palisaded outposts along the interior frontier. Engineers also created less permanent field fortifications to provide advantage on the battlefield. They also reinforced and strengthened existing houses and constructed blockhouses. Examples of their work include those by British, Hessian, French, American, and Spanish engineers:)
Fort Chambly, Île aux Noix, Les Cèdres, Louisbourg, and Québec (Canada)
Fort Phoenix (Massachusetts))
Fort Butts (Rhode Island))
Fort Griswold (Connecticut))
Forts Clinton/West Point, Montgomery, Niagara, Ontario, Salonga/Slongo, Stanwix/Schuyler, Stony Point, and Ticonderoga (New York)
Fort Lee, Monmouth, Morristown, and Red Bank/Fort Mercer (New Jersey)
Brandywine/Chadds Ford, Fort Mifflin, and Valley Forge (Pennsylvania)
Yorktown (Virginia))
Guilford Courthouse (North Carolina))
Camden, Fort Dorchester, Fort Sullivan/Fort Moultrie, Kings Mountain, and Ninety Six (South Carolina)
Fort George/Fort Morris and Spring Hill Redoubt (Georgia))
Castillo de San Marcos (Florida))
Fort Michilimackinac (Michigan))
Fort Laurens (Ohio))
Point Pleasant (West Virginia)
As it was common to destroy fortifications when they were no longer needed, most of these examples are now reconstructions. A number of Revolutionary War–era fortifications were replaced by fortifications during the War of 1812 and the Civil War.
An engineer’s main duty during battle was to command the artillery. He selected the type of shot (round, grape, canister, bar, sliding bar, chain, star, mortar/bomb) to be used and determined the size of the charge (amount of powder to use). He also calculated the distance and trajectory to the target.
Cartographers in the military were known as topographical engineers, and their job essentially involved making maps. General Washington appointed Robert Erskine as “Geographer and Surveyor-General to the Continental Army” on July 19, 1777. He was commissioned as “Geographer and Surveyor to the Army of the United States” the following week, on July 27.
The military engineer was the most difficult staff officer to obtain because of the highly technical skills required. American engineers knew a great deal about civil construction and could erect simple fieldworks, but their skills were not on par with those of formally trained European military engineers. American engineers created earthworks that the Crown forces sometimes chose not to attack, but they could not conduct a formal siege of a town. Their lack of skill turned operations into a mere blockade.
Types of artillery shots. Photo courtesy of the author.
Pierre-Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais (1732–1799), the son of King Louis XVI’s watchmaker and better known as playwright of The Barber of Seville and The Marriage of Figaro, wrote a lengthy memo to King Louis XVI on February 29, 1776, outlining why France should help America. He concluded, “[T]he saving of a few millions [livres or francs] to-day would surely result in the loss of more than 300 within two years.”1 He also emphasized the Americans’ need of arms, powder, and especially engineers, stressing that without engineers, the Americans could not even defend themselves, let alone win.2
The Congressional Committee of Secret Correspondence appointed Silas Deane to the Secret Committee of Congress (which also included Benjamin Franklin, Benjamin Harrison, John Dickinson, John Hay, and Robert Morris). Deane was commissioned on March 2, 1776, “to go to France, there to transact such business, commercial and political as we have committed to his care, in behalf and by authority of the Congress of the thirteen united Colonies.”3
PHILIPPE CHARLES JEAN BAPTISTE TRONSON DU COUDRAY
Silas Deane and Benjamin Franklin were instructed to hire skilled professional soldiers in addition to soliciting material assistance as part of their diplomatic mission to France in the summer of 1776. Beaumarchais and Jean-Baptiste Vaquette de Gribeauval (1715–1789), the leading artillery expert of the century, advised Deane to contract Philippe Charles Jean Baptiste Tronson du Coudray (1738–1777), one of Gribeauval’s protégés, to organize and lead a group of volunteers to America. Despite his extravagant claims, du Coudray was actually a military theorist whose rank was equivalent to that of an artillery major. Deane granted him a generous contract promising him essentially a free hand in artillery and engineer operations and the title of general of artillery and ordnance.
Meanwhile, Beaumarchais, operating under the corporate name of Roderigue Hortalez et Cie., wrote to the Committee of Secret Correspondence on August 18, 1776, to tell them that the company was founded for the sole purpose of serving them in Europe to meet all their needs there and to see that all th
e goods, cloth, canvas, powder, munitions, guns, cannons, and even some gold to pay the troops could be obtained rapidly and under concession. Whenever possible, Beaumarchais would remove any obstacle that European politics might present. He also told Deane and Franklin that he had procured about 200 bronze four-pounders, which he would send at the earliest opportunity, along with 200,000 pounds of cannon powder; 20,000 excellent guns; some bronze mortars, bombs, cannonballs, and bayonets; plates, cloth, linen, and so on to clothe the troops; and some lead to make musket balls. He also found an artillery and engineer officer who would leave for Philadelphia before the arrival of the first shipment, accompanied by lieutenants and officers, artillerymen, gunners, and so on.4
Franklin conveyed du Coudray’s request to the Comte de Saint-Germain, the French minister of war, in December 1776. Saint-Germain allowed four French engineers to volunteer for service in America: Louis le Bègue de Presle Duportail; Louis-Guillaume-Servais des Hayes de La Radière; Jean-Baptiste de Gouvion; and Jean Baptiste Joseph, Comte de Laumoy.
Du Coudray embarked for America with twenty-nine officers and twelve sergeants of artillery, with assurances from the commissioners that he would be commissioned a major general and given command of the artillery. The group arrived in Philadelphia in May 1777, but some American generals resisted du Coudray’s appointment. They were reluctant to appoint a Frenchman as commander of artillery above American general officers. Generals John Sullivan, Nathanael Greene, and Henry Knox wrote to Congress on July 1, expressing their reservations. Sullivan threatened to resign his commission if du Coudray were promoted over Knox. Congress reacted on July 3 by resolving that the
president inform General Sullivan that Congress have not been accustomed to be controlled by their officers in the measures which they are about to take in discharge of the important trust committed to them by the United States; that they mean not to be controlled by his letter in their proceedings respecting Monsr. du Coudray; for that whatever those proceedings may be, General Sullivan’s resignation will be accepted by Congress whenever he shall think it proper to transmit it to them.5
Congress also directed General Washington
to let those officers know that Congress consider the said letters as an attempt to influence their decisions, and an invasion of the liberties of the people, and indicating a want of confidence in the justice of Congress; that it is expected by Congress the said officers will make proper acknowledgments for an interference of so dangerous a tendency; but if any of those officers are unwilling to serve their country under the authority of Congress they shall be at liberty to resign their commissions and retire.6
Congress appointed a committee on July 15 to meet with du Coudray to inform him that the agreement offered by Silas Deane could not be carried out, but Congress would “cheerfully give him such rank and appointments as shall not be inconsistent with the honour and safety of these States, or interfere with the great duties they owe to their constituents.”7 The committee delivered its report to Congress on July 21, requesting that du Coudray