that service, but more particularly to Lieutenant-Colonel Eyre, Major Bromfield, and Captain Millet, who commanded the attack, and Lord Dalrymple, Captains Beckwith and Stapleton, of whose very able assistance and distinguished gallantry the brigadier makes the most honorable mention.

The commander-in-chief has likewise the greatest pleasure in taking this public occasion of signifying to the army how much they are indebted to the humanity and benevolence of Captain Beazley, of His Majesty's Ship Amphion, to whose very friendly and generous assistance many of the wounded officers and men are most probably indebted for their lives.

FRED. MACKENZIE, D. A. General.

A

COURT-MARTIAL.

N extract from the proceedings of a general CourtMartial, beginning and held at New London and Groton, in the state of Connecticut, on the 20th day of August, Anno Domini 1782, by warrant and order of His Excellency the Captain-General of the said state, of which Brigadier-General Roger Newberry was President,

In which the following crimes and charges were exhibited at said Court, and by them with the proofs asserting the same were duly heard and considered, after which the sentences of said Court-martial were as follows:

Jonathan Latimer, Colonel of the 3d1 regiment, for breach of military law in not leading his regiment forward, and preventing the enemy from sacking and burning the town of New London, on the 6th day of September, A. D. 1781. From this charge he was ac quitted with honor.

Nathan Gallup, Esq., Lieutenant-Colonel of the 8th ' regiment, came prisoner before the court, when the following charge was exhibited against him, viz: That whereas, on the 6th day of September, A. D. 1781, (the

1 The 3d Regiment of Connecticut Militia included all men liable to duty in the towns of New London and Lyme. The 8th those of Groton, Stonington, and Preston. — A.

day on which the garrison and fortress standing in said Groton was attacked and stormed by a detatchment of the British army; the inhabitants of said Groton massacred; their houses burnt and their property plundered;) that he then holding and sustaining the aforesaid office and a commission thereto in said regiment, was shamefully negligent in his military duty, and guilty of acting a cowardly part when called to and in actual service.

Ist. In not supporting the garrison in said fort with succour, which was in his power, and by him had been specially engaged to the commandant for his encouragement in defending it, and in making no diversion. upon the enemy before the storm in favor of the garrison.

2dly. In suffering the militia to remain strolling and unembodied upon the hills, in fair view of the enemy when they were marching up to attack the fort.

3dly. In not falling upon and attacking the enemy at the favorable moment of their re-embarkation, which movement of the enemy was said to be well known to him.

4thly. In not attempting to prevent the burning of houses and other buildings of the inhabitants in Groton, done by scattering parties of the enemy.

5thly. In not preventing the wanton plundering of property belonging to the inhabitants, done by the militia and others in the houses which escaped the conflagration, and elsewhere in said town after the storm of said garrison and the burning done by the enemy.

And 6thly. In not preserving the public stores in the fort after the evacuation by the enemy, but suffering them to be embezzled and plundered; all contrary

to the rules and regulations for preserving order and good government among the militia of said state, and unbecoming an officer.

Sentence. The court, upon due consideration of the whole matter before them, are unanimously of opinion that Lieutenant-Colonel Nathan Gallup is not guilty of neglect of duty or of cowardly behaviour, as charged against him. He, therefore, by the Court is acquitted with honor.

Captain John Morgan of the 8th regiment, was ad judged guilty of neglect of duty and unofficer like behaviour, and sentenced to be suspended during the present war with Great Britain.

Captain Ebenezer Witter, of the 8th regiment, was charged with being concerned in plundering public property at Fort Griswold. The court found him not guilty of plundering, but that he acted a very imprudent part in ordering the gun carried to his house, and the court ordered him to return the said gun to the commanding officer at Fort Griswold.

Captain Thomas Wheeler and Lieutenant John Williams, of the 8th regiment, were charged with plundering in a wanton and shameful manner the goods of the inhabitants of Groton on the day of the battle.

The court found them guilty, and sentenced them to be cashiered, and be disabled in future from holding or sustaining any military commission in this state, and that they pay the expenses of their trial in equal parts.

Daniel Latimer, Ensign of a company of militia in

the 3d regiment, was charged with being negligent of his duty in not seasonably forwarding intelligence to his colonel of the expected approach and attack of the enemy. He was found not guilty, and was therefore acquitted.

Zabdiel Rogers, Esq., Colonel of the 20th regiment,' was called upon to answer to the charge of remaining inactive upon the 6th day of September. The sentence was not guilty, and acquitted with honor.

Joseph Harris, Jun., Esq., Lieutenant-Colonel of the 3d regiment, came prisoner before the Court, when the following charges were exhibited against him: That on the day when the British burned the town he was shamefully negligent in his military duty, and guilty of acting a cowardly part.

Ist. In not notifying his chief colonel of the enemy's approach.

2d. In not opposing their entrance into the town. 3d. In not supporting a part of said regiment when in battle at the north part of the town, which he was requested to, but shamefully refused to do.

4th. In allowing the militia to remain strolling and unembodied upon the hill in sight of the enemy. And

2 Lieutenant-Colonel Harris resided on the Town Hill road, nearly opposite Fort Nonsense. He is alluded to by John Hempsted and Jonathan Brooks in their narratives in not very complimentary terms. He appears to have been the only regimental officer of the 3d who resided in the immediate vicinity of hostilities that day. In the Connecticut Gazette of May 2d, 1783, he replied to the finding of the Court, and excused himself from the charge, taking up each specification in its order, and commenting at length upon it. Some of the arguments brought forward by him in support of his innocence are more ingenious than logical; and, as viewed at this late day, his conclusions are strained and far drawn. — H.