In The War That Made America, Fred Anderson writes about the dying General Forbes's plea to Commander in Chief Amherst.
Relations with native people were critical, [Forbes] wrote: Amherst must not think triflingly of the Indians or their friendship, for Britain's hold in the Ohio depended upon having Indian relations "settled on some solid footing." Indian affairs had almost always been misunderstood, "or if understood, perverted to purposes serving particular ends." . . . Amherst, Forbes stressed, must take a strong hand in dealing with all these potential sources of disorder. If Amherst neglected to protect the Indians' interest, and particularly if uncontrolled white settlement occurred west of the Alleghenies, chaos could easily engulf the region, and the interior of North America would be lost to the crown.There is nothing to indicate that the commander in chief paid any attention to the concerns that the dying Forbes voiced with such clarity and fervor.
No, instead Amherst okayed the projects of handing out smallpox-infested blankets to the native people and alienating the colonists whom Britain had taxed and requisitioned for the war. Eventually he returned to England "to deal with pressing personal concerns (among others, his estate had fallen into disrepair and his wife had gone mad)." Expecting a hero's welcome, he instead was greeted with "serious questioning about what had gone wrong in America." The king declined to offer him a peerage, "merely remark[ing] that while Sir Jeffrey's accomplishments were no doubt impressive, they 'would not be lessened if he left the appreciating [of] them to others.'"
Kings can get away with breathtaking rudeness, don't you think? Not that Amherst deserved anything better. I do wonder what happened to his wife, and why.
1 comment:
I can think many others, both famous and not whose "'accomplishments were no doubt impressive, they 'would not be lessened if he left the appreciating [of] them to others.'"
Post a Comment