The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

COLONIAL TIMES

The French & Indian War

South Carolina Independent Co.

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Videos:

Message Icon:

Message:

Smilies




		$computer woes {CW:_(}$

Upload an Image File From Your PC For Insertion in Your Post

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.

T O P I C R E V I E W
Jumonville	Posted - October 10 2003 : 11:08:04 PM I am seeking information on Mackay's SC Co. that participated in the fighting at Fort Necessity. I'm looking for any and all information on them. Your help is greatly appreciated.
20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
Highlander	Posted - October 22 2003 : 01:14:19 AM quote: Originally posted by richfed Not saying this is the case here, necessarily, but often times casualty discrepencies result from differing interpretations of the word ... some witnesses consider only "killed" ouright in their numbers; others use "killed, wounded, & missing". That could explain this ... You are correct Rich.For Example,the casualty accounts for the Battle of Grant's Hill are always placed between 270 & 273.These would be killed,wounded or MIA.However,you have officers who were captured such as Major James Grant or Major Andrew Lewis who were later exchanged at the end of the war.Add to this the few hardy souls such as Robert Kirk and Thomas Gist who were captured by the indians and were adopted into tribes and later escaped!(some of the highlanders chose to stay with the indians when possible.Who would want to give up hunting and fishing all day?But I digress...)And what of those P.O.W.'s who survived the initial engagement but died in captivity?(such as those highlanders who were captured at Ft.Duquesne by the French but were allowed to be killed by indians as the Forbes Expedition closed in and the place was about to be scuttled). I would definitely like to see an amended return so to speak.If you look at the French attack on Ft.Ligonier, it has generally been recorded that the Crown Forces suffered 63 KIA.(mostly Marylanders).Would this include however,one Ensign George Price of the Royal Artillery who was wounded in the fighting,but did not succumb to his wounds until December 1758? In any case,the Fort Necessity website has a roster with the status of all of the participants.It doesn't say however how Robert Stobo nor Jacob Van Braam were factored in since they were hostages.Of course the 10 Frenchmen who surrendered and survived at Jumonville Glen were not exchanged by Robert Dinwiddie either.
SgtMunro	Posted - October 21 2003 : 11:26:04 PM Some orderly books showed that companies would carry an MIA for about a year, afterwards they were dropped from the regimental strength. During this time, the person would continued to be paid and stoppages deducted, until they were dropped, or all regimental accounts were balanced. Depending on how scrupulous the company commander was, pay could be drawn for this 'ghost' for years. Your Most Humble Servant,
Jumonville	Posted - October 21 2003 : 7:39:59 PM Anderson has 100 total - killed and wounded. That the 33 is only killed is the difference.
Jumonville	Posted - October 21 2003 : 7:37:54 PM quote: Originally posted by Highlander In all of the sources that I have seen,the number of British casualties given for Ft.Necessity was 33 killed.I never knew that the breakdown was 17 Independent Coy.and 16 from the Virginians however.Just as the number of French killed at Jumonville Glen was 10 vs. 1 Virginian for the British.Or does Anderson have different figures for that engagement as well?
richfed	Posted - October 21 2003 : 05:57:39 AM Not saying this is the case here, necessarily, but often times casualty discrepencies result from differing interpretations of the word ... some witnesses consider only "killed" ouright in their numbers; others use "killed, wounded, & missing". That could explain this ...
Highlander	Posted - October 20 2003 : 11:30:14 PM In all of the sources that I have seen,the number of British casualties given for Ft.Necessity was 33 killed.I never knew that the breakdown was 17 Independent Coy.and 16 from the Virginians however.Just as the number of French killed at Jumonville Glen was 10 vs. 1 Virginian for the British.Or does Anderson have different figures for that engagement as well?
Jumonville	Posted - October 20 2003 : 4:24:02 PM I was told by one Brian Reedy,a ranger at Ft.Necessity,that not a lot of information exists on MacKay's Coy.Trust me,they've looked.He did say that out of the 33 Crown Forces casualties,17 were from the Independent Coy.This leads me to believe that they were right out in front. [/quote] Anderson's "Crucible of War" and other sources place Washington's losses at around 100. What is your source aside from what the Ranger said? Anderson has extensive footnotes and documentation for his work.
Highlander	Posted - October 19 2003 : 11:34:51 PM We were able to furnish a few members of the South Carolina Independent Coy.to director Robert Matzen yesterday as he was filming the DVD version of "When the Forest Ran Red:Washington,Braddock and a Doomed Army"(due out in April 2004 www.paladincom.com)outside of Fort Doderidge.Along with Trent's Coy.and the First Virginia Regt.I heard that a fun time was had by all.
Highlander	Posted - October 15 2003 : 2:44:43 PM quote: Originally posted by Jumonville I am seeking information on Mackay's SC Co. that participated in the fighting at Fort Necessity. I'm looking for any and all information on them. Your help is greatly appreciated. I was told by one Brian Reedy,a ranger at Ft.Necessity,that not a lot of information exists on MacKay's Coy.Trust me,they've looked.He did say that out of the 33 Crown Forces casualties,17 were from the Independent Coy.This leads me to believe that they were right out in front.
SgtMunro	Posted - October 13 2003 : 11:56:14 PM You are right Fitz, there were three Independant Companies stationed in the North American Colonies during this period. Two were assigned to South Carolinia and one in New York. They were carried on the English Establishment of the British Army, and originally made up of 'invalids' too worn out for continental service, but still too healthy for retirement or Chelsea Royal Hospital. They would still occasionally recruit from the colonies to 'fill the gaps' when their regular source of bodies would dry up during extended periods of peace. Your Most humble Servant,
Hawkeye_Joe	Posted - October 13 2003 : 2:34:50 PM More on MacKay's Company: "After the battle of the Great Meadows, Colonel Innes was ordered to Will’s creek to construct a fort, which would serve as a rallying point to the remaining forces, and a guard to the frontiers. This was afterwards called Fort Cumberland. It was chiefly built by the three independent companies; one from South Carolina, under Captain Mackay, and two others from New York, which were on their march from Alexandria to join Washington, at the time of the action at the Great Meadows."
Fitz Williams	Posted - October 13 2003 : 01:29:15 AM quote: It was my understanding that the company built and garrisoned Fort Loudon. It was commanded first by Raymond Demere, then Paul. I have read that the SC Independent Companies (I think there were three) served in different areas, so it may be that the ones at Fort Loudoun were not the same ones at Ft. Necessity.
Highlander	Posted - October 12 2003 : 8:45:57 PM quote: Originally posted by Jumonville Did Mackay's Co. participate in Braddock's expedition? Yes,same company,different commander.Capt.Delamere replaced Mackay.Mackay doesn't appear during F&I again.However in Lord Dunmore's War,Mackay was a magistrate in Westmoreland Co.Pennsylvania.He then becomes involved in the affaif with Dr.John Connolly.
Scott Bubar	Posted - October 12 2003 : 3:06:28 PM It was my understanding that the company built and garrisoned Fort Loudon. It was commanded first by Raymond Demere, then Paul. Paul was killed in the massacre following the surrender to the Cherokees (as was most of the company) in 1760.
Hawkeye_Joe	Posted - October 12 2003 : 02:25:21 AM Only reference I found lists it as Capt. Delamere's South Carolina Company not even if it was a Royal Company like Mackay's or not....MacKay's was a company of Regulars.
Fitz Williams	Posted - October 11 2003 : 10:31:18 PM quote: under the command of a "Captain Delamere" Any chance this could refer to one of the Demere brothers?
Hawkeye_Joe	Posted - October 11 2003 : 4:07:33 PM I have found no mention of a Capt. James Mackay, or any James Mackay/Macky/Mckay with Braddock's expedition. It seems that the failure of the expedition to Va. was the high water mark of this British Officer's career. MacKay's name does not appear in any documents in Va. or SC after the aforesaid encounter. I do find one reference to a South Carolina Company under the command of a "Captain Delamere" in Braddock's Expedition, but I can find little else about this company or it's Captain or actions.
Jumonville	Posted - October 11 2003 : 1:59:03 PM Did Mackay's Co. participate in Braddock's expedition?
Al Amos	Posted - October 11 2003 : 11:29:50 AM Hawkeye Joe, Thanks! This is very good info and gives me an idea on how I can spice up my mini-campaign covering Washington's expedition in 1754 for HPS F&I War game. From the info in your post I see some interesting what-if scenarios, such as what if.... Washington would have fortified Gist's Plantation? Washington would have ignored the info and kept pressing on? the troops from NC and NY had been available earlier? Washington had successfully retreated to Will's Creek? BTW, would you or anyone else have any idea on the looks or layout of Gist's Plantation. Is it just a log cabin, or a small settlement? I want to make a map of the area to put into a Braddock's March mini-campaign and the above mentioned Washington mini-campaign.
Hawkeye_Joe	Posted - October 11 2003 : 04:15:55 AM Governor Dinwiddie busied himself corresponding with his fellow governors in the Carolinas, Maryland and New York in an effort to secure additional troops and munitions. Governor Glen of South Carolina appeared to be the first to respond favorably, and through his efforts, a company of regular British army troops, known as the Independent Company of South Carolina, was ordered to VA. Captain James Mackay, holding a commission from the King of England, was in command of this company of one hundred men. Captain Mackay and his men arrived at Hampton, in VA, on May 1st, and by the latter part of the month, they were in Winchester. This company was well equipped, with the exception that it lacked wagons and horses, items which were difficult to purchase at any price in Frederick County and adjoining Hampshire. By one method or another, sufficient transport was acquired, and on June 3rd, the company left Winchester for Will's Creek following the same road used by Washington and Fry. By June 8th, Mackay had reached Will's Creek. Spending but a short time there, he marched his troops over the mountains to aid Washington, who was then encamped at the Great Meadows. Mackay reached his objective on June 14th. This South Carolina detachment was the only reinforcement Washington received from any source outside the bounds of VA during the campaign. New York eventually furnished two companies commanded by Captains Thomas Clark and John Rutherford, while North Carolina furnished a force under command of Colonel James Innis, but these troops all arrived too late to aid Washington. Friday June 14, 1754 Captain James Mackay with the Independent Company of South Carolina arrives at The Great Meadows with 100 men. These men are welcome reinforcements as they are regular, well trained British soldiers. Problems of rank almost arise between Mackay and Washington. Mackay's rank is lower, but, obtained from the Crown and it takes precedence over Washington's Colonial rank. However Washington will not agree to turn over command of his men. The two men agree to essentially share leadership through consensus. Thursday June 27 An Indian messenger brings news that a French army has been gathered at Fort Duquesne and soon will be moving south towards the British force. Washington decides to end the road building work and also to ask Captain Mackay to bring his South Carolina company from the Great Meadows to Gist's Plantation. Saturday June 29 Captain Mackay and his South Carolinians arrive at Gist's plantation. With news of the French force being on the move, the officers have a conference "to consider what was most prudent and necessary to be done in the present situation of affairs."(George Washington) The officers decide to evacuate the plantation and retreat to the more defensible stockade at the Great Meadows. That afternoon the men begin their retreat. Monday July 1 The Virginians and the South Carolinians arrive back at the Great Meadows after taking more than two days to march thirteen miles. The officers hold a conference and decide the men are too weak and exhausted to try and retreat back across the mountains to Wills Creek (present day Cumberland Maryland). So instead the men begin working on trenches around the stockade to improve the protection for the men. A Virginian named John Ramsay deserts and finds sanctuary with the French army. He tells the French leader, Captain Coulon de Villiers, that the British army is in very poor condition. With this report, the French decide to press on. The Algonquins, some of the Indians with the French army, leave the expedition and return to their homes as they are nervous about being this close to British territory. Wednesday July 3 Before dawn, de Villiers pushes his men towards the Great Meadows. They pass the glen where Jumonville (his brother) and nine of his men were killed on May 28. Later, in his report, he wrote, "Here I saw some bodies still remaining." About 11 o'c

DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke

Custom Search

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.99 seconds