(1)

Fate of 416 soldiers who landed in Boston, 1775

The American Revolution lasted for 8 years (1775 to 1783), and many British soldiers were in America for the
entire war. Each man had his own distinctive career, but sometimes an overview gives a useful perspective. Let's
look at the men of one regiment who arrived in America just as the war was beginning, and see how they fared
over the following years.

The 22nd Regiment of Foot embarked in Cork, Ireland in early May 1776. Hostilities had begun, but they didn't
know that yet - they had been ordered to America simply to reinforce the army already there, along with the 40th,
44th and 45th Regiments. The men of the 22nd were divided among four transport ships. Originally bound for
New York, they were met off the America coast by a British warship that redirected them to Boston. The
transports trickled in to Boston harbor during the last week of June and the first week of July, encountering the
aftermath of the battle of Bunker Hill and a fresh new war.

416 serjeants, corporals, drummers and fifers of the 22nd Regiment disembarked in Boston (along with about 30
officers, 60 soldiers' wives, and some soldiers' children, but we won't be discussing them here). Over the next
years many more men came into the regiment, but for now we'll discuss only this initial 416. During the next 8
years:

4 became officers. In general it was unusual for a man to "cross over" from the enlisted ranks to the officer corps,
so this low number is no surprise; it may even be deceptively high because some of the four may have been
qualified for a commission but enlisted because there were no vacancies (there were several "tracks" for men to
follow becoming officers; this is discussed in some detail in my book British Soldiers, American War).

14 were killed in battle in America. The 22nd Regiment was involved in fighting on Long Island in 1776, Rhode
Island in 1777 and especially 1778, and in New Jersey in 1780; the Grenadier and Light Infantry companies were
in many other actions. The regiment suffered more killed than this, but only 14 of the initial 416 died in battle.

4 died as prisoners of war. A few men of the regiment were taken prisoner here and there over the course of the
war, including at least one in Boston; 18 men were taken in New Jersey in 1780, and the light infantry company of
50 men was part of the army that capitulated at Yorktown in 1781. Many prisoners died in captivity; again, this
number reflects only those of the initial 416, not the total for the regiment during the war.

2 were executed in America after convictions for military crimes. One was convicted of robbery and desertion; it
was his second offence for robbery, and he was executed in Rhode Island in 1778. The other man murdered his
wife on Long Island in 1781.

7 never returned from captivity. Officially counted as deserters, the actual fate of many of these men is not known.
Most probably succumbed to the temptations of land ownership and a new life in the colonies.

92 died in the service. During times of peace most British soldiers enlisted in their early 20s with no expectation
of leaving the army until they were no longer fit for service; typical careers spanned 20 to 40 years. Wartime
enlistment was different, but for the 416 men who arrived in Boston the American war was only a portion of their
career. Some died in America, while others died years later, some as late as the 1790s. Muster rolls do not give the
cause of death; we assume that most of these men died of illness, but accidents and post-1783 warfare may have
claimed some.

30 deserted and never returned. This includes those who deserted in America and those who deserted in other
places after 1783; it does not include those who did not return from captivity. Reasons for desertion were many
and varied, so much so that we dare not suggest generalities!

176 were discharged and received pensions. Men who did serve 20 or more years, or who were disabled in the
service, could apply for a pension; this, too, is discussed in detail in my book. After factoring out the men who
died or deserted (and therefore could not received pensions), we see that the odds of getting a pension were fairly
good! And few careers during this era offered anything like a pension.

22 were discharged and received land grants. Those men who were eligible for discharge at the end of the war
could opt for a grant of 100 acres of land in Nova Scotia instead of returning to Great Britain and applying for a
pension. Considering that land ownership was only a dream for most British citizens, this was a very tempting
offer.

55 were discharged but received no known reward. When a man was discharged from the army, it was his own
choice whether to return to Great Britain to apply for a pension. Once the muster rolls shows that the man was
discharged, there is no way to know his fate unless he happens to show up later on the pension lists.
 10 unknown. And a few men disappear from the muster rolls of the 22nd or subsequent regiments with no
indication of why. In some cases the muster rolls themselves are missing. For the moment, we simply have no
way of knowing what became of these soldiers.

Overall, we see that about half of the 416 men who landed in Boston completed their military careers and received
either pensions or land grants. Considering the number that did not complete their careers, it becomes clear that
military service, although arduous, was an attractive career because of the possibility of a pension or land grant,
something that almost no other career could offer.

(2)
From various sources, we have information on the trade of 322 soldiers in the 22nd Regiment of Foot who served
in the American Revolution. Of these, over half the men had skilled trades, while the remainder were listed as
"laborers", period parlance for men who had no specific skill. Laborers may have worked as farm hands, unskilled
construction workers, dock workers, or in various other capacities where no specialized training was required.
The identified trades, in order of predominance, are:

 143 Laborers

 41 Weavers

 22 Shoemakers

 16 Tailors

 9 Carpenters

 6 each: Wagon Driver, Wool comber

 5 Breeches makers

 4 each: Cutler, Cooper, Gardiner, Miner

 3 each: Baker, Blacksmith, Bricklayer, Cordwainer, Flax dresser, Mason, Ribbon Weaver

 2 each: Barber, Cabinet Maker, Linen Weaver, Nailor, Silversmith, Tanner

 1 each: Brazier, Butcher, Cloth Dresser, Currier, Farmer, File smith, Glass cutter, Glazier, Gunmaker, Harness

Maker, Hatter, Hosier, Miller, Musician, Needle Maker, Painter, Sadler, Sawyer, Spectacle Maker, Stocking

Maker, Stone Sawyer, Thatcher, Tobacconist, Victualler, Wheelwright, Wire drawer

This gives a total of 179 men with trades and 143 without, or about 56% with skilled trades.

It is difficult to say whether this sample of 322 men is representative of the 1005 men who served in the 22nd
Regiment in America at some point during the American War. For example, the bulk of the data is from records
associated with pensions, and it is possible that men with trades were more likely to get pensions that those
without. Even if this data is does not accurately show the proportion of tradesmen in the army, it at least shows
the variety of trades.

The preponderance of textile workers, particularly weavers, is a simple reflection of Britain's economy that was
strongly based on the textile trade. The significant number of shoemakers, tailors and other clothiers, and
artificers such as smiths, coopers, carpenters and leather workers, shows that the regiment had within its ranks
the skills necessary to be self-sufficient when on campaign or in far-flung garrisons. It also makes clear that many
soldiers had opportunities to work and earn money over and above the base pay they received from the army.

Military books of the era made recommendations to officers about conditions under which soldiers should be
allowed to work outside of the army. The popular work "A System for the Compleat Interior Management and
Economy of a Battalion of Infantry" by Bennett Cuthbertson includes a chapter on the subject offering the
guidance that non-military jobs must not interfere with a soldier's duties and that the soldier was not to work in
his uniform. Especially clear from the recommendations is that it was normal and expected for soldiers to have
second jobs when circumstances allowed it - not unlike today's military.

This adds an interesting and overlooked dimension to the subject of a soldier's pay. Much is made in literature of
the meager pay of 8 pence per day, from which stoppages were made to pay for food, clothing, medical care and
other amenities. This pay, however, should be viewed not as the soldier's sole earning potential, but as his base
pay. We have seen examples of soldiers with trades being able to work for the army and will see more in future
installments. Soldiers without trades also were given opportunities to work at military projects such as building
roads, preparing and maintaining fortifications, cutting work, and numerous other activities.

How much could a soldier earn at a military job? An excellent and striking example is Joseph Harrison, a soldier
in the 22nd Regiment of Foot. Born in 1736, he had acquired no skilled trade by the time he joined the army in
1755. By 1782 he was a corporal.

For a period of 35 days in May and June 1782, he was among 7 men of the 22nd Regiment who, along with 7 men
of the New Jersey Volunteers, worked on a boat a Paulus Hook, a British outpost of the New York garrison on the
shore of New Jersey. The work these men did is not specified in the document that enumerates how they were
paid, but the amount of money that they earned is significant. Each man earned 4 shillings per day, six times the
base pay of a common soldier. Harrison and the other men of the 22nd Regiment each worked 18 days, and each
earned a total of 3 pounds 12 shillings. This was equivalent to about four month's pay, and unlike the base wage
there were no stoppages from it - it was all 'take home' pay.

Joseph Harrison was discharged after the regiment returned to Great Britain in early 1784, and received a
pension. The pension rolls mention that he had a "Wounded left eye" but it is not known when or under what
circumstances he received the wound.

(5)
Thomas Edwards, 22nd Regiment of Foot
A little-known detail of British army operations during the era of the American Revolution is that musket
ammunition did not always consist solely of single round lead balls. Although certainly the projectile of choice on
the battlefield, there were situations when other types of ammunition were more practical. Unfortunately only
enough information has come to light to inform us that other types existed, but not to tell us categorically when
they were used.

When the 32nd Regiment of Foot was stationed in Waterford, Ireland, orders were given for "six rounds of Buck
shot Cartridges" per man to be available, "which are only to be distributed when a party is called out." Although
not explicitly stated, the orders imply that the parties might be called out to quell domestic disturbances. For
small groups of soldiers on this type of duty, shot was a better option that ball, since it would be more likely to
inflict multiple wounds when fired into a crowd but perhaps less likely to produce fatal wounds.

The 32nd Regiment did not serve in America during the 1775-1783 war, but a case concerning a soldier in the
22nd Regiment in America provides another example of non-ball ammunition. When the British army occupied
Newport, Rhode Island and the surrounding countryside in December 1776 orders were given immediately to
protect local farms from plunder - plunder that could come from wayward soldiers of the garrison or from
American raiding parties that visited the island almost nightly. To provide this protection, individual soldiers
called Safe Guards were posted at each place of interest.

One of the Safe Guards was Thomas Edwards of the 22nd Regiment of Foot. Edwards was an experienced soldier;
he had joined the 65th Regiment of Foot some time before 1769 (gaps in the muster rolls leave his enlistment date
unknown) and was drafted into the 22nd Regiment in 1776. His long service made him a good choice for a post of
responsibility, but he found the job a challenging one. Although there were two officers and several soldiers
quartered at the farm that he was ordered to protect, it was the target of marauders during the nights of
December 1776. Edwards managed to catch several German soldiers in the act of robbery on several nights, but
nonetheless sheep, hay and other stock were spirited away throughout the month.

The specific orders given to the Safe Guards have not been found, but apparently they were only expected to
challenge intruders and ward them off without resorting to use of firearms. On the night of 31 December,
Edwards attempted to stop four German soldiers from robbing stock from the farm - which had been robbed the
night before - but the Germans dragged him around a field before disappearing into the night. A dazed and
confused Edwards staggered into the house, bedraggled and open-shirted, and asked why no one had come to his
aid. The next day he protested to Captain Brabazon of the 22nd Regiment, one of the officers living in the house,
that he no longer wished to be a safe guard if he had no way of stopping intruders. Brabazon took the matter to
the commander of the regiment, who authorized Safe Guards to fire on marauders if necessary. The other officer
quartered at the house, young Ensign Richard Proctor of the 22nd Regiment, went to the German barracks to
inform the officers that Safe Guards were now authorized to fire on intruders.

On the next night, about an hour after the evening gun had fired, a party of perhaps ten German soldiers broke
down a fence to enter the farm grounds. Edwards challenged them, but they did not respond. Edwards fired one
shot at the group of interlopers; because his musket was loaded with "Balls cut into square pieces", this one shot
wounded two of the Germans, one in five places and the other in seven. The man with seven wounds died within a
few days.

Edwards was brought before a general court martial on charges of "Maliciously Firing a Musket" and causing the
death of the German soldier. The full proceedings of the trial have been published, and it is from them that we
have the above details of the affair including the way that Edwards' musket was loaded. There are many other
accounts of individual British sentries firing on individual men - plunderers, deserters and others - and killing or
wounding them. Perhaps it was common for guards and sentries to use shot-like loads rather than single musket
balls, making their individual shots more effective.

Thomas Edwards was acquitted. He continued to serve in the 22nd Regiment until 29 August 1778 when he was
killed in the Battle of Rhode Island. Ensign Richard Proctor was also mortally wounded in that fight.

(3)

John Pearce, 3rd and 22nd Regiments

John Pearce joined the 3rd Regiment of Foot (the Buffs) in October 1763. We know nothing of his age, nativity or
background, and we have no details of the first 11 years of his military career. Whether he was a good, steady
soldier during those years or a difficult discipline case remains unknown, but a surviving set of records for the 3rd
Regiment that begins in 1774 gives a startling picture of him during a brief period in 1774 and 1775.

According to a summary list of regimental courts martial conducted in the 3rd Regiment in Ireland from August
1774 through December 1777, John Pearce was tried on 17 November 1774 “For being out of his Barracks till 10
O'Clock at night, & breeding a Riot in a beer house.” This unruly activity earned him a punishment of 100 lashes,
which he received. Infractions like this, and the corresponding punishment, were not unusual, but it bears noting
that only a small portion of the regiment ran afoul of military justice in this way; the majority of men in the 3rd
Regiment do not appear in the court martial list at all, and among those who do appear are many repeat
offenders.

It is difficult to imagine suffering 100 lashes, and such a punishment was intended to humble a soldier and make
an impression on his comrades. Nonetheless, only four days later Pearce was tried again, this time “For making
away with his necessaries.” This time he was awarded 300 lashes, and the record shows that once again he
received all of them. How a man could survive such a punishment is difficult to image. Among the duties of the
regimental surgeon was to help insure this survival by observing the punishment, seeing that the lashes were laid
on in such a way as not to endanger vital organs and monitoring the victim's health throughout the punishment;
the surgeon had the authority to stop the punishment if he believed the victim might die from its effects.
Indeed, one regimental surgeon wrote an entire chapter concerning details to be observed while men were lashed,
including specific examples from his own service.

Only four months later, in March 1775, Pearce was once more brought to trial, now “For selling a pr of Stockings,
being out of his Barracks at 9 O'Clock & defrauding a Publican.” He was again sentenced to 300 lashes, and again
received all of them. 700 lashes within a four month period. Recall that Pearce was not a new soldier; by March
1775 he was in his 11th year in the army and was certainly in his late twenties or thirties in age. Since the surviving
trial records begin only in August 1774 we have no way of knowing whether he had a sudden turn to poor
discipline or if he was routinely in trouble with his superiors, but it is difficult to imagine that he was punished at
this rate year after year.

Events in America brought a turn of fortune for Pearce. A large reinforcement was being sent to quell the rapidly
deteriorating situation there, and men were needed to fill out the ranks of those regiments. Men were taken from
regiments that were to remain in Ireland and put into those going on service. The regiments that provided the
men were ordered to give preference to volunteers, and order men only if enough suitable volunteers did not
come forward. We don't know whether Pearce saw this as his opportunity to escape the officers who enforced
discipline on him, or whether the officers were the ones who took the opportunity to get rid of Pearce. Perhaps it
was a mutual agreement. Regardless, Pearce was drafted from the 3rd Regiment to the 22nd Regiment on 9 May
1775. This says something about Pearce's fortitude, because only men suitable for campaigning were allowed to be
drafted and the receiving regiment had the right to refuse men deemed unsuitable. In spite of his recent 700
lashes, Pearce was accepted into his new regiment and within days was sailing with it to America.

John Pearce arrived with the 22nd Regiment in Boston in late June or early July (depending upon which ship he
was on). He must have remained reasonably fit in spite of his punishments, because he was soon put into the light
infantry company. A final testimony to his physical fitness, his boldness, and to his discontent with the army is
that he made off from the encampment on Boston Common on the night of 18-19 August and swam to Roxbury
where an American soldier made a diary entry recording the arrival of a British deserter. To date we have found
no further information concerning his whereabouts. What his legacy tells us is that it was somehow possible for
men to survive the seemingly outrageous punishments inflicted by the lash, and remain in a state of health that
allowed them to accomplish rigorous physical activity.

(4)
Executed: John Lindon, 22nd Regiment of Foot
Wives of British soldiers were an integral part of the British military, but information about them as individuals is
difficult to find. Strength returns often give the number of women who were part of a regiment, and groups of
returns allows us to do some statistics, make generalities, and understand some things about how women fit in to
the military system. But these are just numbers. When numbers of soldiers change, we can often correlate the
changes to recruiting efforts, illness, or combat. Usually we can find the names of the soldiers and the dates on
which they joined their regiments, deserted, died or were discharged. Rarely are we so well informed about the
women.

The proceedings of a British Court Martial held in February 1781 give some details about one of the hundreds of
British army wives serving in America. On trial was John Lindon, a private soldier in the 22nd Regiment of Foot
who had joined the regiment in 1767. The various testimonies given at the trial tell a story that sounds more like
something from a modern prime time news program than a vignette from the American Revolution.

John Lindon's wife (whose first name we do not know) worked as an army nurse. It was quite common for
soldiers' wives to be employed by the army in some capacity or another, and nursing was a reasonably well-paying
job (read more about soldiers' wives, their jobs and living conditions). When the 22nd Regiment departed Rhode
Island for New York in late 1779, Mrs. Lindon did not sail on the same ship with her husband; he claimed that she
also took all of his necessaries (shirts, shoes and stockings). When the regiment encamped in the New York area,
she refused to live with her husband.

In August of 1780, Lindon sought out his wife at the hospital where she worked. Grace Chapman, another nurse,
explained

that much discourse pass'd between the Prisoner and his Wife, which she the Deponent did not attend to - that
she heard the Prisoner desire his Wife not to be in a Passion, that he said he only wanted his right, that the
deceas'd ask'd What was his right - He answer'd "herself was" - She then reply'd - "She would never live with
him or any one else" that the Prisoner said - "if she would not live with him she should not live with any one
else" - that she the Deponent turn'd her head towards the Window; thinking the Prisoner was gone out of the
Room.

Donald Cameron, soldier of the 74th Regiment, did not turn away and was able to relate the subsequent events:

The Prisoner and his Wife were disputing and she desir'd him to go away and not make a Disturbance in the
Hospital - He answer'd, he would not go 'till he had his right - She ask'd him, What his right was - He answer'd
herself - She then made Answer, She never would go with him, the Prisoner then said if you had told me so
when I first came in, I should have gone away and said no more, for that was all I wanted - He the Deponent
was at this time sitting on the Bed. He observ'd the Prisoner take up his Firelock [musket] and face towards the
Door, and supposes, He at that time cock'd his Firelock - He then said if you do not live with me, you shall not
live with any one else, and then turn'd round and fir'd his Piece - that the Woman immediately fell and to the
best of his the Deponent's recollection, died in four or five hours afterwards.

Cameron said Lindon did not

shew any Concern - He levell'd his Piece in such a Manner, not bringing it to his Shoulder, that He the
Deponent, thought he was going to Charge or Strike the Woman, and was going to prevent him, but before he
the Deponent could effect his intent, the Piece was fir'd... To the best of his recollection the Muzzle of the Piece
touch'd her Cloaths.

The final witness, Surgeon Thomas Ady, treated Mrs. Lindon and said,
she had been shot thro the Body, below her breast - that the Woman died the same day, and to the best of his
Judgement, he thinks the Wound she had receiv'd, was the Cause of her Death

John Lindon did not deny the murder charge, but offered a defence which sounds very modern; he testified that
his wife's

repeated ill behaviour exasperated him in such a manner, that at times he was not sensible and could not be
accountable for his Actions - He farther says he has serv'd His Majesty Fifteen Years and submits himself to the
Mercy of the Court.

He called on an Officer, Lieutenant Benjamin Craven of the 63rd Regiment of Foot, who had for several years
been in Lindon's company in the 22nd. Craven pointed out "that the Character of the Prisoner in General, is that
of a good Soldier."

John Lindon was found guilty, and was sentenced to be hanged by the neck until dead. He was executed 22 March
1781.

Neither John Lindon nor Mrs. Lindon could know that their tragic demise would be remembered two centuries
later. Their situation makes many current news events appear not so unique to our times. More importantly, a
real person can be associated with the cold numbers which we often must use to learn about the period. An event
can be associated with a change in the numbers. The story of Mrs. Lindon gives a reminder that every number
represents an individual who had their own unique circumstances to live with every day, and who by their very
existence became a part of history to be discovered.

(6)

Employed soldiers: John Watkins and Patrick Lenahan, 22nd Regiment

John Watkins enlisted in the 22nd Regiment of Foot on 13 November 1766 at the age of 26. He may have served
previously in the army for four or five years, but that is not clear. He first appears on the muster rolls of the 22nd
on 8 December 1766. In 1767 or early 1768 he deserted, and was taken up in Devonshire and returned to the
regiment. The native of Scotland was a tailor and by 1775, if not sooner, was working at his trade for the regiment.

Patrick Lenahan joined the 22nd Regiment of Foot on 15 March 1775, when the regiment was recruiting to full
strength in preparation for embarkation for America. The Irishman was also a tailor, and it wasn't long before he
was working with Watkins.

Normally, regiments in America received new regimental clothing (coats, and cloth for waistcoats and breeches,
as well as buttons, buttonhole lace and other finishing materials) in October or November. The tailors then had
the winter to make waistcoats and breeches, and fit the coats to the soldiers. The effort required to tailor fit each
garment was well spent, because the clothing was expected to last for a full year and then still be usable for off-
duty and fatigue use. Clothing that fit properly would wear properly, provide the best comfort when on duty, and
the best defense against inclement weather. Well-fitted clothing was not a matter of form but of function.

The tailors of the 22nd Regiment may not have been so busy in the winter of 1775 because the regiment's new
clothing, along with that of the 40th Regiment, had been captured when the ship carrying it sailed in to
Philadelphia in August 1775. This was due to a poor understanding of the political and military situation early in
the war; the 22nd and 40th had originally been ordered to New York and were diverted to Boston when they
arrived off of the American coast in June. The ship with the new clothing left Great Britain several weeks after the
regiments and literally passed in the night a British warship stationed to divert shipping from ports that were not
under British control.

Work was nonetheless available for the tailors. At the court martial of another soldier in Boston, John Watkins
testified that he cut out suit of brown clothing for an officer of the 22nd as well as making a greatcoat for the
officer. He also cut out a surtout (a type of overcoat) for the officer's servant. Patrick Lenahan testified that he
assembled the surtout in early December. Presumably they were paid for this extra work which was outside of
work on regimental clothing. The fact that Watkins cut out the garments indicates that he was the more
experienced tailor, able to measure and pattern the garments, while Lenahan's being tasked only with assembly
suggests that he was newer to the trade.

Two years later, Lenahan was sent from Rhode Island to Philadelphia to join the 22nd Regiment's light infantry
company which had sustained a number of losses in the 1777 campaign. That he was chosen for this active,
campaigning company shows that his work as a tailor did not detract from his fitness as a soldier. Unfortunately
he would not remain long in this new role. He died on 18 September 1778, of unknown causes.

John Watkins enjoyed a much longer career. He served for the remainder of the war in America and returned to
Great Britain with the 22nd Regiment, finally taking his discharge on 6 June 1785 after over 19 years in the 22nd
Regiment. He received an out pension because he was 'worn out & rheumatic' and signed his own name on his
discharge. Like many campaigners, though, Watkins was not done with the army. On 4 January 1788, at the age
of 48, he joined an invalid corps on the island of Jersey, a unit that garrisoned and maintained military
installations. He continued in this corps through 22 August 1800 when he was once again discharged and
pensioned, this time at the age of 60.