Expert answer:The San Patricio Deserters in the Mexican War Rich
Solved by verified expert:Online Discussions for Chicano 8 class. 5-7 sentances each questionWho are the San Patricios?Why were they considered deserters?Are the San Patricio’s actions acceptable or not?
the_san_patricio_deserters_in_the_mexican_war.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
The San Patricio Deserters in the Mexican War
Author(s): Richard Blaine McCornack
Source: The Americas, Vol. 8, No. 2 (Oct., 1951), pp. 131-142
Published by: Academy of American Franciscan History
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/978297 .
Accessed: 31/03/2013 18:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Academy of American Franciscan History is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The Americas.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE SAN PATRICIO DESERTERS IN THE
MEXICAN WAR
NE OF THE perplexing problems in the history of the
Mexican War has been the account of a body of deserters
from the American army which called itself the San Patricio
Battalion. Many of these deserters were being tried and executed
or severely punished as the troops of General Scott pushed into the
heart of Mexico’s capital. The account of the desertion of the
San Patricios has been the subject of much debate, a great deal of it
bitter, between historians with either a Catholic or Protestant point
of view.’ Many Protestant writers have been prone to use this
event as an illustration of placing faith above patriotism, the desertions
being laid at the door of the Mexican clergy who are charged with
actively attempting to entice Catholic soldiers among the American
forces, largely recent German and Irish immigrants, to leave the army
of a Protestant power bent on the destruction of a Catholic nation
and on the spoliation of the temples of the Catholic faith. Catholic
writers have been quick to issue a full denial of such charges. To
date most of the charges and countercharges concerning the San
Patricio Battalion have been based almost exclusively on secondary
evidence. The essential truth of the matter would appear to be obtainable only from the actual records of the deserters in the files of the
United States Army. It is on these records that this article is based.
The San Patricio Battalion, called by the Mexicans Legidn de
Estrangeros, was an organization formed largely of deserters from the
American army together with a sprinkling of other non-Mexicans
resident in Mexico. Desertion from General Taylor’s command began as soon as the American army encamped on the banks of the
Rio Grande. General Ampudia, in command of the Mexican forces
at Matamoras, scattered leaflets among the American troops calling
upon the many English, Irish, German, French and Polish immigrants
to abandon the American army and urged them not to “contribute
to defend a robbery and usurpation which, be assured, the civilized
1 The three most important accounts of the San Patricio Battalion are: Sister
Blanche Marie McEniry, American Catholics in the War with Mexico (Washington,
1937), especially chapter V, “The San Patricio Battalion”; Edward S. Wallace,
“Deserters in the Mexican War,” in Hispanic American Historical Review, XV, 374380; and G. T. Hopkins, “The San Patricio Battalion in the Mexican War,” in Journal
of the United States Cavalry Association, September, 1913, 278-290.
131
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
132
IN THE MEXICANWAR
SAN PATRICIO DESERTERS
nations of Europe look upon with the utmost indignation.”2 Somewhat later the new Mexican commander, General Arista, offered anyone who would desert the American army a reward of three hundred and twenty acres of good land. General Taylor himself stated
that “efforts are continually being made to entice our men to desert,
and I regret to say, have met with considerable success.”3 Desertion
became even more serious during and after the capture of Monterrey
and for the first time the Mexican clergy were condemned as the
instigators. Niles Register reported that priests were active among the
immigrant soldiers and that the Mexican press hailed the deserters
as Roman Catholics who, “following the impulses of their hearts,
have passed over to our army to defend our just cause.”4
The San Patricio Battalion first appears as an organized unit of the
Mexican army in the Battle of Buena Vista where it fought as a
battery of artillery of eighteen and twenty-four pounders which were
moved into position over extremely difficult terrain.5 In the campaigns of General Scott as he advanced inland from Veracruz through
Cerro Gordo to Puebla and then on into the outskirts of Mexico
City, the battalion is not mentioned. Evidence given later at the
trial indicates that the battalion was being reorganized as infantry
and also that the Mexicans simply did not trust the American
deserters to fight at this time their former comrades-in-arms. However, as Scott’s army pushed its way into the suburbs of the capital
the San Patricios were called upon to take part in its defense. The
battalion was marched out to the convent of Churubusco with the
Independencia regiment before it and the Bravo regiment following
behind to insure that the Americans did not falter along the way.
Once the battle had begun at Churubusco on August 20, 1847, the
San Patricios appear to have fought like tigers, realizing the fate
that awaited them if captured. It was reported that three times the
Mexicans in the convent attempted to raise a white flag only to
have it torn down and the fight continued by the San Patricios. In
the report of the First Brigade of the First Division it was stated,
“Of prisoners we paused to take very few although receiving the
surrender of many. . . . Among them, however, we secured twentyseven deserters from our own army, arrayed in the most tawdry
Mexican uniforms. These wretches served the guns (the use of
2 30 Congress, 1 Session, House Executive Document No. 60,
pp. 303-304.
SIbid., p. 133.
4 Niles Register, October 16, 1847, pp. 103-104.
5 James Henry Carleton, The Battle of Buena Vista (New York, 1848), p. 83.
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
RICHARDB. MCCORNACK
133
which they had been taught in our own service) and with fatal effects
on the persons of their former comrades.”6 Another participant in
the Battle of Churubusco reported that “our men were with difficulty prevented from killing them. . . . They looked meanly
enough under the threats and fierce looks of our men who wanted
to eat them up.”7 All accounts agree that the deserters put up
a bitter fight until their ammunition was exhausted and there was
no hope of extricating themselves. All also agree that their captors
were loud in their demands for their immediate trial, and that “the
Irishmen in our army, who had remained true to their colors, were
the most clamorous for their execution.”8
In the Battle of Churubusco some eighty-five of the two hundred
men who formed the battalion were taken prisoner. Those of the
captured San Patricios who were deserters from the American army,
seventy-two in all, were ordered to trial by court-martial by General
Scott in General Orders 259 and 263. The trials were held under
two courts, one sitting at San Angel with Colonel Bennet Riley of the
Second Infantry as president, while the other sat at Tacubaya with
Colonel Garland of the Fourth Infantry as president.9 The trials,
the proceedings of which will be considered below, resulted in the
condemning of all prisoners, except one, to death or to severe punishment. The sentences were reviewed by General Scott and many
were commuted from death to whipping and branding, while in a
very few cases the sentences of the courts were completely remitted.
In all, fifty of the prisoners were hanged, while sixteen were sentenced “to receive fifty lashes well laid on with a raw hide on his
bare back: to forfeit all pay and allowances that are or may become
due him: to be indelibly marked on the right hip, with the letter
‘D,’ two inches in length: to wear an iron yoke weighing eight
pounds with three prongs, each one foot in length, around his neck:
to be confined at hard labor, in charge of the guard
during the time
6
Report dated August 23, 1847, United States Archives, Army of the United States,
(hereafter cited as U. S. Arch., AUS), Office of the Adjutant General, 27932-1895.
7Journal of Henry M. Judah, ms., Library of Congress, Division of Manuscripts,
entry for August 21, 1847.
8Carleton, op. cit., p. 83; 30 Congress, 1 Session, House Ex. Doc. No. 1, pp. 219,
344; Raphael Semmes, The Campaign of General Scott in the Valley of Mexico
(Cincinnati, 1852), p. 316; Edward D. Mansfield, The Mexican War (New York,
1848), p. 280.
9 The records of the trials of the deserters are contained in two bundles of papers,
U. S. Arch., AUS, Judge Advocate General’s Office (J. A. G. O.), EE525 (San
Patricio Battalion, Tacubaya, Mexico), and EE531 (San Patricio Battalion, San
Angel,
Mexico).
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
134
SAN PATRICIO DESERTERS
IN THE MEXICANWAR
the Army remains in Mexico: and then to have his head shaved and
be drummed out of the service.”” One had his sentence changed
to conviction for A.W.O.L., and was discharged with a loss of all
pay; four had their sentences completely remitted, and one was
considered outside of the jurisdiction of the court, never having been
formally sworn into the army at all. The sentences were confirmed by General Scott in General Orders 281 and 283, and were
carried out on various dates. Sixteen of the prisoners were hanged
at San Angel on September 10, four at Mixcoac on the eleventh,
and thirty were hanged on September 13 at Tacubaya within sight
of the assault taking place against the Castle of Chapultepec. “Colonel
Harvey . . . told them that they should live long enough to see the
American flag hoisted upon the battlements of that fortress and no
longer. In a few minutes our colors were raised, and after it was
shown to them they were launched into eternity.””‘ In connection
with the executions at San Angel the clergy of the village are mentioned as pleading for the lives of the prisoners only to be told
by General Twiggs that the crime for which they were being punished could be laid at the door of Ampudia, Arista and Santa Anna
who had seduced the wretches from their duty. Seven of the sixteen hanged at San Angel were Catholics and their bodies were
turned over to the priests for burial in consecrated ground.12
Many statements have been made to the effect that the San Patricio
Battalion was Irish and Catholic. Support is given to this statement
by the name of the battalion, by its battalion flag described as “Saint
Patrick, the harp of Erin and the Shamrock upon a green field,” and
by the name of its commanding officer, John Riley. Among many
examples of such accusations is that of the New Age: “Another
outstanding example of Roman Catholic disloyalty . .. occurred at
the battle of Churubusco though modern historians are painfully silent
concerning it.”13 General Silas Casey, writing in the Christian World,
stated that obstinate resistance offered to the Americans at Churubusco by the Mexican army “was caused by the presence of more
10 General Order
283, September 11, 1847, U. S. Arch., AUS, Office of the Adj.
Gen., Mexican War, Army of Occupation, Miscellaneous Papers, R. G. 94, Box 7.
This order concerned only the prisoners tried at Tacubaya. General Order 281 provided for branding on the cheek for the prisoners tried at San Angel, and from
contemporary accounts it would appear that all the prisoners suffering the punishment of branding were treated in the latter fashion.
11The American Star, September 20, 1847.
12Ibid.; G. T. M. Davis, Autobiography (New York, 1891),
pp. 226-229.
13New Age, October, 1929, p. 608, as quoted in McEniry, op. cit., p. 75.
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
RICHARD
B. MCCORNACK
135
than two hundreddesertersfrom the Americanarmy composed
mostlyof CatholicIrish,who had been persuadedto desertby the
instigation of the Catholic priests.”14 The Know-Nothing Almanac
for 1856 commentedthat the battalionwas “composedof Irishmen,
desertersfromour ranks,”while the ReverendWilliamButlermakes
the flat statement that “the sectarian treachery of the Irish deserters
The recordsof the War
mighthaveprovedto be overwhelming.”‘5
Departmentcontainmany lettersfrom AmericanCatholics,sensitive
to these statements, inquiring into the truth of such accusations, and
invariablythe officialreply was giventhat ” . . . no reportis found
on file or of recordshowingthe nativityor the religiousdenomination
of these or of any desertersfrom the Army during that war.”‘6
Sister Blanche Marie McEniry in her excellent chapter on the
San Patricio Battalion assigns two motives to the desertion of its
membersfrom the Americanarmy-religiousand pecuniary. It would
only be candidto admitthat the Mexicanclergy undoubtedlymade
some effortsto persuadethe Catholicsamongthe invadingforcesto
desert, but these efforts appear for lack of evidence to the contrary
to have been unsuccessful. Equally unimportant, it would appear
from the records, was the pecuniary motive, despite the many offers
made to the American soldiers of land and money and good treatment.
The true reason or reasons for the desertion may never be fully
known, but the closest approach to the truth may be had through a
thorough examination and analysis of the actual court-martial records
of the prisoners, admitting always that each prisoner, with his life in
jeopardy, put the best possible face on his reasons for appearing in a
Mexican uniform bearing arms against his former comrades-in-arms.
Forty-three cases were tried by the court-martial at Tacubaya and
twenty-nine by that sitting at San Angel. Each case was considered
separately, the accused being given full opportunity to defend himself against the charge, common to all, “desertion to the enemy.”
Of this number four pleaded guilty, while the remainder pleaded not
guilty. An examination of the records demonstrates the wide vari14Christian World, XXIV (1873), 47, as quoted in William Butler, Mexico In
Transition (New York, 1892), p. 93.
15Know-Nothing Almanac for 1856,
p. 18, as quoted in McEniry, op. cit., p. 79;
Butler, op. cit., pp. 93-94.
16Several letters of inquiry and the replies thereto are found in U. S. Arch.,
AUS,
Office of the Adj. Gen., 27932-1895. Typical of the statements made is that of Daniel
Maloney in a letter to the Adjutant General dated March 1, 1896, in which he stated
that the desertion of the San Patricios did not prove the disloyalty of Catholics any
more than “the treason of Benedict Arnold proves the disloyalty of Protestants.”
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
136
SAN PATRICIO DESERTERS IN THE MEXICAN WAR
ance in time of desertion, the earliest being that of James Kelley,
Private, Company C, Fourth Infantry, who deserted at Corpus
Christi, Texas, on November 15, 1845, and the latest being that of
Lewis Prefier, Company C, Fourth Infantry, who left the American
army on August 10, 1847, and who was surrendered by Mexican
authorities on August 26.17 The majority of the deserters appear
to have gone over to the Mexicans at two places, at Monterrey in
late 1846 when Taylor’s reduced forces were undergoing the boredom of occupation duty, and at Puebla in the early summer of 1847
when Scott paused to regroup his forces before pushing on to the
capital.
As to the racial composition of the San Patricio Battalion no categorical statement can be made for, as has been indicated, no records
were kept. However, of those tried, twenty-four would appear to
have Irish surnames, although it is obviously impossible to be accurate concerning surnames, which are reliable for proving neither
nativity nor religious persuasion. Only one prisoner identified himself
to the court during the trial as an Irishman while another proclaimed
himself a Scot.’8 Some of the prisoners attempted to claim status as
British subjects, declaring that the British consul in Mexico aided them
with payments of twenty-five cents to a dollar a day until his funds
for such purposes were exhausted. Many of the prisoners were of
German extraction. In fact, two of the German deserters required
interpreters as they knew no English.’9
The court records are equally vague as to any religious motives
that may have persuaded the prisoners to desert. Only two indicated that a priest had anything to do with their desertion, one
stating that he was taken prisoner by a priest and two lancers while
another stated that he was wounded and was taken to a Mexican
hospital by a Dutch priest where he fell into enemy hands.20 Of all
the prisoners only one mentioned that a pecuniary consideration had
anything to do with his desertion, pleading that conditions were so
bad in the House of Correction where he was confined that when
17Kelley,Case 20, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O., EE525;Prefier,Case 41, U. S.
Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O., EE525.
18 Thomas Riley, Case 3, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G.
O., EE531;William A.
Wallace, Case 4, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O., EE531.
19FrederickFogel, Case 1, and John Klager,Case2, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O.,
EE525.
20AugusteMorstadt,Case 16, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O., EE525;John A.
Myers, Case 8, U. S. Arch., AUS, J. A. G. O., EE531.
This content downloaded from 130.182.50.101 on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:20:57 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
RICHARDB. MCCORNACK
137
the Mexicans offered him two hundred dollars and a new suit of
clothes to join the San Patricios he took it to protect his life.”‘
What, then, was the principal excuse offered by the members of
the San Patricio Battalion for their desertion? It was neither religion
nor monetary reward; indeed, it may be summed up in one worddrink! Of the seventy-two prisoners tried by the two courts, thirteen
of whom offered no defense at all, thirty used the excuse that they
wandered away from the American lines while in a state of intoxication and were subsequently captured by the Mexicans. Such words
as “druken frolic” appear frequently in the records. The few others
offered widely varied excuses, some stating succinctly that they had
decided to go home and were on their way when captured by the
Mexicans.
Perhaps a clearer picture may be obtained of the proceedings of
the trials and of the history and motives of the members of the San
Patricio Battalion if a few actual cases are examined. Certainly the
outstanding figure in the trials was that of the commanding officer of
the battalion, Colonel John Riley, formerly a sergeant in Company K,
Fifth Infantry.22 The official records show that Riley enlisted as
a regular at Fort Mackinac, Michigan, on September 4, 1845. His
earlier history is somewhat obscure, although it is believed that he
was a deserter from the Sixty-sixth Regiment of the British army,
and that he had fled his regiment when it was stationed in Canada.
It is certain that prior to his enlistment in the American army he
worked for two years on the Michigan farm of Charles M. O’Malley,
who reported to General Scott that Riley gave him more trouble
than all his other workers, particularly as O’Malley was the local
justice of the peace and Riley “was always at variance with everyone he had anything to do with.”23 …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades