Battle of York in the War of 1812

Battle of York in the War of 1812 The Battle of York was fought April 27, 1813, during the War of 1812 (1812-1815). In 1813, American commanders around Lake Ontario elected to move against York (present-day Toronto), the capital of Upper Canada. Though lacking in strategic value, York presented an easier target than the main British base on the lake at Kingston. Landing on April 27, American forces were able to overwhelm Yorks defenders and captured the town, though promising young commander Brigadier General Zebulon Pike was lost in the process. In the wake of the battle, American troops looted and burned the town. Background In the wake of the failed campaigns of 1812, newly re-elected President James Madison was forced to reassess the strategic situation along the Canadian border. As a result, it was decided to focus American efforts for 1813 on achieving victory on Lake Ontario and the Niagara frontier. Success on this front also required control of the lake. To this end, Captain Isaac Chauncey had been dispatched to Sackets Harbor, NY in 1812 for the purpose of constructing a fleet on Lake Ontario. It was believed that victory in and around Lake Ontario would cut off Upper Canada and open the way for an attack on Montreal. In preparation for the main American push at Lake Ontario, Major General Henry Dearborn was ordered to position 3,000 men at Buffalo for a strike against Forts Erie and George as well as 4,000 men at Sackets Harbor. This second force was to attack Kingston at the upper outlet of the lake. Success on both fronts would sever the lake from Lake Erie and the St. Lawrence River. At Sackets Harbor, Chauncey had rapidly constructed a fleet that had wrested naval superiority away from the British. Meeting at Sackets Harbor, Dearborn and Chauncey began to have misgivings about the Kingston operation despite the fact that the objective was only thirty miles away. While Chauncey fretted about possible ice around Kingston, Dearborn was concerned about the size of the British garrison. Instead of striking at Kingston, the two commanders instead elected to conduct a raid against York, Ontario (present-day Toronto). Though of minimal strategic value, York was the capital of Upper Canada and Chauncey had intelligence that two brigs were under construction there. Battle of York Conflict: War of 1812Dates: April 27, 1813Armies Commanders:AmericansMajor General Henry DearbornBrigadier General Zebulon PikeCommodore Isaac Chauncey1,700 men, 14 shipsBritishMajor General Roger Hale Sheaffe700 regulars, militia, and Native AmericansCasualties:Americans: 55 killed, 265 woundedBritish: 82 killed, 112 wounded, 274 captured, 7 missing The Americans Land Departing on April 25, Chaunceys ships carried Dearborns troops across the lake to York. The town itself was defended by a fort on the west side as well as a nearby Government House Battery mounting two guns. Further west was the small Western Battery which possessed two 18-pdr guns. At the time of the American attack, the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada, Major General Roger Hale Sheaffe was in York to conduct business. The victor of the Battle of Queenston Heights, Sheaffe possessed three companies of regulars, as well as around 300 militia and as many as 100 Native Americans. Having crossed the lake, American forces began landing approximately three miles west of York on April 27. A reluctant, hands-off commander, Dearborn delegated operational control Brigadier General Zebulon Pike. A famed explorer who had traversed the American West, Pikes first wave was led by Major Benjamin Forsyth and a company of the 1st US Rifle Regiment. Coming ashore, his men were met by intense fire from a group of Native Americans under James Givins. Sheaffe ordered a company of the Glengarry Light Infantry to support Givins, but they became lost after leaving town. Map of the Battle of York.   Public Domain Fighting Ashore Outflanking Givins, the Americans were able to secure the beachhead with the assistance of Chaunceys guns. Landing with three more companies, Pike began forming his men when they were attacked by the grenadier company of the 8th Regiment of Foot. Outnumbering their attackers, who launched a bayonet charge, they repelled the assault and inflicted heavy losses. Reinforcing his command, Pike began advancing by platoons towards the town. His advance was supported by two 6-pdr guns while Chaunceys ships began a bombardment of the fort and Government House Battery. Directing his men to block the Americans, Sheaffe found that his forces were being steadily driven back. An attempt was made to rally around the Western Battery, but this position collapsed following the accidental detonation of the batterys travelling magazine. Falling back to a ravine near the fort, the British regulars joined with the militia to make a stand. Outnumbered on land and taking fire from the water, Sheaffes resolve gave way and he concluded that the battle was lost. Instructing the militia to make the best terms possible with the Americans, Sheaffe and regulars retreated east, burning the shipyard as they departed. As the withdrawal began, Captain Tito LeLià ¨vre was sent to blow up the forts magazine to prevent its capture. Unaware that the British were departing, Pike was preparing to assault the fort. He was approximately 200 yards away interrogating a prisoner when LeLià ¨vre detonated the magazine. In the resulting explosion, Pikes prisoner was killed instantly by debris while the general was mortally wounded in the head and shoulder. In addition, 38 Americans were killed and over 200 wounded. With Pike dead, Colonel Cromwell Pearce took command and re-formed the American forces. A Breakdown of Discipline Learning that the British wished to surrender, Pearce sent Lieutenant Colonel George Mitchell and Major William King to negotiate. As talks began, the Americans were annoyed at having to deal with the militia rather than Sheaffe and the situation worsened when it became clear that the shipyard was burning. As talks moved forward, the British wounded were gathered in the fort and largely left unattended as Sheaffe had taken the surgeons. That night the situation deteriorated with American soldiers vandalizing and looting the town, despite earlier orders from Pike to respect private property. In the days fighting, the American force lost 55 killed and 265 wounded, mostly as a result of the magazine explosion. British losses totaled 82 killed, 112 wounded, and 274 captured. The next day, Dearborn and Chauncey came ashore. After prolonged talks, a surrender agreement was produced on April 28 and the remaining British forces paroled. While war material was confiscated, Dearborn ordered the 21st Regiment into the town to maintain order. Searching the shipyard, Chaunceys sailors were able to refloat the aged schooner Duke of Gloucester, but were unable to salvage the sloop of war Sir Isaac Brock which had been under construction. Despite the ratification of the surrender terms, the situation in York did not improve and soldiers continued to loot private homes, as well as public buildings such as the town library and St. James Church. The situation came to a head when the Parliament buildings burned. Aftermath On April 30, Dearborn returned control to the local authorities and ordered his men to re-embark. Before doing so, he ordered other government and military buildings in the town, including the Governors Residence, deliberately burned. Due to foul winds, the American force unable to depart the harbor until May 8. Though a victory for American forces, the attack on York cost them a promising commander and did little to alter the strategic situation on Lake Ontario. The looting and burning of the town led to calls for revenge across Upper Canada and set the precedent for subsequent burnings, including that of Washington, DC in 1814.

Definition and Examples of Senders in Communication

Definition and Examples of Senders in Communication In the  communication process, the sender is the individual who initiates a message  and is also called the  communicator or source of communication. The sender might be a  speaker, a writer, or someone who merely gestures. The individual or the group of individuals who responds to the sender is called the receiver  or audience. In communication and speech theory, the reputation of the sender is important in providing credibility and validation to his or her statements and speech, but attractiveness and friendliness, too, play roles in a receivers interpretation of a senders message. From the  ethos  of the senders rhetoric to the  persona  he or she portrays, the senders role in communication sets not only the tone but the expectation of the conversation between the sender and the audience. In writing, though, the response is delayed and relies more on the senders reputation than image. Communication Process Every communication involves two key elements: the sender and the receiver, wherein the sender conveys an idea or concept, seeks information, or expresses a thought or emotion, and the receiver gets that message. In Understanding Management, Richard Daft and Dorothy Marcic explain how the sender can communicate by selecting symbols with which to compose a message. Then this tangible formulation of the idea is sent to the receiver, where it is decoded to interpret the meaning. As a result, being clear and concise as a sender is important to start the communication well, especially in written correspondence. Unclear messages carry with them a higher risk of being misinterpreted and eliciting a response from the audience that the sender did not intend. A.C. Buddy Krizan defines a senders key role in the communication process in Business Communication as including (a) selecting the type of message, (b) analyzing the receiver, (c) using the you-viewpoint, (d) encouraging feedback, and (e) removing communication barriers. Senders Credibility and Attractiveness A thorough analysis by the receiver of a senders message is imperative in conveying the right message and eliciting the desired results because the audiences evaluation of the speaker largely determines their reception of a given form of communication. Daniel J. Levi describes in Group Dynamics for Teams the idea of a good persuasive speaker as a  highly credible communicator, whereas a communicator with low credibility may cause the audience to believe the opposite of the message (sometimes called the boomerang effect). A college professor, he posits, may be an expert in his or her field, but the students might not consider him or her an expert in social or political topics. This idea of a speakers credibility based on perceived competence and character, sometimes called an ethos, was developed more than 2,000 years ago in ancient Greece, according to Deanna Sellnows Confident Public Speaking. Sellnow goes on to say that because listeners often have a difficult time separating the message from the sender, good ideas can easily be discounted if the sender does not establish ethos via content, delivery, and structure.