One of the statements by the author of this book in the Preface sums up an interesting conundrum. The statement by the author is: 'My reading of the evidence is that the thousands of Americans who perished in New York during the Revolution were the victimes of something well beyond the usual brutalities and misfortunes of war, even eighteenth-century war-a lethal convergence, as it were, of obstinacy, condescension, corruption, mendacity, and indifference. Although the British did not deliberately kill American prisoners in New York, they might as well have done.'
The conundrum is that the British also employed prison hulks in Spain which were not the best places to keep prisoners of war. Further, they allowed the Spanish to at least maintain the Cabrera hell hole, when they could have intervened to stop it or at least have the prisoners transferred to a better place. The death rate on Cabrera was ninety percent. All of the blame does not fall on the Spanish alone. So, what was done to the British officers and officials responsible for these 'problems' with prison hulks and the very high death rate of the prisoners. Whether deliberately kept this way to kill them or merely neglect, it is still a 'war crime' by the definitions set up here on the forum who wish to judge the French and especially Napoleon. The British established a particularly odious record with prison hulks in two wars, not to mention the murder of American seamen held after the War of 1812. Who was punished for that? Anyone?
Sincerely,
Kevin