He wasn't the only one. My ancestor was a substitute too.That's what it said on the NARA file. And what is stranger, he's down as a substitute for a date that followed several months after the Battle of New Orleans. The battle of New Orleans lasted from December 1814 through January 1815 What's really peculiar is that the dates on the record: Roll dated Camp near Newport [KY,I think] Feb. 18, 1815 Date of appointment or enlistmen Feb. 8, 1815 To what time engaged or enlisted Aug. 8, 1815 I know news travelled slowly, but enlisted or appointed Feb. 8, 1815? What gives? > From: "Karen Ermutlu" <karermutlu@mindspring.com> > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:53:10 -0500 > To: WARof1812-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Substitutes > Resent-From: WARof1812-L@rootsweb.com > Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 10:53:07 -0700 > > On Aug 23, 1812, William Harper, enlisted as a private in the Ohio Militia > from Jefferson County. His payroll slip says commencement of service to be > Aug.26 for 3 months, 6 days. HOWEVER, the Company Muster Roll for August 26 > says he was a "Substitute for Joseph Caldwell." > > One historian said no substitutes were used in the War of 1812, but I have the > muster roll slip that says so in this case. > > Will someone please comment on this. > > Karen Harper Ermutlu > > > ==== WARof1812 Mailing List ==== > WAR OF 1812 QUERY BOARD > http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/genbbs.cgi/USWARS/War1812/General > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go > to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Just because the war was officially over didn't mean that everyone kissed and made up quickly afterwards. Large Militia units were probably kept up for some time after the war - just in case. A slight problem with the native population didn't help things much. They weren't too happy either. Remember the British had defeated Napoleon and were actually handily winning the war with the U.S. and were now poised to send in everything they had. ( To the U.S. the war was a huge thing - to the British it was simply a side show.) The Duke of Wellington refused to go to North America as he felt it was a senseless war from start to end and was not worth the cost. Peace was thus finally established. Fortifications were built all long the border between Canada and the U.S. for many years after the war and they were in active use for most of the 19th century. The fears on both sides lasted until well into the late 1800's. During the American Civil War Both the Canadians and the North feared war might break out between them if the British Government thought there was an advantage to invading the North in support of the South. (Keeping the Cotton Trade open for the British cotton mills was far more important to the British than repealing slavery.) After the War the Canadians feared the Americans would turn on them as well since they then had a massive army with no-one left to fight. An invasion actually did happen when the US govt supported the Irish Fenians in their bloody raids into Canada from the U.S. soon after. It was a messy terrorist campaign that lasted for some years and did little for "free trade agreements". But it did cause Canada to decide that it was time to stand up as a free nation and Canada was born as a result. Nelson Denton Who cheers his Loyalist troops onward as they pass by the front of his house to win the battle of Stoney Creek once more every year. . . The odd thing is they are only allowed to win every other year! Political Correctness strikes again!

Thanks for all the input. What confuses me further is that I'm not clear which way the substitution went---Was Stewart Slavins a substitute for Riggs or did he get Riggs to be a substitute. Stewart was hardly a big landowner. He was a small farmer near Mt Sterling with a sick wife (who died that year in the fall) and three young children listed under Stewart, Slavins Private -------- Who was the substitute? Slavins or Riggs? Any ideas appreciated -------------------------------- Card number, line (1) 38113873 line (2) 3875 17th Regiment (Francesco¹s) Kentucky Militia Regular muster roll paper Name: Slavins, Stewart Pvt--Capt. Simon Gillaspie¹s co. of Inf 17 reg¹t Kentucky Militia War of 1812 Company Muster Roll for ___From Feb. 8, 1815 Roll dated Camp near Newport Feb. 18, 1815 Date of appointment or enlistmen Feb. 8, 1815 To what time engaged or enlisted Aug. 8, 1815 Present or absent______ + (plus sign) Mileage from Mt Sterling to Georgetown: 40 Remarks and alterations since last return: James Rigs (sic) substitute few lines down + James Rigs appears in present column duplicate copy beside this except this line Remarks and alterations since last return: Discharged for inability --------------------------------- Here's what's on Riggs at ancestry.com RIGGS JAMES-17 REG'T (FRANCESCO'S) KENTUCKY MILTIIA.  -PRIVATE PRIVATE  Roll Box 175 Roll extr-602 ---------------------------------------------- From Karen <karermutlu@mindspring.com>---on the date of the end of the 1812 War >News of the treaty reached New York 11 February 1815 and was ratified by the >Senate 17 February. From: "Nelson Denton" <ndenton@cogeco.ca> Subject: Re: Substitutes---on the subject of when Militia units disbanded > > Just because the war was officially over didn't mean that everyone kissed > and made up quickly afterwards. Large Militia units were probably kept up > for some time after the war - just in case. > A slight problem with the native population didn't help things much. They > weren't too happy either. Another possibility --on why substitutes were needed >The officers would hire any town drunk, boy, wimp or homely looking woman to >dress up like a soldier and attempt to pass himself off as a real soldier >when the Inspector General's men came to town to review the troops. >Military units would lose their status if they didn't have enough troops to >fill the ranks and the officers could lose their commissions, it was a >serious game.