Dear Bernard Pretty much writing in to argue against you calling Henry Clinton an idiot which seems most unfair given his record while admittedly no genius he was no slouch. If Gage and Co had listened to him then Bunker Hill would not have happened (He wanted to come behind the Americans and trap them instead). It was his idea and flank attack that beat the Americans at Long Island. His capture of the Hudson forts to aid Burgoyne with what little he had was the best anyone could have done under the circumstances. At Monmouth although it was a draw he at least one his strategic aim avoiding the main body or baggage becoming engaged by Washington. And the capture of Charlestown was well done. He also had to contend with the fact he had to send thousands of troops away to fight the French in the West Indies and put up with Cornwallis undermining him (dormant commission and informing him to Howe) and was not even allowed to resign by Germain even though he wanted too get out. So while probably unsuited to the role he was not the idiot or Simmerson figure you make him out to be.
Geraint
I disagree . . . I think he was supine, vindictive and ineffective, but I guess it doesn't really matter now!