ship with both nations, was generally denounced both by federals ANALYSIS. and democrats, but on totally different grounds;-by the former as a war measure, of unjustifiable severity, against Great Britain, -and by the latter as too feeble and imbecile to effect the objects for which it was intended.* a. March 4. Prospect of ment of dif an adjust ficulties. b. April 18, 19 2. Mr Ers 29. Soon after the accession" of Mr. Madison to the presidency, the flattering encouragement was held out, of a speedy adjustment of all difficulties with England. In April, Mr. Erskine, the British minister at Washington, notified the American government that, on the ground that the non-intercourse act "had placed the relations of Great Britain with the United States kine's noft an equal footing, in all respects, with other belligerent cation to the powers," he was authorized to inform the American government government. that the British "orders in council," so far as they affected the United States, would be withdrawn on the 10th of June, "in the persuasion that the president would issue a proclama on American 4 How regarded by both tion for the renewal of intercourse. with Great Britain." The 3. President's president therefore issued a proclamation authorizing the reproclamation. newal of commercial intercourse with England after that day. c. April 19. 4This measure was unanimously approved by both parties in the United States. The federalists declared Mr. Madison worthy of the lasting gratitude of his country--they contrasted his conduct with that of Mr. Jefferson, to the great disparagement of the latter --hailed his return to the good old principles of federalism" with enthusiastic delight, and asserted that England had always been ready to do us justice, when not demanded by threats of violence. parties. 5. The ErsKine treaty rejected by England d. June 19. 30. But if, as the federalists declared, England had previously been willing to compromise on the terms agreed upon by Mr. Erskine, a surprising change now took place in her councils; for the British government rejected the arrangement, on the ground that her minister had exceeded his instructions. Non-intercourse with England was again proclaimed. The instructions of the British government appear to have been, that England was willing 6 Character to adjust the difficulties between the two nations, if the United of States would take off their restrictions upon English commerce, and continue them against France and her allies; and farther, in order effectually to secure the continuance of non-intercourse with the latter, it was to be stipulated that England should "be considered as being at liberty to capture all such American vessels as should be found attempting to trade with the ports of any of these powers." the instruc British govtheir minis tions of the ernment to ter. 7 Effect of these terms if admitted. 31. These terms, if admitted, would have amounted to nothing less than giving legal force to the British orders in council, by incorporating them into a treaty between England and the United 8. Unparal States! Such a mockery of justice, and unparalleled effrontery- leled effronadding insult to outrage, showed not only that England was deter-ery on Engmined to constitute herself the arbitrary mistress of the ocean, 9. Conduct of but that our long submission to her aggressions was regarded by ists, un learn the federal her as evidence of our fear and weakness. land in the result ation with 32. But, notwithstanding the result of the negotiation with of the negoti Mr. Erskine, so wedded were the federalists to the cause of Eng- Mr. Erskine *The following extracts will illustrate the views entertained of the Non-intercourse Act by the Federalists. Mr. Hillhouse, in a speech on the non-intercourse bill before the Senate, Feb. 22, 1809, said: "Sir, the bill before you is war. It is to suspend all intercourse-to put an end to all the relations of amity. What is that but war? War of the worst kind-war under the disguise of non-intercourse. No power having national feelings, or regard to national character, will SUBMIT to such COERCION." "It is a base attempt to bring on a war with Great Britain. It is FRENCH in every feature,' Boston Repertory. ANALYSIS. land, or, such the violence of party feelings by which they were influenced, that the conduct of Great Britain was not only uncensured by them as a party, but justified by many of their leading members, while our own government was charged by them with a blind devotion to French interests, and with demanding terms from England which "duty to herself" would never allow her to grant. The whole affair with Mr. Erskine was declared to be a political maneuver, designed to gain popularity to Mr. Madison, should the treaty be ratified, and to excite resentment against England should it be rejected. Aggressive policy of England continued. led to an in 33. England continued her aggressive policy until after the commencement of the war, although eminent British statesmen* decried the folly of the orders in council, which had effectually cut off from that country a valuable trade with the United States 2. Its effect of fifty millions of dollars annually. Such was the ruinous in. upon British fluence of these measures that large numbers of British manufac manufac tures. turers were reduced to poverty, and the distress among the labor3. Causes that ing classes was extreme. At length, in the spring of 1812, the quiry in par- public feeling had increased to such an extent against the nonliament on intercourse policy with America, as to break forth in alarming this subject. riots in several parts of England, when the ministry were driven to the necessity of submitting to an inquiry in parliament into the 4 Character operation and effects of the orders in council. The testimonyt adof the testimo- duced presented so frightful a picture of distress, produced by the interruption of the American trade, that, on this ground alone, on the 17th of June an address for the repeal of the orders in council was moved in the house of commons by Mr. Brougham, but was withdrawn on a pledge of the ministry that the orders should be repealed, which was done on the 23d of the month, five days after the declaration of war by the United States, but before that event was known in England. ny adduced and Anal repeal of the orders in council. 5. Extent of British dep redations up. commerce. 6. Estimated amount of property tu ken. 34. 5Of the extent of British depredations upon American commerce, we have information of the most reliable character. By an on American official statement of the secretary of state, presented to congress on the 6th of July, 1812, it appears that British men-of-war had captured 528 American vessels prior to the orders of council of November, 1807, and subsequent thereto 389. The values of the cargoes of these vessels could not be ascertained with accuracy, but it was estimated at the time, by judicious merchants, that the average value of each cargo and vessel could not be less than 30,000 dollars. But, placing the estimate at 25,000 dollars each, and we have the enormous amount of twenty-two millions nine hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars worth of American property plundered by a nation with whom we were at peace. A portion of the property seized prior to Nov. 11th, 1807, might perhaps be restored; but for that taken subsequent to this period there was Among others, Mr. Brougham, afterwards Lord Brougham. On the 17th of June, 1812, Lord Brougham moved an address for the repeal of the Orders in Council, &c. The following is extracted from Lord Brougham's remarks. "I have been drawn aside from the course of my statement respecting the importance of the commerce which we are sacrificing to those mere whimsies, I can call them nothing else, respecting our abstract rights. That commerce is the whole American market, a branch of trade in comparison with which, whether you regard its extent, its certainty, or its progressive increase, every other sinks into insignificance. It is a market which, in ordinary times, may take off about thirteen millions worth of our manufactures; and in steadiness and regularity it is unrivalled." "The minutes of the examination, as published by order of Parliament, form a ponderous folio volume of nearly 700 pages, exhibiting a frightful picture of the results of the sinister and absurd policy which dictated the orders in council"-Olive Branch, by M. Carey. Nearly sixty millions of dollars. 1. Other lossBritish sys tem subject. es to which the not the least chance of redress. Nor were the evils which we ANALYSIS. suffered from this plundering system limited to the amount of our property actually captured and confiscated. The restrictions placed upon our trade by the hazards of capture, subjected us to losses far greater than those which have been enumerated. From November 11, 1807, till the very day that war was declared, our commerce with Holland, France, and the north of Italy,-countries at war with England, was nearly annihilated. ed us. 2 Another plaint cause of com against Eng. land 35. 2We now pass to the consideration of another cause of complaint against England, of a character even more aggravating than her commercial depredations. The subject of the impressment of American seamen by British men-of-war claimed the attention of our government soon after the close of the war of the revolution. The following are the principal grounds of complaint, on the part American of the United States, as set forth at various times by the ministers of the latter at the court of London: 36. 41st. England claimed the right of seizing her own subjects, voluntarily serving in American vessels, but invariably refused to surrender American citizens voluntarily serving in British vessels. 2d. She claimed the right of seizing her own subjects, voluntarily serving in American vessels, although they may have been married, and settled, and naturalized in the United States; while she refused to surrender American seamen involuntarily serving in British vessels, if said seamen had been either settled, or married, in the British dominions. 3d. In practice, the officers of British ships of war, acting at discretion, and bound by no rules, took by force, from American vessels, any seamen whom they suspected of being British subjects. It would very naturally be supposed that the proof of the allegiance of such seamen should belong to the British side, but, on the contrary, the most undoubted proof of American citizenship was required, to protect an American citizen from impressment. 4. 8. Impress ment of seamen. The claims, tice of Eng land, on this and the prac subject. 5. The proof thrown upon the American side. 6. Great ex tent of im pressment now admit ted. 7. Impress ment of for American vessels. 37. It is now admitted that, under this odious system, several thousand American citizens were from time to time impressed,held in bondage in the British navy, and compelled to fight the battles of England. Large numbers of Danes, Swedes, and foreigners of various nations, were likewise impressed from American vessels, although their language, and other circumstances, eigners from clearly demonstrated that they were not British subjects; and, indeed, English officers repeatedly informed the agents of the United States that they would receive no proof of American citizenship, except in the single case of native Americans, nor surrender foreigners, taken from American ships, on any pretence whatever. 38. It is true England admitted that impressed seamen should be delivered up, on duly authenticated proof that they were native American citizens; but this, besides most unjustly throwing the burden of proof on the injured party, provided no effectual remedy for the evil. During the interval of obtaining the required testimony, should, happily, the charitable aid of friends, or of the government, be exerted in behalf of the innocent victim of British tyranny, the unfortunate individual was often carried to a foreign station-or the ship had been taken by the enemy, and he was a prisoner of war -or he had fallen in battle-or, when all apologies for retaining him longer failed, he was returned, penniless, with no remuneration for the servitude to which he had been subjected. Hundreds, and even thousands of well authenticated cases of the forcible impressment of American citizens, both by land and by sea, might be given, with details of the cruelties inflicted upon them, by BOOurging and imprisonment, on their attempts to escape from 8. Why the principles on which Eng land profess ed to act in provided no dy for the this matter, effectual rem evil ANALYSIS bondage, or refusal to fight against their country, or against nations 1. Assertions with whom she was at peace The federalists, however, asserted of the federal that the evils of impressment, of which the democratic party complained, had been greatly exaggerated, in order to delude and deceive the public, and that they formed no just cause of war. ists on this subject. 2 Facts urged by the democratic party. a period 1803, to Aug ust, 1804. 39. 2The following facts, however, connected with this-that England had not abated her practice or pretensions on the subject of impressment, up to the year 1812, were urged by the democratic 3. Impress party in opposition to the allegations of the federalists. During ments during a period of less than eighteen months, from March 1803 to August 18 months, 1804, twelve hundred and thirty-two original applications were from March, made to the British government for the release of impressed seamen, claimed to be citizens of the United States. Of this number, 437 were released on proof of American citizenship; 388 were refused to be discharged because they had no documents proving American citizenship, and not because they were proved to be British subjects: many of them declaring that they had lost their certificates of protection, or had been forcibly deprived of them, or had neglected to obtain any; and only 49 were refused to be dis- charged upon evidence-declared by the seamen to be false, that they were British citizens. Of the remainder, 120 were refused to be discharged because they had received wages, and were thereby considered as having entered the British service; others because they had married in England-or were on board ships on foreign stations--or were prisoners of war; 210 because their documents were not deemed sufficient; and 163 applications remained unan4. Number of swered. How many unfortunate Americans were impressed probably still during this period of eighteen months, who had no means of conveying to their government applications for redress, can never be known. impressments greater. 5. Impress another period of 18 months. 40. 5From official returns it also appears that between the first ments during of October, 1807, and the thirty-first of March, 1809, a period of eighteen months, our government made demands for the restoration of 873 seamen impressed from American ships. Of this number 287 were restored, but only 98 were detained upon evidence of their being British subjects. The remainder were detained upon various pleas, similar to those previously stated. 6. The fore- 41. The foregoing comprise the substance of the democratic or going, the democratic government statements, on the subject of impressment, and comstatements mercial aggressions,-urged as one justifiable cause of war. If they are facts, (and no satisfactory refutation of them has yet appeared,*) then was England guilty of the grossest outrages upon our national honor and dignity, and far more serious causes of war existed than those which led to the Revolution. In 1775, our fathers took up arms because they would not be taced by England, 7. Causes of the war of 1775, compared with those of the war of 1812. *The best defence, yet written, of the course pursued by the federal party, is contained in Dwight's "History of the Hartford Convention." It cannot fail to be observed, however, in that work, that the subject of impressment is passed over very cursorily; and that on the subject of commercial aggression, the main object of the author appears to be, to prove that we had received greater injuries from France than from England. But if this were true, what justification, It may be asked, does it afford of the conduct of the latter power? The author of the "History of the Hartford Convention," states, p. 228, that his "review of the policy and measures of the United States government during the administrations of Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison, is designed to show that an ardent and overweening attachment to revolu tionary France, and an implacable enmity to Great Britain, were the governing principles of those two distinguished individuals" But the democratic party, probably with as much propriety, retorted the charge by asserting "that an ardent and overweening attachment to England, and an implacable enmity to France, were the governing principles of the federal party." The truth is, each party went to the extreme of denunciation against the other, aud party spirit, on both sides, was inflamed to the highest degree. 1. The "Peace Party" of 1812. even a penny a pound on tea-in 1812, because they would not sub- ANALYSIS. mit to be openly plundered of the merchandize of a legitimate commerce, and because they would not suffer themselves to be stolen from their country, and condemned to slavery in the galleys of Britain!And yet, when war was declared, as the only means for obtaining a redress of these grievances, behold! there was a "Peace Party" in our midst, who asserted that America had no just cause to complain of England;-there were distinguished American citizens, and even American legislatures, who asserted, that "the war was founded in falsehood," and "declared without necessity."* 42. During the six months previous to the declaration of war, although congress was engaged during that time in making ample preparations for the expected emergency, yet the federal presses, very generally, throughout the Union, ridiculed the expectation of war as illusory, and doubtless contributed much to impress the British ministry with the belief that America would still continue to submit to the outrages that had so long been perpetrated against her commerce and scamen. 2. Preparations for war, pursued by the federal and course presses. message re of war. 43. 3On the first of June, 1812, the President sent a message to 3. President's congress, recommending a declaration of war against England. commending The prominent causes of war, as set forth in the message, and in a declaration the report of the committee which submitted a declaration of war, were, the impressment of American seamen, and the British orders in council: On the subject of impressment the president stated, that, under the pretext of searching for British subjects, "thousands of American citizens, under the safeguard of public law and their national flag, had been torn from their country-had been dragged on board ships of war of a foreign nation-and exposed, under the severities of their discipline, to be exiled to the most distant and deadly climes-to risk their lives in the battles of their oppressors and to be the melancholy instruments of taking away those of their own brethren." 44. 4On the same subject the committee remarked, that, "while the practice is continued, it is impossible for the United States to consider themselves an independent nation." On the subject of the orders in council the committee stated, that, by them, "the British government declared direct and positive war against the United States. The dominion of the ocean was completely usurped-all commerce forbidden-and every flag which did not subserve the policy of the British government, by paying it a tribute and sailing under its sanction, was driven from the ocean, or subjected to capture and condemnation." 4. Declarations of the committee on the subjects of and the Bitt ish orders in impressment, council. Strong opdeclaration of 45. In the house of representatives of the United States the 5. declaration of war was carried by a vote of only 79 to 49; and in the senate by only 19 to 13; showing a very strong opposition to the measure. A motion to include France in the declaration, was made in the house of representatives, but it was negatived by a very large majority. Only ten votes were given in favor of the proposition, and seven of these were from the democratic party. The federalists had long maintained the propriety of declaring war. to the 6. Motion to France in the declaration. include It cannot be denied that many great and good men were opposed to the declaration of war In 1812, but principally on the ground of its inerpediency. Thus, John Jay, a prominent federalist, but a most worthy republican, in a letter of July 28th, 1812, says: "In my opinion, the declaration of war was neither necessary, nor expedient, nor seasonable," but he deprecated, as serious evils, "commotions tending to a dissolution of the Union, or to civil war," and asserted that, "As the war had been constitutionally declared, the people were evidently bound to support it in the manner which constitutional laws prescribed."—Life of John Jay, vol. 1. p. 445. |