Early Newspaper Debate, 1807-1809
The Chesapeake and the Leopard, Washington Federalist, 3 July 1807
We have never, on any occasion, witnessed the spirit of the people
excited to so great a degree of indignation, or such a thirst for
revenge, as on hearing of the late unexampled outrage on the Chesapeake.
All parties, ranks, and professions were unanimous in their detestation
of the dastardly deed, and all cried aloud for vengeance. The accounts
which we receive from every quarter tend to show that these sentiments
universally prevail. The Administration may implicitly rely on the
cordial support of every American citizen, in whatever manly and
dignified steps they may take, to resent the insult and obtain reparation
for the injury.
The Responsibility For The British Outrage, Washington National
Intelligencer, 10 July 1807
We are pleased to observe the circumspection of the merchants. If
they consult their own interests, or that of the country, they will
for a time repress their spirit of adventure, and run as few risks
as possible, until an explicit answer shall be given by the British
Ministry. As yet it remains a point undetermined whether the late
barbarous outrages have emanated directly from the British Cabinet,
or are the acts exclusively of subordinate commanders. If they are
directly authorized by the Cabinet, then we may calculate upon a
scene of violence co-extensive with British power, and for another
display of that perfidy so characteristic of its government. Every
American vessel on the ocean will be seized and sent into some British
port for adjudication, and the courts will take special care, if
they do not forthwith proceed to condemnation, at any rate to keep
the cases sub judice. Indeed, if the recent outrages do not emanate
from the government, it is difficult to say whether they will not,
notwithstanding, seize what they may consider a favorable opportunity
to wreak their vengeance on this country. We know the hostility
of the greater part of those who compose the British administration
to our principles, and they may be Quixotic enough to imagine themselves
able to crush these principles, or seriously arrest our commercial
growth. They may, therefore, under some hollow pretext, refuse that
satisfaction which we demand, the result of which will be war. There
is indeed no small color of truth in the supposition that this outrage
has flowed from the change in the British Ministry, connected with
the fate the treaty has received from our government, and that without
meaning or expecting war, they have virtually authorized aggressions
on us, which they fancied we would tamely submit to; and that however
astonished they may be with the manifestation they will soon receive
of the temper of the nation, their pride may prevent them from retracting.
Everything is, and must for some time remain, uncertain. In the
meantime it becomes our duty to husband all our strength. But little
injury can accrue to the merchant from a suspension of his export
business for a few months, compared with the incalculable evils
that might befall him from its active prosecution. He is, therefore,
under a double obligation to pursue this course, arising not only
from a regard to his own interest, but likewise from a love of his
country. In the day of danger it will want all its resources, and
all its seamen. Were Congress in session, it is extremely probable
that their first step would be the imposition of an embargo. What
they would do, were they sitting, it is the interest and duty of
the merchant to do himself. We have no doubt that the intelligence
of this order of men may on this occasion, as it has on all former
occasions, be relied on.
The Chesapeake and the Leopard, New York Evening Post, 24 July
1807
We say and we once more repeat it, that the Chesapeake, being a
national ship, was not liable to be searched for any purpose, nor
to have any of her crew taken from her. This is ground that ought
to be maintained at every hazard. But on the other hand, candor
demands the concession, that it was in every way improper in the
American commodore to enlist four deserters from the British man
of war, knowing them to be such; and whether they were English subjects,
or had voluntarily enlisted and received their bounty (this being
a conduct long since silently permitted by us), is immaterial. And
we say further that if the Administration, on being applied to by
the English counsul, refused to accommodate the affair, but insisted
on protecting the men by placing them under the national flag, the
Administration thereby became criminal, and are answerable to the
people for their culpable conduct.
Such are the sentiments we hold on this subject: they have been
often revised, and are believed to be correct. The result is that
our own Administration are considered as having been to blame; but
not so that their misconduct justified the resort to force on the
part of the English. On this point, we are ready to say that we
consider the national sovereignty has been attacked, the national
honor tarnished, and that ample reparations and satisfaction must
be given or that war ought to be resorted to by force of arms.
The Embargo and the Farmer's Story, Columbia Centinel, 25 May 1808
A zealous Boston Democrat was lately in the country extolling the
embargo to a plain farmer, as a wise as well as a strong measure,
and urging the farmer to express his opinion upon it. The farmer,
however, modestly declined, saying that he lived in the bush where
he had not the means of information on which to ground an opinion
on political measures; but if Boston folks, who knew more, said
it was right, he supposed it was so; but, says he, I will tell you
a story. Our minister one day sent his boy to the pasture after
a horse. He was gone so long that the parson was afraid the horse
had kicked his brains out; he went therefore with anxiety to look
after him. In the field he found the boy standing still with his
eyes steadily fixed upon the ground. His master inquired with severity
what he was doing there. Why, sir, said he, I saw a woodchuck run
into this hole, and so I thought I would stand and watch for him
until he was starved out; but I declare I am almost starved to death
myself.
Hateful Measures for Enforcing the Embargo, Boston Gazette, 2 February
1809
Within a few days past Colonel Boyd, commanding at the Castle, received
orders from the Secretary of War to interdict all vessels from passing
Fort Independence; in consequence of this edict the acting Collector
has been placed under the necessity of withholding clearances to
every description of vessels.
This aggravated repression was not generally known until yesterday,
when the vessels in the harbor bound their colors in black, and
hoisted them half-mast. The circumstance has created some considerable
agitation in the public mind, but to the honor of the town has been
yet unattended with any serious consequences.
It is to be presumed that this new edict will at least continue
to be enforced until Secretary Dearborn is at leisure to come on,
to mark out his favorites, and take upon himself the office, so
long reserved for him, of the Customs.
The spirit of our citizens is rising and may burst into a flame.
Everything should therefore be done to calm them till the Legislature
has had time to mature its plans of redress. It is feared that the
caution necessary in such an assembly may protract our relief too
long; but we must wait patiently the aid of our Constitutional Guardians,
rather than stain the character of this metropolis by mobs and riots.
If our government cannot do anything now that shall afford full
and complete relief, they may at least do enough to calm the public
mind and lead the citizens to wait for events, which must place
the means for a radical cure completely in our hands. The spirit
of New England is slow in rising; but when once inflamed by oppression,
it will never be repressed by anything short of complete justice.
The Embargo Experiment Ended, Baltimore Federal Republican, March
1809
The embargo now ceases to be in force, and every merchant who can
give a bond with good sureties to double the amount of vessel and
cargo, is entitled to clear out for any port except in France or
England or the dependency of either of them. After depriving government
of its means of support for sixteen months, and preventing the people
of the United States from pursuing a lawful and profitable commerce,
and reducing the whole country to a state of wretchedness and poverty,
our infatuated rulers, blinded by a corrupt predilection for France,
have been forced to acknowledge their fatal error, and so far to
retrace their steps. To the patriotism of the New England States
is due the praise of our salvation. By their courage and virtue
have we been saved from entanglements in a fatal alliance with France.
The whole system of fraud and corruption has been exposed to the
people, and those very men who were the first to cast off the yoke
of England, have lived to save their country from falling under
the command of a more cruel tyrant. The patriot who had the courage
to encounter the fury of the political storm, who stepped forth
in the hour of danger to give the first alarm to his country, we
trust will one day be rewarded with the highest honors in the gift
of a grateful people.
French Outrages Against Our Ships and Sailors, New York Evening
Post, July 1809
Fellow Citizens, for more than two years has your flag been struck
on the ocean whenever it has been met with by the flag of France;
your vessels have been scornfully burnt or scuttled in the ocean;
your property has been seized or confiscated; your sailors robbed
and manacled, or forced by cruelties to serve against their own
country; the worthless part of them suborned by a public decree
to commit perjury, and on their evidence, though charging no crime,
the wretched remainder of the crew condemned as prisoners of war,
landed as such and marched without shoes to their feet or clothing
to their backs in the most inclement weather some hundreds of miles
into the interior of France; lashed along the highway like slaves,
treated with every possible indignity, and then immured in the infernal
dungeons of Arras or Verdun. There, deprived of every comfort and
of all intercourse with the rest of the world, there, fellow citizens,
have they been lying, some for months and some for years! There
they now lie, wasting away the best vigor of their days, counting
the hours of their captivity as they turn in vain their imploring
eyes towards their own government, and etching down another and
another week of grief and despondence. Nineteen cents a day allowed
them for subsistence and clothing and medicine! Allow them seven
a day, or $25 a year for clothing, and you leave them four cents
to purchase each meal. Think of this, ye who live in luxury here,
and read their story with more indifference than you listen to the
fictitious sorrows of a Robinson Crusoe; think of this, and let
it at length engage your attention, and induce you to demand of
your government to interfere in earnest.
But after all, what is to be expected? If any one of these wretched
men, more fortunate than his fellow sufferers, escapes and brings
the tale of their situation, and makes it known to his countrymen,
a set of inhuman wretches here, more cruel than the French themselves,
turn their wrongs into derision, or exert their miserable faculties
in cavillings and criticisms to shew that all these statements are
fabrications, because they have not been drawn up by some special
pleader. The barbarous impudence of some editors pronounces them
forgeries, and every fellow who can set a type repeats the infamous
calumny, till the public voice that had begun to raise itself in
their favor is stilled, and sympathy extinguished.
New York Evening Post, 1 July 1809
The proceedings of the present Congress, the debates, the votes
and the acts, are calculated to excite nothing but surprise, indignation
or ridicule. On the question of foreign relations, I do really think
the French party has been more fairly unmasked than on any former
occasion. Nobody can possibly forget that at the last session, every
democrat in the house was loud and boisterous in his declarations
of impartiality between France and Great Britain: they would hold
them both in the same estimation, both they said had injured; neither
had atoned nor offered satisfaction; both therefore should be equally
excluded from our hospitality, until such satisfaction was attained.
Since that time Great Britain, much to their surprise and vexation,
has offered such satisfaction, and it has been accepted by the president;
France has offered nothing; her wrongs and her insults remain full
blown. And yet the Jefferson party, in the very teeth of all their
professions, yet sounding in our ears, refuse to restore intercourse
with Great Britain, unless it is also restored with France. What
language can convey the indignant emotions that every American must
experience at this bare faced conduct? I am lost in amazement. How
long will the people remain stone blind to the conduct of such rulers,
and to the consequences which will result from it?
Aurora General Advertiser, 31 July 1809
The prints which, by their subserviency to the baleful oppression
of Great Britain, have contributed so much to the disgrace of this
nation, and encouraged, by their corruption, the insolence of the
enemy, are now seeking to make a sett off by rumors from France,
which, like their usual fabrications, are too clumsy and preposterous
to merit regard.
It is the common practice with the English government, and with
its emissaries and adherents every where, to endeavor to mitigate
her injustice, by drawing comparisons with the injustice of France.
To the wrongs of France we are as much opposed as to those of England;
but it will not answer, to say that, because France does us an injury,
that, therefore, England has a right to accumulate wrongs upon us.
If the argument is good for any thing, it must cut both ways; and
then if it be admitted, the incessant insolence, aggression, insult,
and outrage of England, furnishes precedents which, if France were
to follow, might, with equal propriety, be used by France to mitigate
or palliate her injustice.
...Whenever the outrages of England are complained of, the cry
of the British faction is, that there is "French influence."
If the laws of nations are asserted and maintained - it is said
to arise from "French influence." If government endeavors
to preserve its peace by self-denial - it is "French influence."
If we complain of the infringement of our territory, or the impressment
of our seamen - it is said to be "French influence."...
It is time to meet this delusion - the measure of British wrongs
is now too full for palliation. The atrocious character of the measures
of that government, cannot be mitigated; upon a comparison with
the conduct of France to the United States, the contrast presents
on one side a map of murderous and pestilential deformity; on the
other we see the petulance, mixed with the compassion, of a nation
desirous of being generous to us, and conscious that no cause of
enmity can naturally exist between us.
The crisis comes upon us now, when we must look to our own security,
and the policy which is best adapted to ensure our rights and our
prosperity. France has fought our battles - had Britain triumphed,
we should have been enslaved.
We can have no natural sympathies for a government which has tyrannised
over us in every shape - which has murdered, torn from their homes,
and plundered our citizens, insulted our flag, our territory, and
our independence - and trampled upon the laws of civilized nations.
...We want no alliance - we look for none - we look for peace -
we have a right to insist on free commerce and peace; and neither
of the belligerents have a right to invade the one or the other.
In our policy we must detest the nation that insults or injures
us. Our policy in regard to Europe has not been naturally wise.
We must stand upon that ground which asserts the rights of property
alike, on the earth and the seas. Which assures neutral commerce,
and which gives the high road of the ocean, as God has given it
to man free, and without any other bounds to it than the creator
has placed. We have no need to league with the belligerents, we
have only to defend ourselves from oppression.
|
Back up to: Early Newspaper Debate --
To the top |
Political Leaders and their views, 1811-1812
John C. Calhoun Insists on Free Trade, 1811
Although Mr. Speaker, I believe, under existing circumstances, a
war attitude necessary, or at least preparatory steps calculated
to meet that event; and although situated as we are, I am for the
whole of our legitimate rights; yet sir, I would not be willing
to involve the country in war, in defence of the extensive and circuitous
carrying trade, separate from the other causes; that is, that we
should become carriers for the whole world; as Government receives
no benefit from this circuitous carrying trade, only as it is calculated
to aggrandize a few individuals engaged in it. I should be for holding
fast the claim to the circuitous carrying trade, and would be willing
to operate on our enemies by adopting countervailing restrictive
systems. But, sir, I would not be willing, that the good of the
States, the good of the people, the agriculturists and mechanics,
should be put at hazard to gratify the avarice and cupidity of a
small class of men, who in fact may be called citizens of the world,
attached to no particular country; any country is their country
where they can make the most money. But, sir, for what is an inherent
right, for what I deem the legitimate, or necessary carrying trade,
the liberty of carrying our productions to foreign markets, and
with the return cargo, in which agriculture is particularly interested,
I would fight in defence of.
Source: John C. Calhoun, Speech, in Annals of Congress, 12th Cong.,
1st Sess., pages 482-483, 487.
A Southerner, Felix Grundy, Urges Continental Expansion, 1811
The true question in controversy . . . involves the interest of
the whole nation. It is the right of exporting the productions of
our own soil and industry to foreign markets. . . .
What, Mr. Speaker, are we now called on to decide? It is whether
we will resist by force the attempt made by that government to subject
our maritime rights to the arbitrary and capricious rule of her
will; for my part I am not prepared to say that this country shall
submit to have her commerce interdicted or regulated by any foreign
nation. Sir, I prefer war to submission.
Over and above these unjust pretensions of the British government,
for many years past they have been in the practice of impressing
our seamen from merchant vessels; this unjust and lawless invasion
of personal liberty calls loudly for the interposition of this government.
. . .
This war, if carried on successfully, will have its advantages.
We shall drive the British from our continent—they will no longer
have an opportunity of intriguing with our Indian neighbors, and
setting on the ruthless savage to tomahawk our women and children.
That nation will lose her Canadian trade, and, by having no resting
place in this country, her means of annoying us will be diminished.
The idea I am now about to advance is at war, I know, with sentiments
of the gentleman from Virginia. I am willing to receive the Canadians
as adopted brethren; it will have beneficial political effects;
it will preserve the equilibrium of the government. When Louisiana
shall be fully peopled, the Northern states will lose their power;
they will be at the discretion of others; they can be depressed
at pleasure; and then this Union might be endangered. I therefore
feel anxious not only to add the Floridas to the South, but the
Canadas to the North of this empire.
Source: Felix Grundy, Speech, in Annals of Congress, 12th Cong.,
1st Sess., pages 422-427.
Henry Clay Endorses War, 1811
What are we to gain by war, has been emphatically asked? In reply,
he would ask, what are we not to lose by peace?--commerce, character,
a nation's best treasure, honor! If pecuniary considerations alone
are to govern, there is sufficient motive for the war. Our revenue
is reduced, by the operation of the belligerent edicts, to about
six million of dollars, according to the Secretary of the Treasury's
report. The year preceding the embargo, it was sixteen. Take away
the Orders in Council it will again mount up to sixteen millions.
By continuing, therefore, in peace, if the mongrel state in which
we deserve that denomination, we lose annually, in revenue only,
ten millions of dollars. . . .
Not content with seizing upon all our property, which falls within
her rapacious grasp, the personal rights of our countrymen--rights
which forever ought to be sacred, are trampled upon and violated.
The Orders in Council were pretended to have been reluctantly adopted
as a measure of retaliation. The French decrees, their alleged basis,
are revoked. England resorts to the expedient of denying the fact
of the revocation. . . . We are invited, conjured to drink the potion
of British poison actually presented to our lips, that we may avoid
the imperial dose prepared by perturbed imaginations. We are called
upon to submit to debasement, dishonor, and disgrace—to bow the
neck to royal insolence, as a course of preparation for many resistance
to Gallic invasion! . . . We were but yesterday contending for the
indirect trade--the right to explore to Europe the coffee and sugar
of the West Indies. To-day we are asserting our claim to the direct
trade--the right to export our cotton, tobacco, and other domestic
produce to market. Yield this point, and to-morrow intercourse between
New Orleans and New York--between the planters on the James river
and Richmond, will be interdicted. For, sir, the career of encroachment
is never arrested by submission. It will advance while there remains
a single privilege on which it can operate. Gentlemen say that this
Government is unfit for any war, but a war of invasion. What, is
it not equivalent to invasion, if the mouths of our harbors and
outlets are blocked up, and we are denied egress from our own waters?
Or, when the burglar is at our door, shall we bravely sally forth
and repel his felonious entrance, or meanly skulk within the cells
of the castle? . . .
[Y]ou must look for an explanation of [England's] conduct in the
jealousies of a rival. She sickens at your prosperity, and beholds
in your growth--your sails spread on every ocean, and your numerous
seamen--the foundations of a Power which, at no very distant day,
is to make her tremble for naval superiority. . . .
What! shall it be said that our amor patrioe is located at these
desks--that we pusillanimously cling to our seats here, rather than
boldly vindicate the most inestimable rights of the country? Whilst
the heroic Daviess and his gallant associates, exposed to all the
perils of treacherous savage warfare, are sacrificing themselves
for the good of their country, shall we shrink from our duty?
Source: Henry Clay, Speech, in Annals of Congress, 12th Cong.,
1st Sess., pages 599-602.
A Federalist, Samuel Taggart Voices Dissent, 1812
[T]he Orders in Council have been more rigorously carried into effect,
on the part of Great Britain. And since the additional hostile attitude
assumed during the present session of Congress, has been known in
Great Britain, I understand, from the public prints, that orders
have been given for their still more rigid execution. Unless she
saw fit to rescind them, this was naturally to be expected. In proportion
as we assume a more hostile attitude towards her, and show a disposition
to embrace her enemy in the arms of friendship and affection, it
was to be expected that she would either relax and accede to our
demands, or adhere more rigorously to her own system. She has chosen
the latter.
As it respects the impressment of seamen, this is a delicate and
a difficult subject, and if it is ever adjusted to mutual satisfaction
it must be by war, and whenever there is mutually a disposition
to accommodate, it will be found necessary to concede something
on both sides. . . . It is vain to contend against the principle
[of drafting citizens for the military], since we have sanctioned
it by our laws, and daily practise upon it, however hardly we may
think of some of the particular modes in which it is applied. I
feel satisfaction, however, in the reflection, that it has never
had the sanction of my vote. The principle then being admitted,
the only ground of complaint is the irregular application of it
to Americans. Great Britain does not claim, she has never claimed
the right of impressing American citizens. She claims the right
of reclaiming her own subjects, even although they should be found
on board of American vessels. . . .
It is said to be necessary to go to war, for the purpose of securing
our commercial rights, of opening a way for obtaining the best market
for our produce, and in order to avenge the insults which have been
offered to our flag. But what is there in the present situation
of the United States, which we could reasonably expect would be
ameliorated by war? in a situation of the world which is perhaps
without a parallel in the annals of history, it would be strange
indeed, if the United States did not suffer some inconveniences,
especially in their mercantile connexions and speculations. . .
.
What is the particular achievement to be accomplished by this armament,
which is to be kept up at such an enormous expense, and which is
to bring the war to a successful termination? Why, the conquest
of Canada. . . . Our rights on the ocean have been assailed, and,
however inconsistent it may seem to go as far as possible from the
ocean to seek redress, yet this would appear to be the policy. We
are to seek it, it seems, by fighting the Indians on the Wabash
or at Tippecanoe, or the Canadians at Fort Malden, at Little York,
at Kingston, at Montreal, and at Quebec. . . .
For whose benefit is the capture of Canada? What advantages are
we likely to reap from the conquest? Will it secure the liberty
of the seas, or compel Great Britain to rescind her Orders in Council?
Did we ever know an instance in which Great Britain gave up a favorite
measure for the sake of saving a foreign possession, perhaps of
very little value to her? Will the advantages to be derived from
the conquest of Canada be an equivalent for the loss and damage
we may sustain in other quarters? What is Great Britain to be about
all the time that we are wrestling Canada out of her possession?
Is it consistent with the vigor with which she usually acts, to
stand by and tamely look on? Either she will attempt a vigorous
defence of Canada, or she will not. If she does, some of the difficulties
of the enterprise have been stated. If she does not, it will be
that she may be the better able to inflict a severe blow in some
other quarter. Admitting war to be sincerely intended, no course
could be devised more inconsistent with the maxims of sound policy
than that which appears to be pursuing by the United States.
Source: Samuel Taggart, Speech, June 24, 1812, Annals of Congress,
12th Cong., 1st Sess., pages 1649-1650, 1652, 1662-1663, 1666-1667.
The Kentucky Legislature Calls for Action
The people of this state, though not immediately exposed to those
piratical depredations, which vex, and destroy the commerce of their
eastern brethren on the ocean, cannot be less deeply interested
in their effects. They look to the sufferings and wrongs of a single
member as intimately affecting the whole body. But when an evil
becomes so general and inveterate in its deleterious effects, as
to threaten dissolution, unless a proper and forcible remedy is
applied--The state of Kentucky, yielding to none in patriotism;
in its deep rooted attachment to the sacred bond of the union; in
its faithful remembrance of the price of our freedom, and in the
heartfelt conviction that our posterity have a sacred claim upon
us, to transmit to them unimpaired, this God-like inheritance, cannot
fail to be penetrated, with any event which threatens even to impair
it; much less then, can she be insensible to those daring wrongs
of a foreign power, which lead to its immediate destruction.
But when we have discovered a systematic course of injury from
her towards our country, evidencing too strongly to be mistaken,
an utter disregard of almost every principle of acknowledged rights
between independent nations, endeavouring by almost every act of
violence on the high seas--on the coasts of foreign powers with
whom we were in amity--and even in sight of our own harbours by
capturing and destroying our vessels: confiscating our property:
forcibly imprisoning and torturing our fellow-citizens: condemning
some to death: slaughtering others, by attacking our ships of war:
impressing all she can lay her hands upon, to man her vessels: bidding
defiance to our seaports: insulting our national honour by every
means that lawless force and brutality can devise: inciting the
savages to murder the inhabitants on our defenceless frontiers:
furnishing them with arms and ammunition lately, to attack our forces:
to the loss of a number of brave men: and by every art of power
and intrigue, seeking to dispose of our whole strength and resources,
as may suit her unrestrained ambition or interest--and when her
very offers of redress, go only to sanction her wrongs, and seek
merely a removal of those obstacles interposed by our government,
to the full enjoyment of her iniquitous benefits; we can be at no
loss which course should be pursued. . . .
1. Resolved, by the general assembly for the state of Kentucky,
that this state feel deeply sensibly, of the continued, wanton,
and flagrant violations by Great Britain and France, of the dearest
rights of the people of the United States, as a free and independent
nation: that those violations if not discontinued, and ample compensation
made for them, ought to be resisted with the whole power of our
country.
2. Resolved, that as war seems probable so far as we have any existing
evidence of a sense of justice on the part of the government of
Great Britain, that the state of Kentucky, to the last mite of her
strength and resources, will contribute them to maintain the contest
and support the right of their country against such lawless violations;
and that the citizens of Kentucky, are prepared to take the field
when called on.
Source: Resolution, Kentucky Legislature, December 16, 1811, in
Niles' Weekly Register, I (January 11, 1812).
President Madison States the Case for War, 1812
British cruisers have been in the continued practice of violating
the American flag on the great highway of nations, and of seizing
and carrying off persons sailing under it, not in the exercise of
a belligerent right founded on the law of nations against an enemy,
but on a municipal prerogative over British subjects. British jurisdiction
is thus extended to neutral vessels in a situation where no laws
can operate but the law of nations and the laws of the country to
which the vessels belong, and a self-redress is assumed which, if
British subjects were wrongfully detained and alone concerned, is
that substitutions of force for a resort to the responsible sovereign
which falls within the definition of war. Could the seizure of British
subjects in such cases be regarded as within the exercise of a belligerent
right, the acknowledged laws of war, which forbid an article of
captured property to be adjudged without a regular investigation
before a competent tribunal, would imperiously demand the fairest
trial where the sacred rights of persons were at issue. In place
of such a trial these rights are subjected to the will of every
petty commander. . . .
British cruisers have been in the practice also of violating the
rights and the peace of our coasts. They hover over and harass our
entering and departing commerce. To the most insulting pretensions
they have added the most lawless proceedings in our very harbors,
and have wantonly spilt American blood within the sanctuary of our
territorial jurisdiction. . . .
Not content with these occasional expedients for laying waste our
neutral trade, the cabinet of Britain resorted at length to the
sweeping system of blockades, under the name of orders in council,
which has been molded and managed as might best suit its political
views, its commercial jealousies, or the avidity of British cruisers.
. . .
In reviewing the conduct of Great Britain toward the United States
our attention is necessarily drawn to the warfare just renewed by
the savages on one of our extensive frontiers--a warfare which is
known to spare neither age nor sex and to be distinguished by featured
peculiarly shocking to humanity. It is difficult to account for
the activity and combinations which have for some time been developing
themselves among tribes in constant intercourse with British traders
and garrisons without connecting their hostility with that influence
and without recollecting the authenticated examples of such interpositions
heretofore furnished by the officers and agents of that Government.
. . .
Our moderation and conciliation have had no other effect than to
encourage perseverance and to enlarge pretensions. We behold our
seafaring citizens still the daily victims of lawless violence,
committed on the great common and highway of nations, even within
sight of the country which owes them protection. We behold our vessels,
freighted with the products of our soil and industry, or returning
with the honest proceeds of them, wrested from their lawful destinations,
confiscated by prize courts no longer the organs of public law but
the instruments of arbitrary edicts, and their unfortunate crews
dispersed and lost, or forced or inveigled in British ports into
British fleets, whilst arguments are employed in support of these
aggressions which have no foundation but in a principle equally
supporting a claim to regulate our external commerce in all cases
whatsoever.
We behold, in fine, on the side of Great Britain a state of war
against the United States, and on the side of the United States
a state of peace toward Great Britain.
Whether the United States shall continue passive under these progressive
usurpations and these accumulating wrongs, or, opposing force to
force in defense of their national rights, shall commit a just cause
into the hands of the Almighty Disposer of Events, avoiding all
connections which might entangle it in the contest or views of other
powers, and preserving a constant readiness to concur in an honorable
reestablishment of peace and friendship, is a solemn question which
the Constitution wisely confides to the legislative department of
the Government. In recommending it to their early deliberations
I am happy in the assurance that the decision will be worthy [of]
the enlightened and patriotic councils of a virtuous, a free, and
a powerful nation.
Source: "To The Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States, June 1, 1812," in James D. Richardson, A Compilation
of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1908 (Washington:
Bureau of National Literature and Art, 1909), Vol. 1, pages 500-505.
|
Newspaper Debate over War
The Folly of Joining the Army, New York Evening Post, 24 January
1812
"Tricks upon Travellers," or "More Ways than one
to kill a Cat." - Old saws. We are certainly now to have a
war, for Congress have voted to have an army. But let me tell you,
there is all the difference in the world between an army on paper,
and an army in the field. An army on paper is voted in a whiff,
but to raise an army, you must offer men good wages. The wages proposed
to be given to induce men to come forward and enlist for five years,
leave their homes and march away to take Canada, is a bounty of
$16, and $5 a month; and at the end of the war, if they can get
a certificate of good behavior, 160 acres of wild land and three
months' pay; for the purpose, I presume, of enabling the soldier
to walk off and find it, if he can. Now I should really be glad
to be informed, whether it is seriously expected that, in a country
where a stout able-bodied man can earn $15 a month from May to November,
and a dollar a day during mowing and harvesting, he will go into
the army for a bounty of $16, $5 a month for five years, if the
war should last so long, and 160 acres of wild land, if he happens
to be on such good terms with his commanding officer as to obtain
a certificate of good behavior? Let the public judge if such inducements
as these will ever raise an army of 25,000 men, or ever were seriously
expected to do it? If not, can anything be meant more than "sound
and fury signifying nothing?" This may be called humbugging
on a large scale.
They Call It a War for Commerce! New York Evening Post, 26 January
1812
Look for yourselves, good people all - The administration tell me
that the object for which they are going to war with Great Britain,
is to secure our commercial rights; to put the trade of the country
on a good footing; to enable our merchants to deal with Great Britain
on full as favorable terms as they deal with France, or else not
deal at all. Such is the declared object for which all further intercourse
is to be suspended with Great Britain and her allies, while we proceed
to make war upon her and them until we compel her to pay more respect
to American commerce: and, as Mr. Stow truly observed in his late
excellent speech, the anxiety of members of Congress to effect this
object is always the greater in proportion to the distance any honorable
member lives from the seaboard. To enable you, good people, to judge
for yourselves, I have only to beg of you to turn your eyes to Mr.
Gallatin's letter in a succeeding column, stating the amount of
the exports of the United States for the last year; the particular
country to which these exports were sent, and specifying the amount
received from us by each. If you will just cast a glance at this
document, you will find of the articles of our own growth or manufactures
we in that time carried or sent abroad (in round numbers) no less
than $45,294,000 worth. You will next find that out of this sum,
all the rest of the world (Great Britain and her allies excepted)
took about $7,719,366, and that Great Britain and her allies took
the remainder, amounting to $38,575,627. Now, after this, let me
ask you what you think of making war upon Great Britain and her
allies, for the purpose of benefiting commerce?
War Should Be Declared, Washington National Intelligencer, 14 April
1812
The public attention has been drawn to the approaching arrival of
the Hornet, as a period when the measures of our government would
take a decisive character, or rather their final cast. We are among
those who have attached to this event a high degree of importance,
and have therefore looked to it with the utmost solicitude.
But if the reports which we now hear are true, that with England
all hope of honorable accommodation is at an end, and that with
France our negotiations are in a forwardness encouraging expectations
of a favorable result, where is the motive for longer delay? The
final step ought to be taken, and that step is WAR. By what course
of measures we have reached the present crisis, is not now a question
for patriots and freemen to discuss. It exists: and it is by open
and manly war only that we can get through it with honor and advantage
to the country. Our wrongs have been great; our cause is just; and
if we are decided and firm, success is inevitable.
Let war therefore be forthwith proclaimed against England. With
her there can be no motive for delay. Any further discussion, any
new attempt at negotiation, would be as fruitless as it would be
dishonorable. With France we shall be at liberty to pursue the course
which circumstances may require. The advance she has already made
by a repeal of her decrees; the manner of its reception by the government,
and the prospect which exists of an amicable accommodation, entitle
her to this preference. If she acquits herself to the just claims
of the United States, we shall have good cause to applaud our conduct
in it, and if she fails we shall always be in time to place her
on the ground of her adversary.
But it is said that we are not prepared for war, and ought therefore
not to declare it. This is an idle objection, which can have weight
with the timid and pusillanimous only. The fact is otherwise. Our
preparations are adequate to every essential object. Do we apprehend
danger to ourselves? From what quarter will it assail us? From England,
and by invasion? The idea is too absurd to merit a moment's consideration.
Where are her troops? But lately she dreaded an invasion of her
own dominions from her powerful and menacing neighbor. That danger,
it is true, has diminished, but it has not entirely and forever
disappeared. The war in the Peninsula, which lingers, requires strong
armies to support it. She maintains an army in Sicily; another in
India; and a strong force in Ireland, and along her own coast, and
in the West Indies. Can anyone believe that, under such circumstances,
the British government could be so infatuated as to send troops
here for the purpose of invasion? The experience and the fortune
of our Revolution, when we were comparatively in an infant state,
have doubtless taught her a useful lesson that she cannot have forgotten.
Since that period our population has increased threefold, whilst
hers has remained almost stationary. The condition of the civilized
world, too, has changed. Although Great Britain has nothing to fear
as to her independence, and her military operations are extensive
and distant, the contest is evidently maintained by her rather for
safety than for conquest. Have we cause to dread an attack from
her neighboring provinces? That apprehension is still more groundless.
Seven or eight millions of people have nothing to dread from 300,000.
From the moment that war is declared, the British colonies will
be put on the defensive, and soon after we get in motion must sink
under the pressure.
An Address to the People of the Eastern States, New York Evening
Post, 21 April 1812
In a war with England we shall need numerous armies and ample treasuries
for their support. The war-hounds that are howling for war through
the continent are not to be the men who are to force entrenchments,
and scale ramparts against the bayonet and the cannon's mouth; to
perish in sickly camps, or in long marches through sultry heats
or wastes of snow. These gowned warriors, who are so loudly seconded
by a set of fiery spirits in the great towns, and by a set of office
hunters in the country, expect that their influence with the great
body of the people, the honest yeomanry of our country, is such
that every farmer, every mechanic, every laborer, will send off
his sons, nay, will even shoulder his firelock himself and march
to the field of blood. While these brave men who are "designing
or exhorting glorious war," lodged safe at Monticello or some
other secure retreat, will direct and look on; and will receive
such pay for their services as they shall see fit to ask, and such
as will answer their purposes.
Citizens, if pecuniary redress is your object in going to war with
England, the measure is perfect madness. You will lose millions
when you will gain a cent. The expense will be enormous. It will
ruin our country. Direct taxes must be resorted to. The people will
have nothing to pay. We once had a revenue; - that has been destroyed
in the destruction of our commerce. For several years past you have
been deceived and abused by the false pretenses of a full treasury.
That phantom of hope will soon vanish. You have lately seen fifteen
millions of dollars wasted in the purchase of a province we did
not want, and never shall possess. And will you spend thousands
of millions in conquering a province which, were it made a present
to us, would not be worth accepting? Our territories are already
too large. The desire to annex Canada to the United States is as
base an ambition as ever burned in the bosom of Alexander. What
benefit will it ever be to the great body of the people, after their
wealth is exhausted, and their best blood is shed in its reduction?
- "We wish to clear our continent of foreign powers."
So did the Madman of Macedon wish to clear the world of his enemies,
and such as would not bow to his sceptre. So does Bonaparte wish
to clear Europe of all his enemies; yea, and Asia too. Canada, if
annexed to the United States, will furnish offices to a set of hungry
villains, grown quite too numerous for our present wide limits;
and that is all the benefit we ever shall derive from it.
These remarks will have little weight with men whose interest leads
them to advocate war. Thousands of lives, millions of money, the
flames of cities, the tears of widows and orphans, with them are
light expedients when they lead to wealth and power. But to the
people who must fight, if fighting must be done, - who must pay
if money be wanted - who must march when the trumpet sounds, and
who must die when the "battle bleeds," - to the people
I appeal. To them the warning voice is lifted. From a war they are
to expect nothing but expenses and sufferings; - expenses disproportionate
to their means, and sufferings lasting as life.
In our extensive shores and numerous seaports, we know not where
the enemy will strike; or more properly speaking, we know they will
strike when a station is defenceless. Their fleets will hover on
our coasts, and can trace our line from Maine to New Orleans in
a few weeks. Gunboats cannot repel them, nor is there a fort on
all our shores in which confidence can be placed. The ruin of our
seaports and loss of all vessels will form an item in the list of
expenses. Fortifications and garrisons numerous and strong must
be added. As to the main points of attack or defence, I shall only
say that an efficient force will be necessary. A handful of men
cannot run up and take Canada, in a few weeks, for mere diversion.
The conflict will be long and severe: resistance formidable, and
the final result doubtful. A nation that can debar the conqueror
of Europe from the sea, and resist his armies in Spain, will not
surrender its provinces without a struggle. Those who advocate a
British war must be perfectly aware that the whole revenue arising
from all British America for the ensuing century would not repay
the expenses of that war.
WAR! Columbian Centinel, 20 May 1812
The universal sentiment against a British War which prevails among
considerate men of all parties in this section of the Union, is
accompanied by a natural, but perhaps a false security in the conviction
of the impossibility of this event. With the exception of a few
brawlers in the street, and of some office-holding editors, we can
find none who seriously wish to promote this calamity. It is evident
that under the circumstances of this country a declaration of war
would be in effect a license and a bounty offered by our government
to the British Fleet to scour our coasts - to sweep our remaining
navigation from the ocean, to annihilate our commerce, and to drive
the country, by a rapid declension, into the state of poverty and
distress which attended the close of the revolutionary struggle.
We are convinced of the absence of those exasperated feelings in
the great body of the people which would impel them to such a conflict.
We fathom the length and depth of the artificial excitement, which
is attempted by men of desperate fortunes and character, and we
are satisfied that, in their efforts to influence the public mind,
they apply their blazing torches to a mountain of ice. Other considerations
come in aid of our confidence. The proposed enemy is invulnerable
to us, while we are on all sides open to assault. The conquest of
Canada would be less useful to us than that of Nova-Zembla, and
could not be so easily achieved. Our red brethren forgetful of the
patriotic "talks" of their "father" Jefferson
would pour down upon our frontier, and our black brethren would
show themselves not less enamoured with the examples of liberty
taught in St. Domingo than their masters are with those derived
from its mother country. New-Orleans and the Floridas would pass
into the hands of the enemy. Our seaports would be under strict
blockade, and the mouths of our rivers would be bridged with frigates.
Besides the war would be interminable, or end in a surrender on
our part of the objects of contention. If the British nation, which
now copes with a world in arms, should yield to us - a people destitute
of naval force and capable of contact with her in only one point;
whatever may be our internal strength, and national valour; it must
be through feelings of complacence and affection, inspired by the
known partiality of our Presidents, Governors, and Members of Congress,
expressed in the public proceedings. Secluded from the world and
oppressed by taxes, idle for want of employment, and indigent because
idle, this once happy people would repine with maddening recollection
of the days of their prosperity. Discontent, sedition and public
commotions would ensue. The swords of the new army must not be suffered
to rust "for lack, of somebody to hew and hack;" and civil
discord would probably finish the catalogue of evils arising from
such a state. A fair experiment has shown that the men beyond the
Potomac who are the chief instigators to war have no money to apply
to this object; and that the men on this side of it, will not part
with theirs to accelerate their own ruin. It is no longer doubtful
that the Eastern States, are invincibly opposed to war, and that
nothing short of a conscription will fill an army for the foolish
crusade. It is not less evident that our people will sooner become
volunteers to drive from power the men who shall plunge them into
a ruinous war, than conscripts to carry it on. Under an impression
of this state of public opinion, confirmed by all we see and hear
among our own people, we can hardly believe in the existence of
a spirit of infatuation capable of urging our government to such
an extremity. The men whose voice in Congress is for war, appear
to be acting a theatrical part, and we impute their rant and violence
to their feelings and dispositions rather than to ultimate and settled
purpose.
It is well to be prepared for disappointment in these calculations.
It is well for us to begin to think, how we shall be disposed to
act, when we find ourselves in fact, the subjects of men from other
States, who are devoid of sympathy for our interests, respect for
our character, ignorant of our habits - who mock at our calamity
and laugh when our fear cometh.
Niles Weekly Register, 30 May 1812
Every considerate and unprejudiced man, in every part of the union,
freely admits we have just cause for war with both the great belligerents,
and especially England; whose maritime depredations are not only
far more extensive than those of rival, but who has superadded thereto
the most flagrant violations of the individual, national and territorial
rights of the American people; matters of much higher import and
consequence. But a state of war is desired by no man; though most
men agree it is not "the greatest of evils." The thunderstorm,
black and tremendous, disturbs the calm serenity of the summer evening,
and sometimes rives the mighty oak to tatters - it comes unwished
for, excites general apprehension and frequently does partial damage
- but it purges the atmosphere, gives a new tone, as it were, to
listless nature, and promotes the common good. Thus it may be with
war, horrid and dreadful as it is. The political, as well as the
natural atmosphere, may become turbid and unwholesome.
It is very certain that no good citizen of the United States would
wantonly promote a rupture with Great Britain, or any other country.
The American people will never wage offensive war; but every feeling
of the heart is interested to preserve the rights our fathers won
by countless hardships and innumerable sufferings. Our love of peace
is known to the world; nay, so powerful is the desire to preserve
it, that it has been tauntingly said, even in the hall of congress
that "we cannot be kick'd into war." Every measure that
Forbearance, could devise, has been resorted to - and we have suffered
injuries, particularly in the wealth of our citizens, which no independent
nation ever submitted to. Embargo was tried: through the timidity
of the 10th congress, excited by the insolent clamors of a small,
but wicked, portion of the people, aided by the inefficiency of
the laws for enforcing it, it failed of its foreign operation. Since
that time we have virtually submitted, and thereby only lengthened
the chain of encroachment. As has been before observed, we are driven
into a corner, and must surrender at the discretion of a wicked
and unprincipled enemy, or hew our way out of it - the hazard of
life itself is preferable to the certain loss of all that makes
it desirable.
"In the unprofitable contest of trying who can do each other
the most harm," as Mr. Jefferson has emphatically described
war, this gloomy satisfaction results - that we can do Great Britain
more essential injury than another Europe could additionally heap
upon her; for we have greater means of annoyance than all that continent
possesses in our seamen and shipping; not calculated, it is true,
to "Nelsonize the main," but to annihilate her commerce,
the very sinews of the existence of her government. Our coasts may
be secured, and regular trade be destroyed. But many Paul Jones'
will ride and whithersoever a keel can go, just retaliation shall
check the enemy's career. They who make the "Falkland islands"
a resting place and pursue the whale to the Antipodes, will gather
nutmegs at Amboyna and find sugar on the shores of Jamaica. No sea
will be "unvexed" with their enterprizes: and the whole
navy of Britain, if applied to no other purpose, will be incompetent
to the protection of her vast possessions and commerce. To us she
is the most vulnerable of all nations - we can successfully attack
her at home and abroad. War will deprive her of an immense stock
of raw materials, on the manufacture and application of which so
great a portion of her population depends for subsistence; and,
in despite of smugglers, the ingress of her manufactures will be
denied, for a state of activity and exertion far different from
that at present made use of, will be arrayed against them. Already
are her laboring poor in a state of general disaffection for the
want of bread and lack of employment. The military power is daily
made use of to keep them to subordination. To what extremes might
the desperation of the starving wretches lead them, if to their
present privations were added those which must ensue from a war
with these states?
The conquest of Canada will be of the highest importance to us
in distressing our enemy - in cutting off his supplies of provisions
and naval stores for his West India colonies and home demand. There
is no place from whence he can supply the mighty void that would
be occasioned by the loss of this country, as well in his exports
as imports. It would operate upon him with a double force: it would
deprive him of a vast quantity of indispensable materials (as well
as of food) and close an extensive market for his manufactures.
On its retention depends the prosperity of the West India islands.
At war with the United States, and divested of supplies of lumber
and provisions from Canada, their commerce would be totally ruined;
and it is of far more importance to the British government than
all their possessions in the East. Besides it would nullify his
boast, "that he has not lost an inch of territory." Canada
and Nova Scotia, if not fully conquered immediately, may be rendered
useless to him in a few weeks. Without them, and particularly the
latter, he cannot maintain those terrible fleets on our coast that
we are threatened with, or "bridge" our harbors with frigates,
admitting he may have no use for them to defend his own shores;
for he will not have a dockyard, fitting the purposes of his navy,
within 3,000 miles of us.
"Our red brethren" will soon be taught to wish they had
remembered the talks of their "father Jefferson," and
of all other persons who advised them to peace. Upper Canada, at
least, would be immediately and completely in our possession. The
Pandora boxes at Amherstburg and Malden would be closed, and all
the causes of the present murders of the savages would cease; for
they make neither guns nor gun-powder, being at this time supplied
from the "king's stores" at these places, and urged to
the work of death by "his majesty's agents" with liberal
rewards and more liberal promises. To our mind there are facts "as
strong as proofs from holy writ," to convince us that all our
difficulties with the Indians originated with the British in Canada.
New Orleans, even if it should pass into the hands of the enemy,
cannot be held by him. The estimate alone would annihilate it, pent
up and harassed, and straitened for supplies, as it would be, from
the active indignation of a gallant, hardy and adventurous people.
But a million of persons are immediately interested in the navigation
of the Mississippi; and like the torrent of their own mighty river
would descend with a force irresistable, sweeping every thing before
them. Certain parts of Florida the enemy might take, and perhaps,
be permitted to hold; because he would retain them at a greater
injury to himself than to us.
The war will not last long. Every scheme of taxation has already
been resorted to in Great Britain. Every means have been tried to
sustain the credit of her immense paper currency. The notes of the
bank of England are 28 percent below their nominal value. A war
with the United States will add a third to her present expenditures,
at least; and, in a like proportion render her unable to bear them.
Her revenue will decrease as her expenses increase; for she will
lose all the export and import duties she levied on goods sent to
or received from the United States, and all her resources, built,
upon commerce will be fluctuating and uncertain. She will be assailed
on that element she arrogantly assumes as her own, and be perplexed
in a thousand new forms, by a people as brave and more enterprising
and ingenious than any she can boast of. Her seamen once landed
upon our shores, as prisoners or otherwise, will not return to her;
and her naval officers will rarely feel themselves safe from mutiny
while hovering on our coasts. It is considered lawful in war to
encourage such enterprizes; and her impressed seamen, sure of our
asylum, with "peace, liberty and safety," will retort
upon their oppressors some of the pangs they have suffered. Tens
of thousands of her former subjects, natives of generous and oppressed
Erin, will remember the conflagration of their cottages and the
murder of their friends, and vie with each other to avenge their
wrongs: and Britain, to preserve herself, will be compelled to honest
peace.
During the war there will be ample employment for all. Some part
of the labor and capital of the United States, at present devoted
to commerce, will be directed to objects calculated to seal the
independence of the country, in the establishment of a thousand
works, needful to the supply of our wants. Many years must elapse
before any shall, of necessity, be idle because he cannot find enough
to do; and the contest itself will create new sources of emoinment
[sic]. Some changes in the habits of the people on the seaboard
(a small part of our population) may take place; but there will
be nothing terrible in them. Our agriculturalists will have a steady
and better market at home: of this we are easily assured when we
reflect, that all our provisions exported have not produced more
than paid for the foreign liquors we consumed. Instead of sending
tobacco, (the most wretched crop of all others ever raised) to the
fluctuating markets of Europe, we will furnish ourselves, and (in
a short time) the whole world, with wool; and apply the extra laborers
to its manufacture - a state of things that will have a powerful
tendency to ameliorate the condition of the unfortunate negro, equally
profitable to his master. The bonds which fasten us to Europe will
be broken, and our trade and future intercourse with her be materially
and beneficially changed.
The political atmosphere being purged, a greater degree of harmony
will exist; and the regenerated spirit of freedom will teach us
to love, to cherish and support our unparalleled system of government,
as with the mind of one man. The hydra party, generated by foreign
feelings, will die in agonies. The "new army" will be
chiefly employed in the conquered countries, or on the frontiers,
and the protection of the states, generally, be confided to the
people themselves, who are not "their own worst enemies."
Neither the men beyond "the Potomac," nor on this side
of that river, are the instigators of the war - the causes for it
exist in the conduct of the cabinet of St. James', nourished and
cherished by the false hopes they entertain of the strength of "their
party" in the United States.
Money will not be wanting. The people will freely supply it when
there is need for it. Our country is rich. Our resources are great.
Our specie is abundant, and will greatly increase by opening a direct
trade with Mexico; and so serve ourselves and the patriots of that
country by furnishing them with arms and ammunition and stores,
and enable them to drive out their many-headed tyrant. Numerous
hardy volunteers, as true as ever pulled a trigger, will flock to
their standard, from the western states - and encourage in them
an affection for this government and teach them how freemen should
fight.
But the money drawn from the people, either by loans or moderate
taxes, will not moulder away and perish; it will immediately revert
to them, and always be ready, by a perpetual motion, to supply the
wants of the government. In fact, the great probability is, that
money will be much more plenty, as the common saying is, in a state
of war than it is at this time....
On the present occasion the exertions of his friends were greater
than ever. Nor will a "conscription" be necessary to supply
the regular troops or militia. The ranks of the former are filling
with great rapidity, and the requisition of the latter, it appears,
may be chiefly composed of volunteers. In Lexington where the first
blood was shed in the war for independence, a draft was made to
ascertain who should not serve; and the town immediately voted a
bounty of six dollars with the addition of ten dollars monthly pay
to those called into actual service. "The cradle of the revolution"
cannot become the sink of disaffection - and men will be found that
followed Arnold through the then howling wilderness who, a second
time, will set themselves down before Quebec, in force and irresistable
power.
The last paragraph of the article from the Centinel is of itself
sufficiently odious. It is of a piece with the mission of John Henry;
it comes from the same spirit, and would have the same issue. It
needs only to be seen to be hated. It springs from a feeling that
must be eradicated; a feeling that existed in 1776, and threatened
the congress of that with dreadful things: the "snake was scorch'd
not kill'd," and the ill-advised return from Halifax in 1783
gave body and substance, with activity and force, to it - and trade
and commerce, gold and intrigue, have so metamorphosed some people
in the United States, that (as Mr. Pickering said on another occasion)
"it is impossible to distinguish them from English men."
This hydra talks of Washington and calmly proposes a separation
of the states - it preaches morality and order, and speaks of a
resistance to the laws! Such sentiments, however, though loudly
expressed, are held by a very contemptible portion of the people;
they will be eradicated by the war, and their eradication will indemnify
the expense of it. The disaffected are far less numerous than they
were in 1776: and they may depend upon it there will be no second
return for such from Nova Scotia.
To the top
|
|